ojunk (Michael Bryant) wrote in message ...
From: (RHF

Most of these websites are by and for Government Employees Unions
and the Reduction of Government Jobs. This has little or nothing
to do with the LOSS of "Real" Jobs by American Workers to Overseas.

RHF,

The poster said that the only jobs Bush had sent overseas were military jobs.

What other jobs does he have the authority to send overseas?

OK, diplomats to countries that we have relations with and a few UN
appointments.

What others?

That's BS.

Of course it isn't.

Bush supports companies being allowed to "outsource" jobs to the
Caribbean and India to maximize their profits. He's always supported companies
profits over keeping jobs in the US.

Then talk to their shareholders. BTW, do you have a 401K or an IRA?
Hmmmm?

He's even encouraged the RNC to do this
with telemarketers to gather Republican funds.

Encouraging something is different than having the authority to make
it happen. Personally, I think he ought to ask those Chinese Nuns and
Arms Merchants for a few bucks while he's out there "encouraging"
donations.

You're confusing Bush policy
with others.

Bryant, you're confused. That's why you have yet to respond to my
latest posting.

Will post proof when I get off work, but it's Monday for us
Americans that still have jobs.

There are non-Americans here who also have jobs, some of them
illegals. And they send U.S. $$$'s back to wherever instead of
spending them in our shopping malls, our pharmacies, and our
Blockbusters. But I don't hear you complaining about illegals or the
amount of money leaving America.

From: (Brian)

There are non-Americans here who also have jobs, some of them
illegals. And they send U.S. $$$'s back to wherever instead of
spending them in our shopping malls, our pharmacies, and our
Blockbusters. But I don't hear you complaining about illegals or the
amount of money leaving America.

Wow, more stellar reasoning!

First, I've never supported illegal workers replacing US workers. Attacking
Bush outsourcing hardly means I support illegal workers. Duh.

Second, please explain, very carefully, what this has to do with Bush
outsourcing?

Third, when it comes right down to it, what has Bush done to stop illegal
workers? Nothing. It might have a negative impact on corporate profits.

You seem to enjoy being an idiot!

Bryant

"Michael Bryant" wrote in message
...
From: (Brian)

There are non-Americans here who also have jobs, some of them
illegals. And they send U.S. $$$'s back to wherever instead of
spending them in our shopping malls, our pharmacies, and our
Blockbusters. But I don't hear you complaining about illegals or the
amount of money leaving America.

Wow, more stellar reasoning!

First, I've never supported illegal workers replacing US workers.
Attacking
Bush outsourcing hardly means I support illegal workers. Duh.

I don't support illegal workers replacing US workers, either.... however,
the predominance of jobs taken by Mexican immigrants, legal or illegal, are
agricultural jobs for low pay that you could not get the "average US worker"
to take, and therefor would simply not get done otherwise. I know this from
practical experience over a long period of time (my teens and beyond).. I
was the only non-Mexican, non Native American worker in any of the fields I
ever worked... we had people in town that griped about the Mexicans taking
away jobs, but when they were offered those jobs, year after year, before
the migrants came in, they always turned them down...

BTW, Bush is now back to discussing a blanket amnesty for illegal Mexican
immigrants, for the very reasons listed above, among others.

From: "Brenda Ann"

don't support illegal workers replacing US workers, either.... however,
the predominance of jobs taken by Mexican immigrants, legal or illegal, are
agricultural jobs for low pay that you could not get the "average US worker"
to take, and therefor would simply not get done otherwise. I know this from
practical experience over a long period of time (my teens and beyond).. I
was the only non-Mexican, non Native American worker in any of the fields I
ever worked... we had people in town that griped about the Mexicans taking
away jobs, but when they were offered those jobs, year after year, before
the migrants came in, they always turned them down...

Right you are, BA! Most US workers couldn't survive on the wages of most
illegal workers. That makes Bush policy favoring the export of higher-paying
job cause even more resentment of illegal workers.


BTW, Bush is now back to discussing a blanket amnesty for illegal Mexican
immigrants, for the very reasons listed above, among others.



Again, you're right on the money. But don't tell any of the Bush-ites. You
might rock their reality!

ojunk (Michael Bryant) wrote in message ...
From: (Brian)

There are non-Americans here who also have jobs, some of them
illegals. And they send U.S. $$$'s back to wherever instead of
spending them in our shopping malls, our pharmacies, and our
Blockbusters. But I don't hear you complaining about illegals or the
amount of money leaving America.

