OT: Dear Grim Reaper...
cavelamb
Dear Grim Reaper,
So far this year you have taken away my favorite actor Patrick Swayze, my
favorite singer Stephen Gately and my favorite actress Farah Fawcett.
Just so you know, my favorite politicians are Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Nancy
Pelosi.
Regards
Lewis Hartswick
...lew...
Steve B
"cavelamb" <cave...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:jqadnRTNw6-ZzrfW...@earthlink.com...
Joe Biden doesn't hold a candle to Harry Reid.
Ed Huntress
"Steve B" <desert...@fishmail.net> wrote in message
news:005qv6-...@news.infowest.com...
As long as we're voting on who would be more useful if he were no longer of
this Earth, I'm putting in my vote for Joe Lieberman, the State Flounder of
Connecticut.
--
Ed Huntress
Steve B
"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b2a6a7f$0$5002$607e...@cv.net...
Seriously, I wouldn't want them to leave the planet from anything other than
natural causes. Just either do what they're supposed to do, or get out of
the way and let someone else do it. But now, we're in a mode of
internationalizing everything, and brokering carbon credits based on flawed
and fraudulent science, so even electing representative politicians won't
help a lot. It seems as if the actual control of things has shifted to the
Rothschilds and the like, and since they own the politicians, it's a done
deal.
As I see it, there's just a few ways to go: sheeple socialism, armed
revolution, anarchy, or social and financial collapse.
First we had the Euro. Now, the Amero? One worldism isn't far off, folks.
Steve
Ed Huntress
>
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:4b2a6a7f$0$5002$607e...@cv.net...
>>
>> "Steve B" <desert...@fishmail.net> wrote in message
>> news:005qv6-...@news.infowest.com...
>>>
>>> "cavelamb" <cave...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:jqadnRTNw6-ZzrfW...@earthlink.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear Grim Reaper,
>>>>
>>>> So far this year you have taken away my favorite actor Patrick Swayze,
>>>> my favorite singer Stephen Gately and my favorite actress Farah
>>>> Fawcett.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just so you know, my favorite politicians are Barack Obama, Joe Biden
>>>> and Nancy Pelosi.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Joe Biden doesn't hold a candle to Harry Reid.
>>
>> As long as we're voting on who would be more useful if he were no longer
>> of this Earth, I'm putting in my vote for Joe Lieberman, the State
>> Flounder of Connecticut.
>>
>> --
>> Ed Huntress
>
> Seriously, I wouldn't want them to leave the planet from anything other
> than natural causes.
Somethinig quick and painless. <g>
> Just either do what they're supposed to do, or get out of the way and let
> someone else do it. But now, we're in a mode of internationalizing
> everything, and brokering carbon credits based on flawed and fraudulent
> science, so even electing representative politicians won't help a lot.
Steve, if you understand atmospheric fluid dynamics and the quantum
mechanics of the atmospheric greenhouse effect, and can do the calculations,
and can interpret the data from surface and satellite sources, more power to
you. I can't.
> It seems as if the actual control of things has shifted to the Rothschilds
> and the like, and since they own the politicians, it's a done deal.
Try Exxon, Big Pharma, the American Bar Association, and Golden Sacks.
>
> As I see it, there's just a few ways to go: sheeple socialism, armed
> revolution, anarchy, or social and financial collapse.
I suspect none of the above.
>
> First we had the Euro. Now, the Amero? One worldism isn't far off,
> folks.
No Ameros are on the way. Who would take a currency backed by Mexico and
Canada? <g>
--
Ed Huntress
Pete C.
Yep, the two wings hate Lieberman, since he's one of the few centrists
out there and won't rubber stamp either wings agenda.
Ed Huntress
"Pete C." <aux3....@snet.net> wrote in message
news:4b2a904e$0$9357$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
I think that Gail Collins got it right in her NYT column today. She used to
cover him when he was in the CT legislature and she knows him pretty well.
In a kind way, what she says is, basically, that he's stupid.
--
Ed Huntress
F. George McDuffee
<desert...@fishmail.net> wrote:
<snip>
>First we had the Euro. Now, the Amero
And in case you missed it the "Gulfo."
Gulf petro-powers to launch currency in latest threat to dollar
hegemony
The Arab states of the Gulf region have agreed to launch a single
currency modelled on the euro, hoping to blaze a trail towards a
pan-Arab monetary union swelling to the ancient borders of the
Ummayad Caliphate.
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Published: 7:12PM GMT 15 Dec 2009
http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/channel/HumanCapital/news/974581/could-gulfo-supplant-dollar-/
A new Arab monetary union, modelled on Europe, could give birth
to an important new currency.
Interesting news from the Gulf, where four oil-rich Arab states
have just entered a �monetary union pact�; this will lead to the
creation of a central bank for the region and a new currency
modelled on the Euro � dubbed, with startling originality, the
'Gulfo'. Since these states are very rich and control a sizeable
chunk of the world�s oil production, this monetary union could
have some serious political heft. And if the Gulfo becomes the
basis for oil contracts, some argue that in time it could even
supplant the dollar as the world�s reserve currency (which
wouldn�t be good for sterling either, presumably).
Unka George (George McDuffee)
..............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).
dca...@krl.org
> I think that Gail Collins got it right in her NYT column today. She used to
> cover him when he was in the CT legislature and she knows him pretty well.
> In a kind way, what she says is, basically, that he's stupid.
>
> --
> Ed Huntress
I read Gail's column. I am not impressed by that column. But I
expect the liberal Democrats liked it.
Dan
Ed Huntress
<dca...@krl.org> wrote in message
news:f9255482-edc8-404a...@z40g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 17, 8:33 pm, "Ed Huntress" <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
> I think that Gail Collins got it right in her NYT column today. She used
> to
> cover him when he was in the CT legislature and she knows him pretty well.
> In a kind way, what she says is, basically, that he's stupid.
>
> --
> Ed Huntress
>I read Gail's column. I am not impressed by that column.
I'm not surprised. d8-)
> But I expect the liberal Democrats liked it.
They probably do. She's pretty smart.
--
Ed Huntress
Wes
>Just so you know, my favorite politicians are Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Nancy
>Pelosi.
Dear Grimster,
Cavelamb forgot how much he likes Chuck U Schumer.
Wes
cavelamb
LOL! - you tell 'em, Wes.
Wes
>As long as we're voting on who would be more useful if he were no longer of
>this Earth, I'm putting in my vote for Joe Lieberman, the State Flounder of
>Connecticut.
On the scale of betrayal, R2D2 (Arlen Specter) rates the State Flounder title far more
than Joe does.
Wes
--
Someone please resolve for me the dichotomy of 'ignorance of the law is no defense'
with congress critters telling me they don't read the
bills because you need a team of lawyers to understand it.
Wes
>I think that Gail Collins got it right in her NYT column today. She used to
>cover him when he was in the CT legislature and she knows him pretty well.
>In a kind way, what she says is, basically, that he's stupid.
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/connecticut/
I thought I'd google major industries and Connecticut, that link popped up. See
Insurance.
His interest in the Middle East is understandable.
Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller
Ed Huntress
"Wes" <clu...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:eFyWm.197732$mn3.1...@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>As long as we're voting on who would be more useful if he were no longer
>>of
>>this Earth, I'm putting in my vote for Joe Lieberman, the State Flounder
>>of
>>Connecticut.
