Rudy Giuliani--CLOSED
Lfh
Fred
Brad Greer
wrote:
>Amen to that.
>
Who is Booie going to vote for now?
Neil X.
>
> Amen to that.
He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
I guess that brilliant, unorthodox strategy of not contesting Iowa or
New Hampshire worked out real well for him
Peace,
Neil X.
ML
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:55:02 -0800 (PST), Lfh <onetaste2...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Amen to that.
>
..."Like a steam locomotive
rolling down the track...."
Velvet Jones
> Amen to that.
I guess the embarrassment of losing in NY state was 'too hard to handle'.
That would have been funny though.
Brad Greer
wrote:
>> Fred wrote:
>>
>> Amen to that.
>
>
>He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
>president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
>creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
You obviously choose to discount his term as mayor of New York or his
dousing himself in the "I am the greatest hero of 9/11" religion. He
is a fucktard, and an evil one at that. He would have made us all
long for the days of GWB.
>I guess that brilliant, unorthodox strategy of not contesting Iowa or
>New Hampshire worked out real well for him
>
Glad he fucked up.
Lfh
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:34:36 -0800 (PST), "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> Fred wrote:
>
> >> Amen to that.
>
> >He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
> >president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
> >creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
>
> You obviously choose to discount his term as mayor of New York or his
> dousing himself in the "I am the greatest hero of 9/11" religion. He
> is a fucktard, and an evil one at that. He would have made us all
> long for the days of GWB.
I agree. I remember hearing a radio spot with him a few months back
and it seemed like he wanted to out-bellicose Bush and was most
interested in hammer diplomacy, a "no, fuck YOU" approach. As for his
9/11 trappings, that was just sickeningly opportunistic. I think it
crested when he was asked to respond to Hillary's tearing up. He said
something like "oh, you can't really judge someone for crying. I have
to tell you, I cried a lot when I attended the funerals of 9/11
victims." Didn't Biden say something like "Rudy's campaign: a noun, a
verb, and 9/11"?
The guy just skeeved me from the jump.
> >I guess that brilliant, unorthodox strategy of not contesting Iowa or
> >New Hampshire worked out real well for him
>
> Glad he fucked up.
Yup.
Fred
Velvet Jones
>
> You obviously choose to discount his term as mayor of New York or his
> dousing himself in the "I am the greatest hero of 9/11" religion. He
> is a fucktard, and an evil one at that. He would have made us all
> long for the days of GWB.
No one in the mainstream political landscape today could make me long for
Bush. He will go down historically as the worst leader, a man who can be
held responsible for taking the US from being an elite, mostly loved always
envied nation to the laughing stock of the world and economic shamble. I
don't like Rudy but I'd take him in a nanosecond over Georgy boy.
LP
> On Jan 30, 8:55 am, Brad Greer <jjh110...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:34:36 -0800 (PST), "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >> Fred wrote:
>
> > >> Amen to that.
>
> > >He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
> > >president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
> > >creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
>
> > You obviously choose to discount his term as mayor of New York or his
> > dousing himself in the "I am the greatest hero of 9/11" religion. He
> > is a fucktard, and an evil one at that. He would have made us all
> > long for the days of GWB.
>
> I agree. I remember hearing a radio spot with him a few months back
> and it seemed like he wanted to out-bellicose Bush and was most
> 9/11 trappings, that was just sickeningly opportunistic. I think it
> crested when he was asked to respond to Hillary's tearing up. He said
> something like "oh, you can't really judge someone for crying. I have
> to tell you, I cried a lot when I attended the funerals of 9/11
> victims." Didn't Biden say something like "Rudy's campaign: a noun, a
> verb, and 9/11"?
>
> The guy just skeeved me from the jump.
>
> > >I guess that brilliant, unorthodox strategy of not contesting Iowa or
> > >New Hampshire worked out real well for him
I've seen parodies of politicians just saying "nine - eleven" followed
by thunderous applause.... Gweeliani did it for real. What a
sickening opportunistic freakshow.
I too am glad he's done as a candidate for now.
LP
Brad Greer
wrote:
Luckily we don't get to find out.
bmo...@nyx.net
> wrote:
>
> >> Fred wrote:
>
> >> Amen to that.
>
> >He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
> >president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
> >creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
>
> You obviously choose to discount his term as mayor of New York or his
> dousing himself in the "I am the greatest hero of 9/11" religion. He
> is a fucktard, and an evil one at that. He would have made us all
> long for the days of GWB.
