Airspace Privacy over your house !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 21:40:49 -0600, Rich Ahrens wrote:

:Eric Miller wrote:
: My take on entertainers and celebrities, whether they're actors, athletes,
: musicians or whatever is...
:
: They're not paid to think, they're paid to entertain us.
: They certainly have no business spouting off on political issues.
: They're trained monkeys.
: So shut up and do what you're paid to do!
: Dance for me, monkey, dance!
:
:I presume that goes for Charlton Heston as well?

Charlton Heston spoke out on one particular topic (gun ownership) that
he had a lifelong interest in and was VERY well informed on. On that
topic, I listened to him the same way I'd listen to anyone else - with
an open mind. I didn't think he was correct just because he was in
"Omega Man."

:Ahnooold?

The jury is still out on Arnold. He may be fine. He may be awful.
No matter what, he'll be better than the walking disaster we had
before. Any trained monkey would be. YOU would be, no matter who you
are. A random number generator would be a better gov. than Davis.

:Ronnie?

He worked his way up. 16 years as president of a large, powerful
union before he ran for office. Popular governor, successful
President (unless you think the end of communism was a bad thing.)
Awful actor. Not a major star, as far as I'm concerned. No more than
Fred "Gopher" Grandy.

Performers *can* make good politicians. So can lawyers, doctors,
carpenters, salesmen, writers and auto mechanics. But before they run
for office, why should we listen to actors more than any of the
others?

:Or just
:the ones whose positions on issues disagree with your own?

I don't think Bruce Willis OR Cher should have a significant influence
on public policy.

..
wrote in message ...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 21:40:49 -0600, Rich Ahrens wrote:

:Eric Miller wrote:

:Ronnie?

He worked his way up. 16 years as president of a large, powerful
union before he ran for office. Popular governor, successful
President (unless you think the end of communism was a bad thing.)


What is China, a republic? The only thing that Ronnie did was out-spend the USSR, a good thing don't get me wrong, but
certainly not the end of communism...

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 13:12:37 GMT, "Blueskies" wrote:

:
:.
wrote in message ...
: On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 21:40:49 -0600, Rich Ahrens wrote:
:
: :Eric Miller wrote:
:
: :Ronnie?
:
: He worked his way up. 16 years as president of a large, powerful
: union before he ran for office. Popular governor, successful
: President (unless you think the end of communism was a bad thing.)
:
:
:What is China, a republic? The only thing that Ronnie did was out-spend the USSR, a good thing don't get me wrong, but
:certainly not the end of communism...

Outspending the USSR was a big part of it, but not the whole thing.
Being willing to use the military was another. Invading Grenada seems
like nothing in retrospect, but we were coming off Carter, who's only
use for a military was... well basically nothing. And Reagan was
only 5 years removed from the fall of S Viet Nam. We were cowed by
everyone at that point, we wouldn't even defend our people in Iran.
Reagan turned our national outlook. He was the one who walked away in
Iceland.

China's a dictatorship, with a LOT of state owned businesses
(especially the People's Liberation Army - it's unbelievable how much
of the stuff you buy in Toys R Us is made by the PLA) but they're no
longer communist. They say so themselves.

The only countries that are still communist are Cuba and North Korea.
A bunch of SEA countries are wierd mixes - Viet Nam, Laos, Burma (we
still offically call it Burma). They're like China - one party
dictatorships, with a lot of the production and property belonging to
the government. But they no longer teach Marx, Lennin and Mao.