🚀 go-pugleaf

Well, I received five copies in my mailbox of Lori Saldana's turgid prose
(responded to below). Was it malice or merely gross incompetence?   I have
informed Ms. Saldana that mailbombing is looked upon with great disapproval
by network and ISP administrators - who tend to reward this kind of
behavior with account termination.  If she does it again, we will know,
won't we?  I have promised her that if she stays out of my mailbox, I will
stay out of hers.

Lori Saldana wrote:

>Well, if anyone would purport to know about idiots, Andrew, I suspect it 
>would be you. But just to test your knowledge: what famous American 
>author wrote: "I imagined myself an idiot. I imagined myself a 
>Congressman. But I repeat myself." ??

Jim Wright?  Wilbur Mills?  Dan Rostenkowski?  Barbara Boxer?

Ms. Saldana, you are the one who chooses to be a 'useful idiot' to the lies
and corruption of the Democrats.  I belong to no political party, and
support only those politicians who have demonstrated that they actually
care about preventing the destruction of this country with debt.  Read the
conclusions of Robert Kerry's (D-Nebraska) Entitlement Commission and tell
us again how much you admire the lies of Clinton, Panetta, Gebhardt,
Daschle, ad nauseam...

>But environmental considerations aside (those are difficult, complicated 
>issues, after all), perhaps the next Congressional delegation will at the 
>very least be able to keep our wonderful national parks and museums open 
>and our federal programs operating... or is that too much to ask of 
>elected officials these days? 

Try asking Clinton.  He promised in writing in November to come to the
budget table with a budget plan that eliminates the deficit in seven years
using CBO numbers.  He *refused* for two months to keep that clear and
unequivocal promise.  Congress promised a CR that would allow the
government to stay open, despite Clinton's vetos of spending bills, the
instant he came to the table with an honest budget.  They proved again
their willingness to keep their promises, in a dramatic contrast to the
deceit and dishonesty of Clinton and his administration.  It was
*Clinton's* decision, and only his decision, to shut down the government
for two months.

>
>And isn't it interesting how important National Parks are in terms of 
>generating income for local communities! With the parks shut down across 
>the nation the last few weeks, suddenly local businesses realize that 
>these parks are really contributing lots of money to their livelihoods. 
>

And Clinton *vetoed* the Interior department bill that would have allowed
all the parks to stay open.  And when the State of Arizona said they would
pay the salaries and other costs needed to open Grand Canyon National Park,
Clinton *refused* to allow that.  Who's playing politics, Ms. Saldana? 
Those like Clinton and his supporters who lie and lie and lie, or those who
keep promises?

>And re:Andrew's comments about Bilbray's challengers- I can't imagine 
>anyone else being able to do a *worse* job-- I mean, these current guys 
>can't even keep our basic institutions functioning! And when out-of-work 
>federal employees protested last week, Brian's staff actually tried to 
>blame it on the Democrats for organizing them! You want hypocrisy, look 
>no further.

As I have documented above, it *was* the Democrats and Clinton's lies about
coming to the table with an honest budget that caused the shutdown.  Worse
job?  Try scum like Jim Wright, Tom Foley, Dan Rostenkowski, Mel Reynolds,
and all the other liars, thieves, child molesters and other assorted scum
that Democrats say should be running things in Congress.  Tell us how much
you admire Rosty and Reynolds and Foley and Wright, Ms. Saldana. 

>Finally, Andrew has never responded to my question re:the failed San 
>Marcos, CA  waste recycling facility...

Because it was a pathetic tactic of yours to avoid discussing your blatant
falsehoods about Bilbray's positions and his *support* for the Clean Water
Act standards.  But the San Marcos project went down the tubes for
primarily two reasons, one valid, the other not.  The valid reason was
runaway cost increases that made the project economically a waste of
resources.  The other was rampant NIMBYism.  Care to get into a discussion
about the problems of hammer mills, pipe erosion, and removal of
non-ferrous metals that are a major issue in waste-to-energy plants, Ms.
Saldana?  Or are you just an ignorant posturer about these kinds of
facilities?

>Andrew may know a lot about federal issues in SDO, but I suspect he knows 
>very little about these "close to home" issues that San Diegans and 
>other Californians feel the effect of every day. I hear he lives 
>thousands of miles away-- why is he so interested in these affairs, 
>anyway?

Because I have lived in San Diego for nearly seventeen years.  Your
pseudo-environmentalist incompetence is matched by whomever you 'hear'
from.  Care to discuss where you got this excellent demonstration of your
fundamental lack of facts?


Andrew Russell
arussell@bix.com