While it's hard to believe anyone could make us long for GWB, you
might be right. After all, GWB didn't seem *that* bad until he had
been in office for a while. Giuliani might have similarly seemed OK at
first but once he got into his groove... look out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/us/politics/22giuliani.html
It's not for nothing that another former mayor of NYC wrote a book
called "Giuliani: Nasty Man".
Brad Greer
wrote:
>On Jan 30, 8:55 am, Brad Greer <jjh110...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:34:36 -0800 (PST), "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> Fred wrote:
>>
>> >> Amen to that.
>>
>> >He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
>> >president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
>> >creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
>>
>> You obviously choose to discount his term as mayor of New York or his
>> dousing himself in the "I am the greatest hero of 9/11" religion. He
>> is a fucktard, and an evil one at that. He would have made us all
>> long for the days of GWB.
>
>I agree. I remember hearing a radio spot with him a few months back
>and it seemed like he wanted to out-bellicose Bush and was most
>interested in hammer diplomacy, a "no, fuck YOU" approach. As for his
>9/11 trappings, that was just sickeningly opportunistic. I think it
>crested when he was asked to respond to Hillary's tearing up. He said
>something like "oh, you can't really judge someone for crying. I have
>to tell you, I cried a lot when I attended the funerals of 9/11
>victims." Didn't Biden say something like "Rudy's campaign: a noun, a
>verb, and 9/11"?
I hated Guiliani while he was mayor of New York. He was an asshole.
But, as the events of 9/11 were unfolding I gave him credit for saying
the right things in the right way (unlike our President, who seemed
unsure of how to respond). That momentary feeling of "hey, he's at
least doing the right thing now" went away when he started floating
the idea that, because of 9/11, he should be allowed to continue as
mayor (or at least run again, preferably unopposed as he had reached
the term limit for mayor of NYC). He saw 9/11 as an opportunity every
bit as much as Bush/Cheney (and probably would have invaded Iraq even
quicker). Asshole.
Lfh
> > I agree. I remember hearing a radio spot with him a few months back
> > and it seemed like he wanted to out-bellicose Bush and was most
> > interested in hammer diplomacy, a "no, f___ YOU" approach.
> I too am glad he's done as a candidate for now.
I am glad we agree on Rudy leaving, but I'm curious about the edit
thingy there with the f___ YOU" bit. What the f___ is with that,
Larry?
Fred
Lfh
> I hated Guiliani while he was mayor of New York. He was an asshole.
> But, as the events of 9/11 were unfolding I gave him credit for saying
> the right things in the right way (unlike our President, who seemed
> unsure of how to respond).
I'm gonna have to disagree here, Brad. Not with your take on Rudy,
because I'm right with you there. But since it is the one shining
moment in what is an otherwise abysmal and noxious presidency, I hafta
say that I thought Bush absolutely nailed his address to the nation a
few days after the attack.
I've hated everything about the guy ever since I first learned he was
running, so I was absolutely certain he was going to butcher the
moment, but I was floored by how well he did. Of course, he then
proceeded to fulfill my expectations wholesale by pissing all over the
opportunity to unite by dividing instead. But for that moment . . .
Fred
Brad Greer
wrote:
>On Jan 30, 9:41 am, Brad Greer <jjh110...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I hated Guiliani while he was mayor of New York. He was an asshole.
>> But, as the events of 9/11 were unfolding I gave him credit for saying
>> the right things in the right way (unlike our President, who seemed
>> unsure of how to respond).
>
>I'm gonna have to disagree here, Brad. Not with your take on Rudy,
>because I'm right with you there. But since it is the one shining
>moment in what is an otherwise abysmal and noxious presidency, I hafta
>say that I thought Bush absolutely nailed his address to the nation a
>few days after the attack.
My point was more that it took Bush a few days (as you say) to think
of how to respond, as events were unfolding he was unsure. He needed
the script written for him because he had no idea how to act as a
leader. Rudy is an asshole, but he knew how to say the right things
as 9/11 was happening (afterwards, perhaps a different story).
And my contempt for Bush was already so great I didn't think he did a
good job a few days later. But I admit to a strong degree of bias.
Velvet Jones
>He saw 9/11 as an opportunity every
> bit as much as Bush/Cheney (and probably would have invaded Iraq even
> quicker).
Whaaaaaaaaa? I'm fairly certain that Rudy and his friends are not oilman. No
fucking way Rudy would have invaded Iraq. North Korea or Iran? Maybe. New
Jersey? Definitely! He'd rename it New Jork which is what many Hispanics
lovingly refer to it already. <snerk>
LP
You can't use that word on the internetss!!!