>
> On the scale of betrayal, R2D2 (Arlen Specter) rates the State Flounder
> title far more
> than Joe does.
But Specter is the State Flounder of Pennsylvania! d8-)
Lieberman is covered by NY's TV stations, which is what we watch, and NY
area newspapers. If you follow him closely, he seems to be a little nuts,
and has been for over a decade. What appears superficially to be an
independent mind may well be little mind at all.
--
Ed Huntress
Pete C.
Insurance used to be a major industry in CT, however it is rapidly
disappearing from CT just like the manufacturing they drove away as
well. What is left is mostly a house of cards with it's hopes pinned on
biotech which isn't the growth engine they thought it was.
Wes
>> Dear Grimster,
>>
>> Cavelamb forgot how much he likes Chuck U Schumer.
>>
>> Wes
>
>LOL! - you tell 'em, Wes.
Just trying to help out.
Wes
Ed Huntress
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>I think that Gail Collins got it right in her NYT column today. She used
>>to
>>cover him when he was in the CT legislature and she knows him pretty well.
>>In a kind way, what she says is, basically, that he's stupid.
>
> http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/connecticut/
>
> I thought I'd google major industries and Connecticut, that link popped
> up. See
> Insurance.
Oh, yeah. That's one of his issues.
>
> His interest in the Middle East is understandable.
Right. But he's totally in the tank on that one.
Lieberman's shtick is that he's anti-ideological. But viewed over time, he
just looks incoherent. His positions look more like random enthusiasms than
pragmatism or open-mindedness.
--
Ed Huntress
Wes
>> On the scale of betrayal, R2D2 (Arlen Specter) rates the State Flounder
>> title far more
>> than Joe does.
>
>But Specter is the State Flounder of Pennsylvania! d8-)
I grant you that one.
>
>Lieberman is covered by NY's TV stations, which is what we watch, and NY
>area newspapers. If you follow him closely, he seems to be a little nuts,
>and has been for over a decade. What appears superficially to be an
>independent mind may well be little mind at all.
I can think of many positions he has I hate. I'm thinking he is one of those moderates we
hear about.
Ed Huntress
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>> On the scale of betrayal, R2D2 (Arlen Specter) rates the State Flounder
>>> title far more
>>> than Joe does.
>>
>>But Specter is the State Flounder of Pennsylvania! d8-)
>
> I grant you that one.
>>
>>Lieberman is covered by NY's TV stations, which is what we watch, and NY
>>area newspapers. If you follow him closely, he seems to be a little nuts,
>>and has been for over a decade. What appears superficially to be an
>>independent mind may well be little mind at all.
>
> I can think of many positions he has I hate. I'm thinking he is one of
> those moderates we
> hear about.
Ha! Wes, an incoherent flounder is not a moderate. They just don't know what
other polite thing to call him.
Moderates often are conservatives who try to file the rough edges off of
conservatism -- people like Ev Dirksen, George Romney, and, in his final
years, Barry Goldwater. Sometimes they're liberals who try to file the rough
edges off of liberalism -- like Pat Moynihan, John Kennedy, and Bill
Clinton.
With maturity and a good sense of real human behavior, libertarian types,
like Goldwater, often become "moderates" in the sense that they object to
the ideological suicide pacts of the wingers. The two premier examples of
moderates, real iconoclasts who were principled and also coherent, were
Dirksen and Moynihan. I keep longing for a resurrection. <g>
--
Ed Huntress
wmbjk...@citlink.net
First the state dems disowned him, then his new party did the same.
The video at this site http://allaboutjoe.org/ explains the situation
nicely. Colbert says that Lieberman has joementia. Bull's-eye.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/16/colbert-senile-lieberman_n_393908.html
Wayne
Wes
>With maturity and a good sense of real human behavior, libertarian types,
>like Goldwater, often become "moderates" in the sense that they object to
>the ideological suicide pacts of the wingers. The two premier examples of
>moderates, real iconoclasts who were principled and also coherent, were
>Dirksen and Moynihan. I keep longing for a resurrection. <g>
I don't remember Dirksen. I remember Barry Goldwater, a much maligned man. Barry was a
Libertarian at heart and a Conservative by reputation.
Moynihan was a true Liberal but a liberal that understood how social forces worked. He
understood realpolitik. I really miss the guy, you never knew when he would emit a gem of
verbage.
As you know, I'm a C-Span junkie, I got many chances to listen to Daniel Patrick Monihan.
He was always worth the time. Just like time spent with Tim Russert. I may not agree but
a well reasoned argument is worth hearing.
Ed Huntress
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>With maturity and a good sense of real human behavior, libertarian types,
>>like Goldwater, often become "moderates" in the sense that they object to
>>the ideological suicide pacts of the wingers. The two premier examples of
>>moderates, real iconoclasts who were principled and also coherent, were
>>Dirksen and Moynihan. I keep longing for a resurrection. <g>
>
> I don't remember Dirksen. I remember Barry Goldwater, a much maligned
> man. Barry was a
> Libertarian at heart and a Conservative by reputation.
>
> Moynihan was a true Liberal but a liberal that understood how social
> forces worked. He
> understood realpolitik. I really miss the guy, you never knew when he
> would emit a gem of
> verbage.
>
> As you know, I'm a C-Span junkie, I got many chances to listen to Daniel
> Patrick Monihan.
> He was always worth the time. Just like time spent with Tim Russert. I
> may not agree but
> a well reasoned argument is worth hearing.
>
> Wes
See? You're sort of a moderate yourself. d8-)
Those are among the most admirable politicians of our lifetime, IMO. You
should get to know more about Dirksen. An Illinois Republican, he was the
driving force behind the Civil Rights Act, and individual rights in general.
He had a voice like a bullfrog but he was mesmerizing.
--
Ed Huntress
Wes
>See? You're sort of a moderate yourself. d8-)
Right, a moderate that has read Atlas Shrugged 4 times, life member of the NRA, board of
directors in a shooting club, tour in the Marines and a two term official in local
politics that had a R by his name.
Then there is my collection of L Neil Smith books. ;) A few John Stossle and P J O'Rourke
added to the mix. I have a few books by Art Buchwald too. That reference took way too
long to recall. I hope I don't have Anheuser's. I guess Art gives me moderate points. :)
>
>Those are among the most admirable politicians of our lifetime, IMO. You
>should get to know more about Dirksen. An Illinois Republican, he was the
>driving force behind the Civil Rights Act, and individual rights in general.
>He had a voice like a bullfrog but he was mesmerizing.
We are talking about Everett Dirksen?
Wes
--
"If I can not learn, I can not teach." Massad Ayoob
Ed Huntress
Hey, it's never too late to improve your taste in literature. d8-) You
should have read it *once*, and then read Edmund Burke's _Reflections on the
Revolution in France_ and Russell Kirk's _The Conservative Mind_. Those are
the foundational works on modern conservatism. You'll see where William
Buckley and Barry Goldwater got their ideas. Today's "conservatives" are
mostly pathetic copies of those original thinkers. _Atlas Shrugged_ is just
a wacky polemic, and a poorly written one, at that.
> ....life member of the NRA
I'm a member, too. I only sign up for 5 years at a time. You never know when
they're going to completely lose their marbles.
