U.S. tourism may be casualty of war on terror

Deep Foiled Malls wrote:

Shouldn't you be working?

Free time is whats gained from hard work to become successfull. A
concept that ****es off alot of liberals.

PTRAVEL wrote:

How about "leftist" for starters. I'm a moderate. I always have been (I've
even voted for a couple of Republicans in my time).

In the scope of your comments here, you are a leftist. Thats name
calling? Heck you just called yourself a name, moderate. Good grief.


Then when will you provide a substantive response? I've raised two very
specific issues, which I've discussed in the context of the First Amendment.
You've responded by calling me a leftist and simply ignoring what are
reported and verified facts.

Your issues were merely questions posed as answers. IOW's, you never
answered a damn thing. You twisted and asked some other loosly related
question. Call your local congressmen if you feel action is needed.


I told you, I'm not a leftist. Do you think that everyone who disagrees
with you is a "leftist"?

No, just you.

The difference is, none of those
networks confuse partisan punditry with journalism, unlike Fox.

Are you for real? Networks such as CBS are about as biased as they
come. Just because that bias agrees with your views does not make it
journalism.



The blue states are blue because of the high number of people dependent
on government services.


I'm sure that's what Rush tells you. It is not, however, true.

Ya, it most certainly is. Red states vote conservative because they use
social programs??? What are you on dude? Why do you lefties use the ol
Rush stereotyping anyways? I can't stand the guy. He's an entertainer
and a whining one at that.

Matthias Bludau wrote:

If being a tourist I rather would travel to Canada or
elsewhere instead, where I would not have the costs and
hassle. We'll see what happens when those measures are active.



I wouldn't be surprised if Canada becomes "North America's drawing room"
as business meetings and conferences get diverted there. The recent CES
(Consumer Electronics Show) saw a massive withdrawal by Chinese firms
due to inability to get visas in time (started by Haier, I think, and
dominoed).
For those who would poo-poo this as a mere loss for the Chinese consider
that a) a lot of US-based buyers cancelled since they were interested in
seeing the new lines from Haier, etc. and b) those firms will shift their
emphasis to events like CeBit in Hamburg, etc. CES in Vancouver, BC
next year would not surprise me ...

gld

PTRAVEL wrote:

He was credentialed enough to get access to a Bush press conference ...


Q1: Isn't a security check required?

Q2: If yes, what if a terrorist tried to get access as "Jeff Gannon"?

gld

miles wrote:
Free time is whats gained from hard work to become successfull. A
concept that ****es off alot of liberals.


Am I to understand that a good old fashioned capitalist right winger is
expected to support his government even if the government is totally
mismanaging the economy, bankrupting the country with record debts,
taking measures to worsen trade deficit by reducing inbound tourist
dollars, and preventing the adoption of more environmentally frinedly
lifestyle and technologies which would save US corporation money and
make then more competitive in the world simply because the government
wants to help its friends in the oil patchj continue to make tons of
money ?

Am I to understand that a right wing born again christian is supposed to
support his government because the government says it is anti abortion
to save lives, even though that government is responsible for having
killed over 15,000 innocent irakis as well as 1500 american soldiers
(and 10 times that manyu who were injured). ???

Am I to understand that right wing americans who feel so strongly about
freedom and liberty would support their government even thought it is
still violating the USA costitution with its Patriot act ?

It is one thing to have convictions. But you can't blindly support a
governent that makes claims compatible with your convictions when that
government acts against what it says it believes in.

You may not want to admit all the bad things your government has done,
you may not want to admit that you know your own government lied to you
big time (where are the WMDs ?) and is lying to you now with its
unfounded accusatiosn on Iran and Syria, but deep down, can you really
be blind to this ? If you, you have a few missing bolts.

In what used to be the United States, it was not only considered normal,
but it was considered GOOD to criticise one's government, no matter if
it was on the same wing as you. But this is no longer the case since no
right winger dare aven admit the evidence that the current governbmentr
can't be trusted to do anything right.

And they'll invade Syria before they've cleaned up the mess they made in Iraq.

"miles" wrote in message
news:CI9Sd.18713$Tt.11015@fed1read05...
Deep Foiled Malls wrote:

Shouldn't you be working?

Free time is whats gained from hard work to become successfull. A
concept that ****es off alot of liberals
=======

Liberal:
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or
authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and
tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on
or associated with principles of social and political liberalism,
especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
e. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
f. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.

nobody wrote:
miles wrote:

Free time is whats gained from hard work to become successfull. A
concept that ****es off alot of liberals.



Am I to understand that a good old fashioned capitalist right winger is

dozens of unrelated rant snipped.


Care to rephrase your page full of warped rants so it relates as a
reply? A 100 or so word sentence? Good grief. Thats awful!

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 17:24:07 -0700, miles wrote:

PTRAVEL wrote:

How about "leftist" for starters. I'm a moderate. I always have been (I've
even voted for a couple of Republicans in my time).

In the scope of your comments here, you are a leftist. Thats name
calling? Heck you just called yourself a name, moderate. Good grief.

Actually, he did this at the beginning of his post then tells the
truth by the end where he admits he is a liberal.



The difference is, none of those
networks confuse partisan punditry with journalism, unlike Fox.

Are you for real? Networks such as CBS are about as biased as they
come. Just because that bias agrees with your views does not make it
journalism.

Just ask Dan Rather. He is effectively finally being canned for just
this. Along with a bunch of others.




The blue states are blue because of the high number of people dependent
on government services.


I'm sure that's what Rush tells you. It is not, however, true.

Ya, it most certainly is. Red states vote conservative because they use
social programs??? What are you on dude? Why do you lefties use the ol
Rush stereotyping anyways? I can't stand the guy. He's an entertainer
and a whining one at that.

I'm with you on Limbaugh. And it certainly is true. I live in New
Jersey which pays the most in Federal tax getting back the least.
This was a blue state for as long as anyone can remember, has a huge
state debt for all the government crap and pays out to the Feds
something like $1.55 for every $1 it gets back. New Mexico, on the
other hand, was a red state and gets the most back of any state for
what it pays in. Something like paying $.55 in Federal taxes for
every dollar it gets back.

Tom Bellhouse wrote:
Liberal:
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or
authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and
tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on
or associated with principles of social and political liberalism,
especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
e. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
f. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.

Do you have a point to make? Some of your above definition does not
reflect the actual perceived definition in the USA. Liberalism as its
generally accepted by the public is not the same in the various
countries you listed.

Item E needs rewriting:

E: Tending to give other peoples money freely (can you say tax the crap
out of the wealthy?)

wrote:

I'm with you on Limbaugh. And it certainly is true. I live in New
Jersey which pays the most in Federal tax getting back the least.
This was a blue state for as long as anyone can remember, has a huge
state debt for all the government crap and pays out to the Feds
something like $1.55 for every $1 it gets back. New Mexico, on the
other hand, was a red state and gets the most back of any state for
what it pays in. Something like paying $.55 in Federal taxes for
every dollar it gets back.

The states that have the highest number of people on social welfare are
in blue states. Look at California. The highest concentration is
highly congested inner cities. People on social programs will vote
liberal, no doubt about it and they live in higher concentrations in
larger cities.