What the f___ is wrong with YOU?
LP
Andrew
news:f91d0133-bfdf-435e...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>> Fred wrote:
>>
>> Amen to that.
>
>
> He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
> president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
> creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
Wow. I found him to be the one legit candidate on either side who would not
be a significant upgrade over our current situation.
Ken Fortenberry
>
> He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
Dude.
--
Ken Fortenberry
Bzl.
"Lfh" <onetas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e84fac7f-7403-4c41...@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Yup.
Fred
------------------------------------------
Most brilliant campaign since George Allen.
It seemed like he just didn't want to win, or perhaps he knew couldn't stop
the skeletons from falling out of the closet. Kinda like when he almost ran
against Hillary in 2000.
theothr1
"Ken Fortenberry" <wrote ...
: Neil X. wrote:
: >
: > He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
: > president, ...
:
: Dude.
:
: --
Neil X.
You apparently didn't live for four years under the empty suit that
was the Romney administration, or listen to Huckabee suggest that the
US Constitution should be amended to align it with "God's will" (that
abortion be illegal and gays be discriminated against,) or hear McCain
talk in 2006 and 2007 about how the problem in Iraq would be solved if
we doubled or tripled our troop contingency there. Giuliani is a
flaming liberal peacenik compared to these guys.
Peace,
Neil X.
Velvet Jones
> You apparently didn't live for four years under the empty suit that
> was the Romney administration, or listen to Huckabee suggest that the
> US Constitution should be amended to align it with "God's will" (that
> abortion be illegal and gays be discriminated against,) or hear McCain
> talk in 2006 and 2007 about how the problem in Iraq would be solved if
> we doubled or tripled our troop contingency there. Giuliani is a
> flaming liberal peacenik compared to these guys.
Well duh, he was a turncoat democrat ya know. He only switched sides to
become Mayor of NYC. IIRC, he couldn't run against an incumbent in his own
part (David Dinkins) so he ran as a RWRDH. Ok, maybe not the DH part but you
get my drift.
His ex-wife hates him. His kids hate him. Half of NYC's residents hate him.
It just took a presidential bid and now the most of the country hates him
too. For Chrissakes, he closed up many of the best strip clubs in NY!
There's simply no call for that.
Neil X.
Well, Huckabee and Mitt would be doing the best they could to close up
strip clubs nationwide. OTOH, McCain, he might be "making it rain".
Peace,
Neil X.
Velvet Jones
> Well, Huckabee and Mitt would be doing the best they could to close up
> strip clubs nationwide. OTOH, McCain, he might be "making it rain".
Yeah no doubt. It took me awhile to decide but it's really not too
difficult. My vote in politics has always been for the lesser of two evils.
This time may be no different but the choice I'm finding easier. This Obama
guy is the only one who doesn't carry the load of years of political
dealmaking. He's inexperienced relative to the other choices. Since choose
people with experience hasn't worked, I'm willing to try a fresh face with
nothing but a desire to do the job for a change. What do I have to lose? I
think he may also get more respect worldwide because of his race (which is
an odd thing to say). He might get more done in the middle east and with the
terrorist supporting nations for the same reason. Couldn't hurt. You think
the sexist Arab leadership will negotiate with a woman in good faith? I'm
thinking Condi's done a great deal of nuttin' during her tenure (though I'm
really not too knowledgable on her accomplisments).
I'll give the new guy a try. Meet the new boss...same as the
old...well....maybe not.
--
VJ
-Who among us has not dreamed of faraway places and intertwined lovers?
Octopus Ride
"Velvet Jones" <Vel...@Jones.org> wrote in message
news:47a0edb8$0$25018$607e...@cv.net...
> I'm thinking Condi's done a great deal of nuttin' during her tenure
> (though I'm really not too knowledgable on her accomplisments).
She helped lie the country into a war in Iraq.
That's about it...............
OR
Lfh
You know, now that you mention it, I'm beginning to think that maybe
electing a democrat is the best way to go this time.
Fred
Brad Greer
wrote:
>On Jan 30, 1:57 pm, "Andrew" <amur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I'll take an empty suit over Rudy any day. Huckabee and McCain are no
picnic either, but Rudy was seriously the worst of the bunch.
Avant Grape
Then why was his foreign policy team loaded with neo-cons? I can't
agree with you. When it comes foreign policy, Rudy was by far the
scariest candidate out there. I guess you hadn't been following his
campaign.
Huckabee BTW is definitely a liberal outside of the abortion issue.
-JC
volkfolk
> He would have made us all
> long for the days of GWB.