> board of directors in a shooting club...
I wrote PR and lobbied for mine.
> ....tour in the Marines...
My dad was in the 1st Division and in the first wave of the first landing at
Guadalcanal. His politics were about the same as mine.
> and a two term official in local politics that had a R by his name.
I was a delegate to my county's Republican Convention for a gubernatorial
nomination. We nominated a guber. <g>
>
> Then there is my collection of L Neil Smith books. ;) A few John Stossle
> and P J O'Rourke
> added to the mix.
I like O'Rourke, too. Did you read his take on _The Wealth of Nations_? It's
the most worthwhile thing he's ever written. Highly recommended, especially
if you aren't going to read the 1,000+ pages of Adam Smith's original.
Hardly anyone does, anyway.
> I have a few books by Art Buchwald too. That reference took way too
> long to recall. I hope I don't have Anheuser's. I guess Art gives me
> moderate points. :)
None of those things preclude you from being a moderate, which, in its
sophisticated version, is just someone who sees the weaknesses in ideologies
and who applies pragmatic thinking to real-world problems. Reading the
foundational works on conservatism is worth a lifetime of reading Wayne
LaPierre's editorials or P.J. O'Rourke's parodies. It can even cure the
mental tics one acquires from reading too much Ayn Rand. <g>
>
>>
>>Those are among the most admirable politicians of our lifetime, IMO. You
>>should get to know more about Dirksen. An Illinois Republican, he was the
>>driving force behind the Civil Rights Act, and individual rights in
>>general.
>>He had a voice like a bullfrog but he was mesmerizing.
>
> We are talking about Everett Dirksen?
The same. Very conservative fiscally; moderate about most social issues; a
real liberal when it came to racial equality. One of the giants.
He's one of the Republicans who Gunner and the boyz are talking about when
they talk about Republicans "leading" the legislative effort for the Civil
Rights Act and other racial-equality issues. He's also one they'd call
"RINO," and then say how glad there are no more of them in the Republican
Party. That kind of ignorance is what pisses me off about many of the
self-styled Republicans we see on this NG.
--
Ed Huntress
Ed Huntress
<wmbjk...@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:73kli592ee38acl6c...@4ax.com...
LOL! Funny. Lieberman's about-face on the Medicare issue would be one thing
if it was just a change in thinking. But he doesn't seem to remember that
he's one of those who PROPOSED it, fer chrissake.
--
Ed Huntress
Hawke
That would be nice but my Christmas wish is for old Dickhead Cheney to
suffer the final heart attack, and soon. There'd be a big party around
here when he goes.
Hawke
Hawke
Did you see what happened today in the Senate when Lieberman was
speaking and Al Franken was in charge of the session? It was great.
Lieberman had his time expire and he wanted more and requested extra
time from Franken, who turned him down flat. Lieberman said he didn't
take it personally, which he did because it was meant to be. I just
wonder what Lieberman's problem is? Doesn't he realize that he's making
a lot of enemies in the Democratic party by what he's doing? The thing
with Franken was the first time anyone has said boo to Lieberman. I have
to think that there are going to be people who are going to want to get
back at the guy. He's going to lose his committee chairmanships and will
be a pariah. I think he's cutting his own throat. You know republicans
don't like him and only like seeing him back stab the Democrats. Now
he's going to lose all his Democrat friends too. It's like what Dr. Phil
says all the time. What was he thinking?
Hawke
William Wixon
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hgf8ar$n8v$2...@aioe.org...
>>
>
>
> That would be nice but my Christmas wish is for old Dickhead Cheney to
> suffer the final heart attack, and soon. There'd be a big party around
> here when he goes.
>
> Hawke
it'll be interesting to see whether or not mccain drops dead of a heart
attack (or becomes somehow otherwise incapacitated) within the next 3 years.
b.w.
ATP*
about him. It's been suggested he's looking for concessions from the Obama
administration on the settlements or other key points Israel is seeking in
return for his support on health care.
Pete C.
I think the answer here is that he does think - about actual issues, not
about political party games and infighting.
Doug Miller
>
>it'll be interesting to see whether or not mccain drops dead of a heart
>attack (or becomes somehow otherwise incapacitated) within the next 3 years.
The smart money would bet that he'll be around for quite a few more years. You
do know his mom was out campaigning for him, right?
Ed Huntress
> Ed Huntress wrote:
>> <dca...@krl.org> wrote in message
>> news:f9255482-edc8-404a...@z40g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>> On Dec 17, 8:33 pm, "Ed Huntress" <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I think that Gail Collins got it right in her NYT column today. She used
>>> to
>>> cover him when he was in the CT legislature and she knows him pretty
>>> well.
>>> In a kind way, what she says is, basically, that he's stupid.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ed Huntress
>>
>>> I read Gail's column. I am not impressed by that column.
>>
>> I'm not surprised. d8-)
>>
>>> But I expect the liberal Democrats liked it.
>>
>> They probably do. She's pretty smart.
>>
>
>
> Did you see what happened today in the Senate when Lieberman was speaking
> and Al Franken was in charge of the session? It was great. Lieberman had
> his time expire and he wanted more and requested extra time from Franken,
> who turned him down flat. Lieberman said he didn't take it personally,
> which he did because it was meant to be.
Yes. I got a kick out of it. <g> Franken was uncomfortable doing it,
probably because he's the newest Senator and Lieberman has been around the
block, but that didn't stop him. Good for Franken.
> I just wonder what Lieberman's problem is? Doesn't he realize that he's
> making a lot of enemies in the Democratic party by what he's doing? The
> thing with Franken was the first time anyone has said boo to Lieberman. I
> have to think that there are going to be people who are going to want to
> get back at the guy. He's going to lose his committee chairmanships and
> will be a pariah. I think he's cutting his own throat. You know
> republicans don't like him and only like seeing him back stab the
> Democrats. Now he's going to lose all his Democrat friends too. It's like
> what Dr. Phil says all the time. What was he thinking?
>
> Hawke
It's possible he's not thinking very much, but just being political. He's
done that before.
--
Ed Huntress
Larry Jaques
<clu...@lycos.com> scrawled the following:
>"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>> On the scale of betrayal, R2D2 (Arlen Specter) rates the State Flounder
>>> title far more
>>> than Joe does.
>>
>>But Specter is the State Flounder of Pennsylvania! d8-)
>
>I grant you that one.
>>
>>Lieberman is covered by NY's TV stations, which is what we watch, and NY
>>area newspapers. If you follow him closely, he seems to be a little nuts,
>>and has been for over a decade. What appears superficially to be an
>>independent mind may well be little mind at all.
Ed just hates him because he (Lieberman) is too conservative.
>I can think of many positions he has I hate. I'm thinking he is one of those moderates we
>hear about.
I'm not too down on Lieberman, but I sure wish his patriotism was
toward the USA first and Israel second, instead of the other way
around. He just may be one of those rare moderates we read about in
fairy tale books.
--
This episode raises disturbing questions about scientific standards,
at least in highly political areas such as global warming. Still,
it's remarkable to see how quickly corrective information can now
spread. After years of ignored freedom-of-information requests and
stonewalling, all it took was disclosure to change the debate. Even
the most influential scientists must prove their case in the court
of public opinion�a court that, thanks to the Web, is one where
eventually all views get a hearing. --Gordon Crovitz, WSJ 12/9/09
F. George McDuffee
<desert...@fishmail.net> wrote:
>
>"cavelamb" <cave...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:jqadnRTNw6-ZzrfW...@earthlink.com...