Wow, more stellar reasoning!

First, I've never supported illegal workers replacing US workers.

You did by omission.

Attacking
Bush outsourcing hardly means I support illegal workers. Duh.

BUSH, Bush, bush. Why is Bush so evil?

Second, please explain, very carefully, what this has to do with Bush
outsourcing?

You tell me.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Michael Bryant )
Subject: Dear Rush


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: 2003-12-28 17:11:50 PST


From: (Brian)
I only had time to look at one of your links. Unfortunately, I don't
have unlimited time to follow all of your links, so I would suggest in
the future that you be more specific before wasting everyones time
with useless, vector links. I.E., get to the point sooner.


Bull****. The combination of multiple links indicate that the unions are
protesting an official Clinton policy. The fact that you can't (more likely
won't) realize that the official Clinton policy encourages outsourcing is
clearly more a product of your non-objectivity than your shortage of time.

But what evidence is there to the contrary?I've provided evidence, and you've
chosen to ignore the bulk of it. Prove my facts wrong. Come on, try to prove
something you assert.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

So which is it that you're complaining about? Clinton or Bush?

Third, when it comes right down to it, what has Bush done to stop illegal
workers? Nothing. It might have a negative impact on corporate profits.

You seem to enjoy being an idiot!

You can't tell the diff between Clinton and Bush. Who'se the idiot?

From: (Brian)

Wow, more stellar reasoning!

First, I've never supported illegal workers replacing US workers.

You did by omission.

By omission?? If you use that twisted reasoning then GW is clearly responsible
for US jobs going overseas by "omitting" to do anything about it.

You really are one of the most stupid conservatives I've ever encountered.
Keep up the fine work!

Bryant

ojunk (Michael Bryant) wrote in message ...
From: (Brian)

Wow, more stellar reasoning!

First, I've never supported illegal workers replacing US workers.

You did by omission.

By omission?? If you use that twisted reasoning then GW is clearly responsible
for US jobs going overseas by "omitting" to do anything about it.

You really are one of the most stupid conservatives I've ever encountered.
Keep up the fine work!

Bryant

Mike, you get way too excited, and you like to call people names.
Maybe one day we can have a rational discussion about the Feds,
Unions, and overseas work. Let me know when.

Brian

That's precisely why I "plonked" him earlier.

Bryant doesn't debate -- he insults, labels, and name-calls, then pretends
that he's debating (all the while typing aloof and condecending rhetoric).

Some folks actually buy that act -- but most others see it as the insipid,
cliche-riddled rambling of a small mind that it is. Just ignore him.

-- Stinger


"Brian" wrote in message
m...
ojunk (Michael Bryant) wrote in message
...
From: (Brian)

Wow, more stellar reasoning!

First, I've never supported illegal workers replacing US workers.

You did by omission.

By omission?? If you use that twisted reasoning then GW is clearly
responsible
for US jobs going overseas by "omitting" to do anything about it.

You really are one of the most stupid conservatives I've ever
encountered.
Keep up the fine work!

Bryant

Mike, you get way too excited, and you like to call people names.
Maybe one day we can have a rational discussion about the Feds,
Unions, and overseas work. Let me know when.

Brian

From: "Stinger"


That's precisely why I "plonked" him earlier.

Bryant doesn't debate -- he insults, labels, and name-calls, then pretends
that he's debating (all the while typing aloof and condecending rhetoric).

Some folks actually buy that act -- but most others see it as the insipid,
cliche-riddled rambling of a small mind that it is. Just ignore him.


Let's return to Rush Limbaugh, then. Why does he avoid your critique of
"condescending rhetoric"? My style is mild compared to most conservative
talk-show hosts.

Kind of makes a point, doesn't it?

Bryant
Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL
Louisville, KY
R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K,
DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A
GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76
(remove "nojunk" to reply)

From: (Brian)

Bryant, you're confused. That's why you have yet to respond to my
latest posting.

Once again, you prove that you lack basic reading capabilities. I said I would
respond as soon as I got off work. Some of us actually have to work for a
living.

My response has already been posted.

Timing your attempt as refutation,

Bryant