ANYBODY is going to be better than that congenitally moronic fuckwit
Scot
Avant Grape
Yup. I could care less about religion at this point. I heard Huckabee
say on national TV that an atheist can be more moral than a
self-described Christian and I believed him. Not that I would vote for
him. But to fear that over a gung-ho jerk like Rudy? Puhlease! An
attack on Iran was a certainty under Rudy. I'm a little worried about
McCain as well.
-JC
Walter Karmazyn
>> Fred wrote:
>>
>> Amen to that.
>
>
> He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
> president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
> creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
You're fucking kidding me, right? That son of a bitch was the darling
of the neocons. His senior advisers read like a who's who of neocon
intellectuals. I was very worried till recently that this fuck would get
the nod and even worse, win. He's got 911 on the brain, which is very
dangerous. President Giuliani was scarier to me than any other candidate
still running. His advisers were the type who thought Bush didn't go far
enough.
W
>
> I guess that brilliant, unorthodox strategy of not contesting Iowa or
> New Hampshire worked out real well for him
Whatever. He's out, thank goodness.
>
> Peace,
> Neil X.
ML
Seriously. Only thing worse is the Mitt From Outer Space.......
ML
But she did it with such, uh, MEDIOCRITY! (is that a word?)
Avant Grape
Walter, we've never agreed more on this point. A true nightmare
scenario has been averted, though McCain is riding pretty close behind
in the "dangerous" department.
-JC
Velvet Jones
> I was very worried till recently that this fuck would
> get the nod and even worse, win. He's got 911 on the brain, which is
> very dangerous. President
Us New Yorkers knew he never stood a chance. This country could never elect
a man who's children hate him publicly. 'twas a joke from the start.
Avant Grape
Well, that's not why he lost. He was definitely a serious national
candidate. The fact that liberals in NY hated him was a plus, not a
minus. Rudy lost because he ran a shitty campaign. He had no interest
in fighting for the nomination. Rather, he felt he "deserved" it for
his performance on 9/11. He and his neo-con buddies are certainly a
deluded bunch: in this case, thankfully.
-JC
Andrew
> On Jan 30, 1:57 pm, "Andrew" <amur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:f91d0133-bfdf-435e...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> Fred wrote:
>>
>> >> Amen to that.
>>
>> > He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
>> > president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
>> > creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
>>
>> Wow. I found him to be the one legit candidate on either side who would
>> not
>> be a significant upgrade over our current situation.
>
>
> You apparently didn't live for four years under the empty suit that
> was the Romney administration,
Gimme an empty suit over Giuliani any day of the week. Not that I don't find
Giuliani to be an empty suit also, but an empty suit with a hawk
mentality...
> or listen to Huckabee suggest that the
> US Constitution should be amended to align it with "God's will" (that
> abortion be illegal and gays be discriminated against,)
Legit candidate. I don't think Huck ever had a chance in hell... But even
then, I'd still rather take that guy
> or hear McCain
> talk in 2006 and 2007 about how the problem in Iraq would be solved if
> we doubled or tripled our troop contingency there.
I'm certainly no McCain fan, but at least here he is dealing with how to
leave a current BS war in better shape rather than starting a new BS war,
which would have undoubtedly been the case with Giulia911...
Ray
wrote:
> Brad Greer wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:21:48 -0800 (PST), "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >> On Jan 30, 1:57 pm, "Andrew" <amur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>> "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >>>news:f91d0133-bfdf-435e...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>>> Fred wrote:
> >>>>> Amen to that.
> >>>> He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
> >>>> president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
> >>>> creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
> >>> Wow. I found him to be the one legit candidate on either side who would not
> >>> be a significant upgrade over our current situation.
>
> >> You apparently didn't live for four years under the empty suit that
> >> was the Romney administration, or listen to Huckabee suggest that the
> >> US Constitution should be amended to align it with "God's will" (that
> >> abortion be illegal and gays be discriminated against,) or hear McCain
> >> talk in 2006 and 2007 about how the problem in Iraq would be solved if
> >> we doubled or tripled our troop contingency there. Giuliani is a
> >> flaming liberal peacenik compared to these guys.
>
> > I'll take an empty suit over Rudy any day. Huckabee and McCain are no
> > picnic either, but Rudy was seriously the worst of the bunch.
Even in that crowd I agree - the vision of a President Rudy scared the
bejusus out of me.
> I heard Huckabee
> say on national TV that an atheist can be more moral than a
> self-described Christian and I believed him.
I heard that; I also heard him say that we need to amend the U.S.