>>
>> Dear Grim Reaper,
>>
>> So far this year you have taken away my favorite actor Patrick Swayze, my
>> favorite singer Stephen Gately and my favorite actress Farah Fawcett.
>>
>> Just so you know, my favorite politicians are Barack Obama, Joe Biden and
>> Nancy Pelosi.
>>
>> Regards
>
>Joe Biden doesn't hold a candle to Harry Reid.
>
unwanted people" in preparation for the "night of the long
knives" we would do well to reflect on the effect the relocation
of Senator Ted Kennedy to the big cacus in the sky had on the
operations and debate in Washington.
While many of the personalities involved are indeed enough to
piss off both the pope and the Dahali Lama,
Unka George (George McDuffee)
..............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).
Lewis Hartswick
> "cavelamb" <cave...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:jqadnRTNw6-ZzrfW...@earthlink.com...
>>
>> Dear Grim Reaper,
>>
>> So far this year you have taken away my favorite actor Patrick Swayze, my
>> favorite singer Stephen Gately and my favorite actress Farah Fawcett.
>>
>>
>> Just so you know, my favorite politicians are Barack Obama, Joe Biden and
>> Nancy Pelosi.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>
> Joe Biden doesn't hold a candle to Harry Reid.
>
>
...lew...
F. George McDuffee
Before we get too involved in drafting an official "RCM list of
(night of the long knives) we would do well to reflect on the
effect the relocation of Senator Ted Kennedy to the big senate
chamber in the sky has had on the operations and debate in
Washington.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/roehm.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives
While many of the Washington personas are indeed enough to piss
off both the Pope and the Dali Lama, it does not appear that this
is the foundational problem. Rather it is the basic U.S.
political establishment and organization has "drifted" such that
ideological fanatics and sociopaths now rise to the positions of
leadership, largely because the two party organizations have
managed to make a farce of "representative" government, and have
managed in too many cases to implement lifetime tenure for the
incumbents, even if the incumbents are zombies, i.e. Byrd [82
years old].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd
==>Its not that these are necessarily "bad" people, but they live
on another socio-cultural/economic planet.<==
One example, how can a Congress with 44% of its member
*OFFICIALLY* millionaires [237] possibly be representative of the
people with about 1% millionaires?
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/06/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5553408.shtml
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29235.html
Another difference between Congress and us mere mortals is their
tax payer funded health care plan:
http://blog.peakdems.org/2007/10/congressional-health-plan-details-its.html
http://www.psa-rising.com/blog/2009/07/sen-chris-dodds-prostate-cancer-covered-by-congressional-health-plan/
Michael A. Terrell
"F. George McDuffee" wrote:
>
> Another difference between Congress and us mere mortals is their
> tax payer funded health care plan:
> http://blog.peakdems.org/2007/10/congressional-health-plan-details-its.html
> http://www.psa-rising.com/blog/2009/07/sen-chris-dodds-prostate-cancer-covered-by-congressional-health-plan/
They don't deserve care that's is even 1% better than what our
Military or Veterans receive.
--
Offworld checks no longer accepted!
Hawke
Yeah, but I don't think she's had as many heart attacks as he has.
Hawke
John R. Carroll
In our market based society, they deserve whatever they can negotiate.
You aren't on of those commies are you?
Hey, I got my MilStar Card today.
$40.00 off my purchase ( over $200.00 ) at the base exchange and $0.40 off
of $2.67 gas from December 31 through January 7th.
I'm surprised your hero Gunner hasn't picked his up yet.
Why do you suppose he hasn't....................
--
John R. Carroll
Wes
>> They don't deserve care that's is even 1% better than what our
>> Military or Veterans receive.
>
>In our market based society, they deserve whatever they can negotiate.
>You aren't on of those commies are you?
Actually, I think our congress critters should get their care at the VA. Same queues too.
Might make them a bit more intent on honoring promises made.
>
>Hey, I got my MilStar Card today.
>$40.00 off my purchase ( over $200.00 ) at the base exchange and $0.40 off
>of $2.67 gas from December 31 through January 7th.
Sweet. A small token of appreciation from a grateful country.
Best thing uncle ever did was to do National Guard time after his hitch in the Marines. At
least he has his health care covered.
>
>I'm surprised your hero Gunner hasn't picked his up yet.
>Why do you suppose he hasn't....................
Now that he knows, maybe he will.
ATP*
I have to agree with our ethically challenged former senator D'Amato that
Schumer is a putzhead. The airline incident illustrates his attitude
perfectly.
cavelamb
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:47:44 -0500, the infamous Wes
> <clu...@lycos.com> scrawled the following:
>
>>
>
> toward the USA first and Israel second, instead of the other way
> around. He just may be one of those rare moderates we read about in
> fairy tale books.
>
It's scriptural, Larry.
Any nation that supports Israel is blessed with success.
cavelamb
Ok, Good point.
So how many of those congressional critters were millionaires - *before* running
for congress?
Richard
Post thought:
Running? what a difference a little i makes!
Ruining!
John R. Carroll
> "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote:
>
>>> They don't deserve care that's is even 1% better than what our
>>> Military or Veterans receive.
>>
>> In our market based society, they deserve whatever they can
>> negotiate. You aren't on of those commies are you?
>
> Actually, I think our congress critters should get their care at the
> VA. Same queues too. Might make them a bit more intent on honoring
> promises made.
>>
>> Hey, I got my MilStar Card today.
>> $40.00 off my purchase ( over $200.00 ) at the base exchange and
>> $0.40 off of $2.67 gas from December 31 through January 7th.
>
> Sweet. A small token of appreciation from a grateful country.
>
> Best thing uncle ever did was to do National Guard time after his
> hitch in the Marines. At least he has his health care covered.
>
>>
>> I'm surprised your hero Gunner hasn't picked his up yet.
>> Why do you suppose he hasn't....................
>
> Now that he knows, maybe he will.
Ok, but it's a credit card and they are post issued ( I thinik) so he'll
have to get his on a base somewhere.
Got a call from Afghanistan yesterday.
That kid I encouraged you to send a hopeful text message checked in.
LOL, he'd just finished 13 days forward observing from an OP.
Ain't no showers in those puppies. They do apparently have an adequate
supply of rocks.
Says the local women throw them, rocks that is, not showers.
He also said the locals he's met are good folks, just illiterate, and that
this is a real hurdle.
His unit isn't partnered, so they are good. Can yo imagine training someone
who can niether read or write?
How would you do that?
I gather we are teaching them to do just that, read and write, as a first
step and we had a good laugh about Laura Bush trotting around talking about
all of the schools that had been built. The Taliban are using them as HQ's
and Armory's.
Tell me Wes, did you ever text the guy?
--
John R. Carroll
Stuart Wheaton
So...
What percent of the congress are college grads? More than the general
population? How about high school grads? What about veterans? MD's,
Lawyers? Congress isn't a cross section of the US population, they are
a group that selects that sort of life.
Besides, having a net worth of a mere million dollars isn't really that
impressive these days.
And how many of us would willingly submit to the scrutiny of our lives
and our finances that public service requires.
ATP*
"Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
news:qgqni55l9ndcavi80...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:47:44 -0500, the infamous Wes
> <clu...@lycos.com> scrawled the following:
>
>>"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> On the scale of betrayal, R2D2 (Arlen Specter) rates the State Flounder
>>>> title far more
>>>> than Joe does.
>>>
>>>But Specter is the State Flounder of Pennsylvania! d8-)
>>
>>I grant you that one.
>>>
>>>Lieberman is covered by NY's TV stations, which is what we watch, and NY
>>>area newspapers. If you follow him closely, he seems to be a little nuts,
>>>and has been for over a decade. What appears superficially to be an
>>>independent mind may well be little mind at all.
>
> Ed just hates him because he (Lieberman) is too conservative.
>
>
>>I can think of many positions he has I hate. I'm thinking he is one of
>>those moderates we
>>hear about.
>
> I'm not too down on Lieberman, but I sure wish his patriotism was
> toward the USA first and Israel second, instead of the other way
> around.
Agreed. "Israel Uber Alles" is Joe's motto.
He just may be one of those rare moderates we read about in
> fairy tale books.
I think he's just a traitor and an opportunist.
Michael A. Terrell
I hadn't even heard about it, but then there are no bases close
enough to do me any good. The nearest would be Patrick AFB, a couple
hour drive, each way.
John R. Carroll
Michael A. Terrell
I'm familiar with the website. I crawled all over t a few months ago
and didn't see anything I needed or wanted. There is a tiny exchange at
the Gainesville VA hospital, (about the size of a convenience store.)
but I can beat almost every price there without a two hour+ round trip
drive to Gainesville.
John R. Carroll
I only posted the URL because of the card.
Yuo can apply for one, if you like, through the site.
--
John R. Carroll
cavelamb
Aw John.
That was kind of you.
But Walmart has better prices.
Gunner Asch
6 hours for me at minimum
Gunner
"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.
This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost
Michael A. Terrell
Gunner Asch wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:43:27 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"John R. Carroll" wrote:
> >>
> >> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> >> > "F. George McDuffee" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Another difference between Congress and us mere mortals is their
> >> >> tax payer funded health care plan:
> >> >>
> >> http://blog.peakdems.org/2007/10/congressional-health-plan-details-its.html
> >> >>
> >> http://www.psa-rising.com/blog/2009/07/sen-chris-dodds-prostate-cancer-covered-by-congressional-health-plan/
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > They don't deserve care that's is even 1% better than what our
> >> > Military or Veterans receive.
> >>
> >> In our market based society, they deserve whatever they can negotiate.
> >> You aren't on of those commies are you?
> >>
> >> Hey, I got my MilStar Card today.
> >> $40.00 off my purchase ( over $200.00 ) at the base exchange and $0.40 off
> >> of $2.67 gas from December 31 through January 7th.
> >>
> >> I'm surprised your hero Gunner hasn't picked his up yet.
> >> Why do you suppose he hasn't....................
> >
> >
> > I hadn't even heard about it, but then there are no bases close
> >enough to do me any good. The nearest would be Patrick AFB, a couple
> >hour drive, each way.
>
> 6 hours for me at minimum
Yes, it's not a short trip across base anymore, is it? :)
Wes
>
>Tell me Wes, did you ever text the guy?
No, I did not. I thought about what to say to a guy heading off to war that was uplifting
and came up empty. After a few days of coming up empty, I (conveniently) forgot about it.
Your post jogged my memory. I still don't know what to say. Thanks seems like too little
and I hope you make it back in one piece too grim.
We have a history of expending our best on battlefields. There have been few good wars. I
don't think Iraq and Afghanistan are on the list. Nor was your war.
I do admire his willingness to defend our country, I just hope he keeps his mind open to
what is happening behind the lines in Washington. I fear we are expending our best with
no hope of a favorable outcome.
Wes
Ed Huntress
Well said. I've felt that way for most of the last 45 years.
--
Ed Huntress
Gunner Asch
Our best is doing their duty, coming home and sitting on the sofa
getting more and more pissed off at the system.
Politics in the next 10 yrs will be filled with soldiers who are pissed
off.
And thats a very good thing.
Jim Wilkins
> ...
> Politics in the next 10 yrs will be filled with soldiers who are pissed
> off.
> And thats a very good thing.
> Gunner
Speaking of which, what do you think of Senator James Webb?
jsw
ATP*
"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b2ebbbf$0$5001$607e...@cv.net...
achieve some transformation in another nation that would be desirable but
not truly possible) going to war shows that the US will act to protect its
interests and that of its allies. There's at least a deterrent effect from
that. I don't see a lot of benefit from staying in a country indefinitely
pursuing the unattainable.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
I like him. I dont agree with him on many matters..but he is the kind
of guy we will be seeing more and more of in DC and other politics in
the not so distant future.
And he is a Democrat.
Ed Huntress
"ATP*" <waxwin...@azurepane.com> wrote in message
news:4b2ecbaa$0$5013$607e...@cv.net...
I think Obama expressed it pretty well in his Nobel acceptance speech. Now,
if we are lucky enough to have presidents with the good sense to know when
NOT to go to war, maybe we'll restore some kind of sensibility to the
process.
--
Ed Huntress
cavelamb
Yes...
cavelamb
Ed, Et Tu?
I thought declaring war was one of Congress's jobs.
Not the pres...
cavelamb
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 19:01:19 -0500, Wes <clu...@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>> "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote:
>>
>>> Tell me Wes, did you ever text the guy?
>> No, I did not. I thought about what to say to a guy heading off to war that was uplifting
>> and came up empty. After a few days of coming up empty, I (conveniently) forgot about it.
>>
>> Your post jogged my memory. I still don't know what to say. Thanks seems like too little
>> and I hope you make it back in one piece too grim.
>>
>> We have a history of expending our best on battlefields. There have been few good wars. I
>> don't think Iraq and Afghanistan are on the list. Nor was your war.
>>
>> I do admire his willingness to defend our country, I just hope he keeps his mind open to
>> what is happening behind the lines in Washington. I fear we are expending our best with
>> no hope of a favorable outcome.
>>
>> Wes
>>
>>
> Our best is doing their duty, coming home and sitting on the sofa
> getting more and more pissed off at the system.
>
> Politics in the next 10 yrs will be filled with soldiers who are pissed
> off.
>
> And thats a very good thing.
>
> Gunner
>
Sheee-it, Gunner.
It's been like that for the last 50 years.
Ed Huntress
Ah, you might want to read a newer book on American history. I think you're
about 60 years out of date. <g>
--
Ed Huntress
cavelamb
That wouldn't surprise me.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
Actually..the military has been comprised largely of Draftees during the
last "major" wars. The recent and current ones are filled with
Volunteers..people who stepped up to the plate, bat in hand.
Big difference in world view, if you think about it a bit.
cavelamb
Gunner Asch
wrote:
Betrayed? How so? Im actually interested in what you are trying to say.
Wes
>>But they are still coming home betrayed and pissed...
>
>
>Betrayed? How so? Im actually interested in what you are trying to say.
From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic head injuries
get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment rights under Brady.