Constitution to be in line with God's Law. I believed him there too.
> I could care less about religion at this point.
So I take it you aren't interested in some Jebus water then:
John Doherty
>> Fred wrote:
>>
>> Amen to that.
>
>
> He was probably the one GOP candidate I could have tolerated as
> president, the only one whose psyche was not in thrall to either some
> creepy religion or memories of torture in a POW camp.
I found him the most potentially disturbing GOP candidate. His foreign
policy braintrust was all the fools who dreamed up the Iraq war (norman
Podhoretz & the neocons). He pretty much promised he'd get us into more
wars.
Huckabee may be a rube, but I feared Rudy more.
>
> I guess that brilliant, unorthodox strategy of not contesting Iowa or
> New Hampshire worked out real well for him
>
> Peace,
> Neil X.
Velvet Jones
> Velvet Jones wrote:
>> Us New Yorkers knew he never stood a chance. This country could
>> never elect a man who's children hate him publicly. 'twas a joke
>> from the start.
> Well, that's not why he lost. He was definitely a serious national
> candidate. The fact that liberals in NY hated him was a plus, not a
> minus. Rudy lost because he ran a shitty campaign. He had no
> interest in fighting for the nomination. Rather, he felt he
> "deserved" it for his performance on 9/11. He and his neo-con
> buddies are certainly a deluded bunch: in this case, thankfully.
True that. But if it had gone to the nomination, Rudy's kids woulda fried
him.
Octopus Ride
"Avant Grape" <avantnog...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:2y7oj.4790$J41...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
I'll pile onto Neil here too, I agree with all of you. (And didn't Neil
predict that Rudy would get the Rep nomination?) Giuliani ran only because
he wanted to "stay on offense" and fight this great big bad war on terror.
His visions of the collapsing towers will haunt him until he (now someone,
anyone) starts at least ONE more war, probably more, whether one is needed
or not. We must flex our muscles and annihilate the enemy! Whoever that
may be at this point.........
Even as he withdrew, he was endorsing McCain as the best man to be
"Commander in Chief of the United States", as if the office of president was
equal to the office of The Great Dictator. The president isn't my
commander in chief, he's the commander in chief of the military. Believe it
or not Rudy, the president also has other duties.
That dude was scary, scary, scary. We can all be grateful that the nation
won't be saddled with the gross errors in strategic thinking that
characterized his campaign. Talk about bad judgement.
McCain is preferable, although I'm sick and tired of his overheated war
rhetoric. We'll never know, but my gut tells me that McCain wouldn't have
acted as Bush did in launching a war of convenience, and if he did, it
surely would have been better run and less costly in lives and money. He's
like the grumpy old national grandpa with the dated lingo and focus on the
goings on down at the VFW hall. He has no clue about the rest of the
country, but overall I think he tries to at least be honest.
Rudy was just flat out shameless. Good riddance.
OR
OR
Octopus Ride
The Repubs sure had their share of guys who announced they were running for
president and never actually ran. Thompson sleepwalked through everything
except one state. Rudy claimed he was the one who could compete with the
Dem in all 50 states yet he also actually ran in only one state.
You can't win the presidency if you don't actually RUN for it. Doh!
OR
Octopus Ride
"ML" <mary.eg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fb544397-3ad6-43b7...@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
Everytime I see Mitt a song goes off in my head.
Space Baby, by the Tubes.
"Space Baby, you got no planet"..................
I doubt Fee or whoever penned that little ditty was thinking of Mormon
doctrine when they wrote it, but I still find it apropos....................
OR
Avant Grape
I think he was going to pay them off. But that would have been fun. He
makes Clinton seem like a moral man by comparison.
-JC
ML
> "ML" <mary.egret1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > Seriously. Only thing worse is the Mitt From Outer Space.......
>
> Everytime I see Mitt a song goes off in my head.
>
> Space Baby, by the Tubes.
>
> "Space Baby, you got no planet"..................
>
> I doubt Fee or whoever penned that little ditty was thinking of Mormon
> doctrine when they wrote it, but I still find it apropos....................
>
> OR
Weren't The Tubes great? They all scare the bejesus out of me. Even
the democrats.
ML
<tthomas@[REMOVE_TO_REPLY]ogre.net> wrote:
> over that Hell-spawned ghoul (Giuliani) any day of the week and I'd do i
> with a song in my heart. With Mitt, you know that whatever he's
> staunchly opposing this week is what he'll be supporting next week--he's
> like New England weather; don't like it, just wait a minute and it'll
> change. That, and he's got very Presidential hair.