Wes
Jim Wilkins
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 17:07:17 -0800 (PST), Jim Wilkins <kb1...@gmail.com>
> >Speaking of which, what do you think of Senator James Webb?
>
> >jsw
>
> I like him. I dont agree with him on many matters..but he is the kind
> of guy we will be seeing more and more of in DC and other politics in
> the not so distant future.
> And he is a Democrat.
> Gunner
A moderate democrat with an immoderate mouth.
And a good adventure writer.
jsw
Stuart Wheaton
Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
Larry Jaques
<kb1...@gmail.com> scrawled the following:
I recently picked up _Fields of Fire_. It was just OK. Sorry, but
he's no John Ringo, David Drake, David Weber, or Richard Marcinko.
--------------------------------------------
-- I'm in touch with my Inner Curmudgeon. --
============================================
Gunner Asch
Yes, indeed. But what about the vast majority of them that come home
uninjured? What are they feeling betrayed about?
Gunner Asch
wrote:
Immoderate mouths are not necessarily a bad thing. Particularly for a
politician who can actually walk the walk.
pyotr filipivich
about Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:02:31 -0800 did write/type or cause to
appear in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>
>>Sheee-it, Gunner.
>>It's been like that for the last 50 years.
>
>
>Actually..the military has been comprised largely of Draftees during the
>last "major" wars.
Nuance - in 1917, while the draft came along later, at the star
tit too was a volunteer army. And in 1941/42, there was a massive
volunteer turnout - but that got backed by a conscription as well.
Plus a lot of PSA on how it was your Patriotic Duty to voluntarily
serve your country. (With the carrot that volunteers got more choices
than draftees). In both of those wars, volunteer or draftee, you had a
lot of citizen-soldiers, in for the duration plus six months. Come
the declaration of victory, and they started counting their remaining
180 days.
The current batch - all volunteer from the get go. While some may
have volunteered for the educational benefits in the 1980's, 90's and
up till 2001, those who now volunteering strictly for those are ...
"out of the loop" shall we say? Or they could be volunteering for a
different set of "educational" benefits. The Quest, and The Test of
Manhood still exists. To answer the age old question "Have I got what
it takes?"
Those who reup - they have found that they like this shit, they're
good at this shit, that somebody has to teach the noobs so they don't
get killed, they owe it to themselves, their family, and those who
count.
> The recent and current ones are filled with
>Volunteers..people who stepped up to the plate, bat in hand.
>
>Big difference in world view, if you think about it a bit.
Ayup. And the combat vets have learned, in their guts, the virtue
of ruthlessness. That sometimes, there is no nice way to do this,
quick and dirty is the better way. E.G., the doctor who took one look
at the kids split lip, and rather than inject Novocain, just put in
the one needed stitch. He reasoned that if he injected an anesthetic,
the kid would get needle stick, and it would take time, and of course,
having a numb lip raises the risk of the kid biting what he can't
feel; this way - "we're done!"
If it needs be done, then were best done quickly.
pyotr
-
pyotr filipivich
"We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious
is the first duty of intelligent men." George Orwell
Gunner Asch
Very well said.
Wes
>> From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic head injuries
>> get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment rights under Brady.
>
>Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
Cites please. I've only heard the side I've presented.
Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller
Gunner Asch
>Stuart Wheaton <sdwh...@fuse.net> wrote:
>
>>> From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic head injuries
>>> get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment rights under Brady.
>>
>>Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
>
>
>Cites please. I've only heard the side I've presented.
>
>Wes
Google "Veterans Disarmament Act,"
Once again..Stupid shows his ignorance.
Wes
>I like him. I dont agree with him on many matters..but he is the kind
>of guy we will be seeing more and more of in DC and other politics in
>the not so distant future.
>
>And he is a Democrat.
When his aid got busted for bringing in Sen Webb's gun in Webb's brief case, I knew he had
potential.
cavelamb
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:09:47 -0500, Wes <clu...@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>> Stuart Wheaton <sdwh...@fuse.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic head injuries
>>>> get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment rights under Brady.
>>> Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
>>
>> Cites please. I've only heard the side I've presented.
>>
>> Wes
>
>
> Google "Veterans Disarmament Act,"
>
> http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=+%22Veterans+Disarmament+Act%2C%22&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&fp=cbc2f75bf9d43a8f
>
>
> Once again..Stupid shows his ignorance.
>
> Gunner
>
>
Yup...
Ed Huntress
Nope. From the NRA/ILA:
"Some pro-gun groups have claimed that H.R. 2640 would "prohibit" thousands
of people from owning guns. This is not true; these bills would only enforce
current prohibitions. In fact, H.R. 2640 would allow some people now
unfairly prohibited from owning guns to have their rights restored, and to
have their names removed from the instant check system."
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018
Don't start following Gunner around the block, Richard. He's as ignorant as
a lamp post about anything political.
--
Ed Huntress
Stuart Wheaton
> Stuart Wheaton <sdwh...@fuse.net> wrote:
>
>>> From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic head injuries
>>> get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment rights under Brady.
>> Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
>
>
> Cites please. I've only heard the side I've presented.
>
If it had any basis in fact, I'm quite certain that it would be well
publicized on their site. The only place I ever see this is in forwards
from people who have been proven to be utterly unreliable about the
veracity of their posts. So unless you can provide an actual cite, I
say BUNK!
John R. Carroll
> "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote:
>
>>
>> Tell me Wes, did you ever text the guy?
>
> No, I did not. I thought about what to say to a guy heading off to
> war that was uplifting and came up empty. After a few days of coming
> up empty, I (conveniently) forgot about it.
>
> Your post jogged my memory. I still don't know what to say. Thanks
> seems like too little and I hope you make it back in one piece too
> grim.
You might want to save this for future use:
" Godspeed, Good Luck. 300 million Americans like me who you don't know will
be as happy as the ones you do the day you get home."
You see Wes, these guys know the people in their daily lives are concerned.
It's the ones that aren't known to them that count.
That would be you.
I don't know how others responded or how many bothered. At least a few must
have and those responses were taken to heart.
Enjoy the holiday Wes.
--
John R. Carroll
Wes
>> From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic head injuries
>> get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment rights under Brady.
>
>Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
I'm still waiting for links.
Wes
>>> Once again..Stupid shows his ignorance.
>>>
>>> Gunner
>>>
>>
>> Yup...
>
>Nope. From the NRA/ILA:
>
>"Some pro-gun groups have claimed that H.R. 2640 would "prohibit" thousands
>of people from owning guns. This is not true; these bills would only enforce
>current prohibitions. In fact, H.R. 2640 would allow some people now
>unfairly prohibited from owning guns to have their rights restored, and to
>have their names removed from the instant check system."
>
>http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018
>
>Don't start following Gunner around the block, Richard. He's as ignorant as
>a lamp post about anything political.
Are you sure this isn't the remedy for what I stated earlier?
Wes
Their site: which site is that?
Stewart Wheaton wrote:
> Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
Stewart, put up or shut up.
Now if you care to listen to Tom Gresham's podcast (fairly moderate guy other than Second
Amendment issues)
http://www.libertywatchradio.com/, this guy is really into liberty. Heck, his email
address is listed, he will respond to you. Nice guy btw, I've communicated with him a
number of times.