>
> I'd even prefer Mitt over McCain. He doesn't have quite so much crazy
> in him and isn't as likely to lose his temper and cockpunch a visiting
> foreign dignitary. That'd make for some awkward international
> relations...funny...but awkward.
>
> Sure, Mitt would take visiting politicos out for the most expensive
> dinners possible and let us pick up the check, but at least there'd be
> no threat of violence simmering under the surface. That's got to count
> for something.
>
> Oh, and it ought to go without saying (but I'll say it anyway), that I'd
> also prefer Mitt over Huckabee, despite Pastor Mike's ability to rock
> out fer Jeebus every now and then:
>
> http://www.state.wv.us/sga/HuckabeeGuitar_300.jpg
But they are fucked-up! It is like talking about having to choose
between types of torture.
Walter Karmazyn
Well, every few years somehow we fuck up and agree on something ;-).
Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran McCain is no peacenic compared to Rudy,
but He has a brain of his own and honorable enough that he wouldn't
allow lies to take us into another conflict, imo. Not that I think we
need any more foreign adventures, or that I would agree with any foreign
adventure he came up with, like Iran if Bush doesn't get us there first.
I think McCain would need more pushing to take us into any conflict
than Giuliani, who has the same level of foreign policy and military
knowledge that Bush had in 2000(and still imo), very little. Rudy also
never saw the military, though eligible for Vietnam. 2S, followed by 2A,
a civilian occupation deferment, gotten by the Judge he was clerking
for. By time he was 1A again in 1969, he got a high number in the
lottery but mysteriously wasn't called. Anyway, remember McCain on
torture recently? Very much against it, as a former POW. What did
Adolf Giuliani say at a debate last year when he was asked if he would
support the use of torture on suspected terrorists that is *believed*
have information on a future attack? as President? "I would tell the
people who had to do the interrogation to use every method they could
think of." McCain is also in favor of closing Gitmo. I am not making a
case to vote for McCain, I certainly never would, but just making clear
he's no Giuliani.
W
W
Neil X.
>
> I'll pile onto Neil here too, I agree with all of you. (And didn't Neil
> predict that Rudy would get the Rep nomination?)
Did I? I don't think so. I certainly haven't thought that he was
anything but toast since I heard that his political primary strategy
was to ignore Iowa and NH so that he could concentrate on Florida.
> That dude was scary, scary, scary. We can all be grateful that the nation
> won't be saddled with the gross errors in strategic thinking that
> characterized his campaign. Talk about bad judgement.
No doubt, his strategy to get elected was even poorer than the neocon
Middle East master plan. And that's saying something.
> Rudy was just flat out shameless. Good riddance.
Every politician is shameless. Giuliani was less unpalatable to me
than other GOPers because he wasn't a religious fanatic. Huckabee and
Mitt, they're as batshit crazy as Dubya when it comes to Absolute
Truth. Religious nuts do things like invade Iraq for no reason other
than that God whispered in their ear that they should do it.
I am surprised to read all these comments that McCain would be less
likely than Giuliani to start a war because he had his period or
something. McCain reminds me of Dr. Strangelove, crippled, damaged
and demented by previous exposure to the horrors of war. Giuliani, he
just seems like a shameless opportunist. Slick Willie was a shameless
opportunist, too, and I loved his presidency (except for the part
where his need for a BJ from a plump 20-something ended up dooming the
nation to 8 years of the insanity of Dubya.)
Peace,
Neil X.
Octopus Ride
> Every politician is shameless. Giuliani was less unpalatable to me
> than other GOPers because he wasn't a religious fanatic. Huckabee and
> Mitt, they're as batshit crazy as Dubya when it comes to Absolute
> Truth. Religious nuts do things like invade Iraq for no reason other
> than that God whispered in their ear that they should do it.
Huckabee is part of that ilk that believes that Israel is ordained by god
blah blah blah. He'd want to defend it to the death against the heathen
Arabs (as long as there was a good joke or two in it).
Romney isn't of that ilk. He doesn't need Israel, Utah is Israel. Zion,
baby. The Hebrews came to North America in 3 great migrations, the most
recent in 600 BC. They became the Lamanites and the Nephites, and over the
centuries they battled and warred, almost killing themselves off, despite
having been personally visited by Jesus on his farewell tour before going to
the celestial kingdom to be with his parents (God and his wife), his
grandparents, etc. The great "Indian mounds" of the Ohio Valley are the
bone piles of the dead from those epic wars. Eventually the primitive
"Indians" or "Native Americans" devolved from the ashes of those dead
cultures, the actual living descendants of the famed Lost Tribes of Israel,
recent DNA evidence notwithstanding. Sort of like the barbaric Hu-mans
populating the post-annihilation era of the Planet of the Apes. Mmmmm,
Nova.
See? Romney has no interest in the Jews in Israel, he can see them on any
Indian reservation. Therefore he has less of a beef with the Arabs than
does Giuliani, unless Al Qaeda were to launch an attack on the Utes and the
Shoshoni.
> Slick Willie was a shameless
> opportunist, too, and I loved his presidency (except for the part
> where his need for a BJ from a plump 20-something ended up dooming the
> nation to 8 years of the insanity of Dubya.)
Maybe you're above this, but I'm not. How many guys do you know who think
the fact that she was a porker made him look sillier than if she had been
some smokin' runway model? I think a lot fewer guys would have even cocked
an eye at his behavior if it was Giselle Bundschen taking that cigar.
OR
Avant Grape
> "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e2233d43-8393-4634...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Every politician is shameless. Giuliani was less unpalatable to me
>> than other GOPers because he wasn't a religious fanatic. Huckabee and
>> Mitt, they're as batshit crazy as Dubya when it comes to Absolute
>> Truth. Religious nuts do things like invade Iraq for no reason other
>> than that God whispered in their ear that they should do it.
>
> Huckabee is part of that ilk that believes that Israel is ordained by god
> blah blah blah. He'd want to defend it to the death against the heathen
> Arabs (as long as there was a good joke or two in it).
>
I think Huckabee actually has quite a bit of sympathy for the
Palestinians. He truly is the most liberal Republican running IMO (he's
no where near the greedy, insensitive asshole that Dubya is)...outside
of course his views on abortion. Of course, any Republican is just as
bad on that issue. Huckabee definitely doesn't strike me as someone
interested in war however. Romney on the other hand is one of those
guys that is going to feel that he has to show how tough he is. IMO,
he's dangerous and his rhetoric on Iraq and terrorism in general
suggests as much.
BTW, Bush's Christian rap always struck me as a little phony.
-JC
Edwin Hurwitz
Walter Karmazyn <walterk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Like we have anything to say about it? I bet you were doing what I was
doing on our last run up to war. Writing to representatives and the
white house and seeing our senators in person to demand that they don't
let Bush have the power to go to war while they lie to our faces, like
the sniveling Wayne Allard. That guy pisses me off to no end. What a
creep. As soon as the 2006 elections happened and it looked like Bush
was no longer the golden boy he declared he wouldn't run again to spend
more time with his family. Thanks for the public service!
Sheesh. Could he be any more of a Republican clone?
Anyway, my point is that when these guys have it in their mind to go to
war, there's not much the people can do to stop it.
Edwin
--
If you want to make peace, you don't talk to your friends. You talk to your
enemies.
-Moshe Dayan
k sturm
"Edwin Hurwitz" <ed...@indra.com> wrote in message
news:edwin-C02BAD....@news.indra.com...
My reps are very good at looking me in the eye and agreeing with me or
writing thank you for sharing your thoughts, I will keep them in mind as I
cast my vote. And then they vote the opposite way. It's getting very
frustrating. And two of them are democrats!
The other night I went to hear Scott Ritter speak. He was very scary and
said we should just give up on trying to end the war because it's hopeless
and Iraq is already broken beyond repair. With the depleted uranium all
over the place, the whole area is deadly and will be forever. So...
He says that the NIE that we were all so happy about because it said Iran
stopped their nuclear program was bull. He said it's all lies and that it
probably originated in Cheney's office. That to believe the report means
one has to believe they ever had a program. He says they didn't, and if
anyone should know, it's him.
Ritter said that they are still talking about them as "terrorists" every day
and that they still plan to attack Iran. In the spring. With nukes. That
THAT is the war we have to think about, talk about, scream about, and try to
stop before it starts. If they do it, they will suspend the election so all
this arguing about it and watching it like a sport is just futile anyway.
We all should be paying attention to what they are saying about Iran and
pushing our representatives to make a law that stops it. Now.
If Scott Ritter is right again, that is...
Brad Greer
wrote:
>I am surprised to read all these comments that McCain would be less
>likely than Giuliani to start a war because he had his period or
>something. McCain reminds me of Dr. Strangelove, crippled, damaged
>and demented by previous exposure to the horrors of war. Giuliani, he
>just seems like a shameless opportunist. Slick Willie was a shameless
>opportunist, too, and I loved his presidency (except for the part
>where his need for a BJ from a plump 20-something ended up dooming the
>nation to 8 years of the insanity of Dubya.)