I believe Mark Vandenburg at gunrights.us has also had people on his podcasts telling
about what I stated.
You are the one that is claiming I'm full of chit. Give me links to the debunking you
claim has happened all so many times.
This is one of those times when my guys are saying one thing and you are saying it isn't
happening. If you believe in your frame of reference, back it up. I'm always interested
in detecting if I'm being 'spun'.
What I claimed fits in perfectly with the Brady law. Mentally ill is a disqualifyer with
no return afaikt. Sure hope you are all in for having your medical records digitized, a
future rightwing oppresive goverment will make sure you are disarmed.
Wes
>Wes wrote:
>> "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Tell me Wes, did you ever text the guy?
>>
>> No, I did not. I thought about what to say to a guy heading off to
>> war that was uplifting and came up empty. After a few days of coming
>> up empty, I (conveniently) forgot about it.
>>
>> Your post jogged my memory. I still don't know what to say. Thanks
>> seems like too little and I hope you make it back in one piece too
>> grim.
>
>You might want to save this for future use:
>
>" Godspeed, Good Luck. 300 million Americans like me who you don't know will
>be as happy as the ones you do the day you get home."
>
>You see Wes, these guys know the people in their daily lives are concerned.
>It's the ones that aren't known to them that count.
>That would be you.
I am concerned. I'm not sure this nation or this administration fully backs Afghanistan.
I don't understand our goals either. We sure can't make a nation out of this. Iraq
maybe.
I was not impressed with GWB and his efforts or our allies other than the UK. This was
supposed to be the good war. So many of our NATO allies are only supplying
non-combatants.
Giving this fine young man a rah rah would make me feel like a hypocrite giving my
feelings on this theater of war. I never figured out Iraq either given Iran is the one
working on nukes. Seems like we hit the wrong country.
>I don't know how others responded or how many bothered. At least a few must
>have and those responses were taken to heart.
I am grateful than men like him will march off to fight for this country. Just don't
expect me to egg him on if my heart isn't in it.
Please don't think I do not admire his devotion to our country. These young men and now
women that head off into the war are our best.
Do you think I could text these feelings to him? You asked me to do something that may
have seemed easy to do since we both admire those that have served our country. If I was
with the program it would have been no problem but you didn't know how I felt.
>
>Enjoy the holiday Wes.
Thanks. You and yours also.
Stuart Wheaton
> Stuart Wheaton <sdwh...@fuse.net> wrote:
>
>> Wes wrote:
>>> Stuart Wheaton <sdwh...@fuse.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic head injuries
>>>>> get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment rights under Brady.
>>>> Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
>>>
>>> Cites please. I've only heard the side I've presented.
>>>
>> If it had any basis in fact, I'm quite certain that it would be well
>> publicized on their site. The only place I ever see this is in forwards
>>from people who have been proven to be utterly unreliable about the
>> veracity of their posts. So unless you can provide an actual cite, I
>> say BUNK!
>
>
> Their site: which site is that?
OOPS, sorry, NRA.
If the NRA isn't worried about it, I'm not either.
>
> Stewart Wheaton wrote:
>
>> Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable anymore.
>
> Stewart, put up or shut up.
>
> Now if you care to listen to Tom Gresham's podcast (fairly moderate guy other than Second
> Amendment issues)
>
> http://www.libertywatchradio.com/, this guy is really into liberty. Heck, his email
> address is listed, he will respond to you. Nice guy btw, I've communicated with him a
> number of times.
>
> I believe Mark Vandenburg at gunrights.us has also had people on his podcasts telling
> about what I stated.
>
I've heard plenty of Idiots on podcasts talking about all sorts of
things that are factually not so.
> You are the one that is claiming I'm full of chit. Give me links to the debunking you
> claim has happened all so many times.
>
> This is one of those times when my guys are saying one thing and you are saying it isn't
> happening. If you believe in your frame of reference, back it up. I'm always interested
> in detecting if I'm being 'spun'.
>
> What I claimed fits in perfectly with the Brady law. Mentally ill is a disqualifyer with
> no return afaikt.
Mentally ill, IF you are ADJUDICATED SO... that means a court
determines it in an adversarial hearing. A doctor cannot take away
your civil rights. If a doctor makes a determination that you pose a
danger to yourself or others, you can contest it before the judge with
your own doctor and your own testimony.
> Sure hope you are all in for having your medical records digitized, a
> future rightwing oppresive goverment will make sure you are disarmed.
You do know that the digitization of records does not include anything
like a central repository don't you? And the Feds won't have access to
them.
>
>
Ed Huntress
> Stuart Wheaton <sdwh...@fuse.net> wrote:
>
>>> From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for
>>> traumatic head injuries
>>> get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment rights under
>>> Brady.
>>
>>Those lies have been debunked so many times it isn't even laughable
>>anymore.
>
> I'm still waiting for links.
Didn't you see the debunking report I posted from NRA/ILA yesterday, Wes?
They say that it's false. And there are many sources for the original bill.
Didn't you read the bill?
--
Ed Huntress
Ed Huntress
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>>> Once again..Stupid shows his ignorance.
>>>>
>>>> Gunner
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yup...
>>
>>Nope. From the NRA/ILA:
>>
>>"Some pro-gun groups have claimed that H.R. 2640 would "prohibit"
>>thousands
>>of people from owning guns. This is not true; these bills would only
>>enforce
>>current prohibitions. In fact, H.R. 2640 would allow some people now
>>unfairly prohibited from owning guns to have their rights restored, and to
>>have their names removed from the instant check system."
>>
>>http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018
>>
>>Don't start following Gunner around the block, Richard. He's as ignorant
>>as
>>a lamp post about anything political.
>
> Are you sure this isn't the remedy for what I stated earlier?
>
> Wes
I don't know what you stated earlier. It's a remedy for reading the b.s. gun
sites, if that's what you mean. Reading the bill itself is another remedy,
but that's too much like being responsible for Gunner and the boyz. Can't
have that much responsibility all in one place, ya' know.
--
Ed Huntress
jbsl...@gmail.com
Read the Bill?? Buy a dictionary?? Understand all the words??
Damn! You sure ask a lot of a man...
Regards,
J.B.
Wes
>>>http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018
>>>
>>>Don't start following Gunner around the block, Richard. He's as ignorant
>>>as
>>>a lamp post about anything political.
>>
>> Are you sure this isn't the remedy for what I stated earlier?
>>
>> Wes
>
>I don't know what you stated earlier. It's a remedy for reading the b.s. gun
>sites, if that's what you mean. Reading the bill itself is another remedy,
>but that's too much like being responsible for Gunner and the boyz. Can't
>have that much responsibility all in one place, ya' know.
I am reading it. Thomas has a neat feature where you can compare changes to the bill as it
progressed.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-2640&version=enr&compareto=ih&view=side
Ed Huntress
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>>>http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018
>>>>
>>>>Don't start following Gunner around the block, Richard. He's as ignorant
>>>>as
>>>>a lamp post about anything political.
>>>
>>> Are you sure this isn't the remedy for what I stated earlier?
>>>
>>> Wes
>>
>>I don't know what you stated earlier. It's a remedy for reading the b.s.
>>gun
>>sites, if that's what you mean. Reading the bill itself is another remedy,
>>but that's too much like being responsible for Gunner and the boyz. Can't
>>have that much responsibility all in one place, ya' know.
>
>
> I am reading it. Thomas has a neat feature where you can compare changes
> to the bill as it
> progressed.
>
> http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-2640&version=enr&compareto=ih&view=side
>
>
> Wes
Yes, and what did you find?
--
Ed Huntress
Wes
>Yes, and what did you find?
That reading this is a huge headache :(
The enrolled bill seems like a step forward. Better than the original.
GOA seems to have issues with it but the NRA seems to be okay with it.
Alan Korwin wrote a piece http://www.gunlaws.com/gloaup6-PR.htm that commented on the
bill as passed.
I'm going to cite a portion of the above link
"4. Also note the new law does nothing for 140,000 veterans whose rights were denied en
masse on bureaucratic grounds (diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder), without the
current safeguards. Those safeguards include advance notice that you face rights denial,
notice that there is an appeals process, and that only a true due-process procedure before
a real court (plus a valid medical diagnosis) can make the decision. Under the new law,
those vets could appeal, and if they win, their attorney's fees are covered (at a somewhat
less-than-full rate)."
Wes
Btw, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Ed Huntress
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>Yes, and what did you find?
>
> That reading this is a huge headache :(
Hey, Constitutional law is my hobby. It can be fun. <g>
>
>
> The enrolled bill seems like a step forward. Better than the original.
>
> GOA seems to have issues with it but the NRA seems to be okay with it.
>
> Alan Korwin wrote a piece http://www.gunlaws.com/gloaup6-PR.htm that
> commented on the
> bill as passed.
>
> I'm going to cite a portion of the above link
>
> "4. Also note the new law does nothing for 140,000 veterans whose rights
> were denied en
> masse on bureaucratic grounds (diagnosis of post traumatic stress
> disorder), without the
> current safeguards.
Except that it never happened. Note that this discussion began when you said
"From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic
head injuries get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment
rights under Brady."
I think the "traumatic head injuries" idea was a red herring from the start.
There is a reasonable question about how PTSD would be treated, but the bill
that was being objected to never passed in that form. How the provision
would have been interpreted by the courts is an open question; of course,
the gun writers assume the worst possible case.
> Those safeguards include advance notice that you face rights denial,
> notice that there is an appeals process, and that only a true due-process
> procedure before
> a real court (plus a valid medical diagnosis) can make the decision. Under
> the new law,
> those vets could appeal, and if they win, their attorney's fees are
> covered (at a somewhat
> less-than-full rate)."
>
>
> Wes
>
> Btw, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Merry Christmas to you and yours, too, Wes.
--
Ed Huntress
Stuart Wheaton
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>> Yes, and what did you find?
>
> That reading this is a huge headache :(
>
>
> The enrolled bill seems like a step forward. Better than the original.
>
> GOA seems to have issues with it but the NRA seems to be okay with it.
>
> Alan Korwin wrote a piece http://www.gunlaws.com/gloaup6-PR.htm that commented on the
> bill as passed.
>
> I'm going to cite a portion of the above link
>
> "4. Also note the new law does nothing for 140,000 veterans whose rights were denied en
> masse on bureaucratic grounds (diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder), without the
> current safeguards. Those safeguards include advance notice that you face rights denial,
> notice that there is an appeals process, and that only a true due-process procedure before
> a real court (plus a valid medical diagnosis) can make the decision. Under the new law,
> those vets could appeal, and if they win, their attorney's fees are covered (at a somewhat
> less-than-full rate)."
>
Gee Wes, that seems to be exactly what I said....
Of course, since I am the President of the longest continuously
operating pistol club west of the Allegheny Mountains, I tend to keep
myself informed on these issues.
But don't feel bad, many of my own members will repeat anything they get
without asking the questions or doing the research that you eventually did.
So far, in factual terms, the current congress and admin has been pretty
good to us. Carry in the National Parks, transport on Amtrak,
protection of surplus arms, and even the Bill you cite which both helps
to keep the criminals from getting guns legally, and provides a better
means for challenging or correcting bad or old info in your records.
Stuart
Wes
>Gee Wes, that seems to be exactly what I said....
>
>Of course, since I am the President of the longest continuously
>operating pistol club west of the Allegheny Mountains, I tend to keep
>myself informed on these issues.
>
>But don't feel bad, many of my own members will repeat anything they get
>without asking the questions or doing the research that you eventually did.
I do want to be accurate. Sometimes it is based on repeating sources I trust. That can
be a problem if there is inaccuracy in the chain of trust.
>
>So far, in factual terms, the current congress and admin has been pretty
>good to us. Carry in the National Parks, transport on Amtrak,
>protection of surplus arms, and even the Bill you cite which both helps
>to keep the criminals from getting guns legally, and provides a better
>means for challenging or correcting bad or old info in your records.
>
I'll go with you on Congress. I like that Senator Webb.
Merry Christmas Stuart,
Wes
Wes
>
>"Wes" <clu...@lycos.com> wrote in message
>news:%FMYm.197325$Td3.1...@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...
>> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Yes, and what did you find?
>>
>> That reading this is a huge headache :(
>
>Hey, Constitutional law is my hobby. It can be fun. <g>
Ranks up with counting grains of sand on the beach with me. My grammar isn't good enough
to figure where a semicolon can change the intention of a sequence of words.
>
>>
>>
>> The enrolled bill seems like a step forward. Better than the original.
>>
>> GOA seems to have issues with it but the NRA seems to be okay with it.
>>
>> Alan Korwin wrote a piece http://www.gunlaws.com/gloaup6-PR.htm that
>> commented on the
>> bill as passed.
>>
>> I'm going to cite a portion of the above link
>>
>> "4. Also note the new law does nothing for 140,000 veterans whose rights
>> were denied en
>> masse on bureaucratic grounds (diagnosis of post traumatic stress
>> disorder), without the
>> current safeguards.
>
>Except that it never happened. Note that this discussion began when you said
>"From what I've heard, Soldiers and Marines that are treated for traumatic
>head injuries get a notice from the VA that they lost their 2nd Amendment
>rights under Brady."
>
>I think the "traumatic head injuries" idea was a red herring from the start.
>There is a reasonable question about how PTSD would be treated, but the bill
>that was being objected to never passed in that form. How the provision
>would have been interpreted by the courts is an open question; of course,
>the gun writers assume the worst possible case.
I'll keep my ears and eyes open. The law was enacted in response to something. As
always, some horse trading took place since Carol McCarthy supported it.
I ment to say "traumatic brain injuries", not that it gives my statement much different
meaning.
PTSD, I wonder what the accuracy rate is in diagnosis, the range of it's effects, can it
be short term? Is a vet diagnosed with PTSD 100% service related disabled? You seem to
be up on medical stuff.
>
>> Those safeguards include advance notice that you face rights denial,
>> notice that there is an appeals process, and that only a true due-process
>> procedure before
>> a real court (plus a valid medical diagnosis) can make the decision. Under
>> the new law,
>> those vets could appeal, and if they win, their attorney's fees are
>> covered (at a somewhat
>> less-than-full rate)."
It is much better than the situation they were in.
>>
>>
>> Wes
>>
>> Btw, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
>
>Merry Christmas to you and yours, too, Wes.
Wes