>
McCain scares me as well, and I don't think he'd have a problem
starting a war. But Rudy is such a hard right neocon I have to ignore
his more liberal social agenda.
Velvet Jones
>
> Weren't The Tubes great? They all scare the bejesus out of me. Even
> the democrats.
I saw them once on Halloween night in Boston circa 1981. Wild show, never
seen anything like it at the time and not much like it since. Didn't love
the music much but it sure was fun.
Velvet Jones
>
>>>I'd even prefer Mitt over McCain. He doesn't have quite so much crazy
>>>in him and isn't as likely to lose his temper and cockpunch a visiting
>>>foreign dignitary.
<insert SNL sketch here>
Velvet Jones
>> McCain is preferable, although I'm sick and tired of his overheated
> war rhetoric. We'll never know, but my gut tells me that McCain
> wouldn't have acted as Bush did in launching a war of convenience,
> and if he did, it surely would have been better run and less costly
> in lives and money.
McCain fought in a war. Georgy boy didn't. McCain understands the sickness
of it and wouldn't preemtively attack. Period. He's a moderate republican
comparatively. I wouldn't vote for him but he's the least disasterous of the
3.
Avant Grape
Yup. It's the advisers a presidential candidate chooses that offers the
clearest signpost to their foreign policy philosophy. As much as I fear
McCain, he's clearly not anywhere near as dangerous as Rudy. I don't
see any neo-cons hanging with him after all.
-JC
Ray
wrote:
> Brad Greer wrote:
> > McCain scares me as well, and I don't think he'd have a problem
> > starting a war. But Rudy is such a hard right neocon I have to ignore
> > his more liberal social agenda.
>
> Yup. It's the advisers a presidential candidate chooses that offers the
> clearest signpost to their foreign policy philosophy. As much as I fear
> McCain, he's clearly not anywhere near as dangerous as Rudy. I don't
> see any neo-cons hanging with him after all.
Yup. Neocon granddaddy and ultra-hawk Norman Podhoretz was a senior
Giuliani advisor - the equivalent for me of ~10 reds flags.
Avant Grape
I am sort of contradicting myself. I have mixed feelings about McCain.
Something about his age and temperament makes him a little more
volatile than I would have imagined going a decade back. But with Rudy,
it's guaranteed madness. I'm so glad he screwed up.
-JC
Walter Karmazyn
> Octopus Ride wrote:
>> "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:e2233d43-8393-4634...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Every politician is shameless. Giuliani was less unpalatable to me
>>> than other GOPers because he wasn't a religious fanatic. Huckabee and
>>> Mitt, they're as batshit crazy as Dubya when it comes to Absolute
>>> Truth. Religious nuts do things like invade Iraq for no reason other
>>> than that God whispered in their ear that they should do it.
>>
>> Huckabee is part of that ilk that believes that Israel is ordained by
>> god blah blah blah. He'd want to defend it to the death against the
>> heathen Arabs (as long as there was a good joke or two in it).
>>
>
> I think Huckabee actually has quite a bit of sympathy for the
> Palestinians.
For the record, Huck's website makes no mention of the Palestinians, but
he is on record as favoring a Palestinian state, as long as it's outside
Israel, like Egypt or Saudi Arabia. He actually said this on CBS's "Face
the Nation" last year. This amounts to ethnic cleansing of the
Palestinians from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, imo, and I don't
feel this position shows any sympathy for the Palestinians. JC, maybe
we'll be in agreement twice in 2 days?
W
theothr1
"The Lord of Eltingville" > wrote
:
: I'd even prefer Mitt over McCain. He doesn't have quite so much crazy
: in him and isn't as likely to lose his temper and cockpunch a visiting
: relations...funny...but awkward.
:
-- -
.... I just threw up in my mouth a little bit...
Neil X.
>
> If they do it, they will suspend the election
<rolls eyes>
You're bordering on the delusional, Kathy..........
Peace,
Neil X.
theothr1
"k sturm" > wrote :
:
: Ritter said that they are still talking about them as "terrorists" every
day
: and that they still plan to attack Iran. In the spring. With nukes.
That
: THAT is the war we have to think about, talk about, scream about, and try
to
: stop before it starts. If they do it, they will suspend the election so
all
: this arguing about it and watching it like a sport is just futile anyway.
: We all should be paying attention to what they are saying about Iran and
: pushing our representatives to make a law that stops it. Now.
:
: If Scott Ritter is right again, that is...
:
:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQu_l0sZb8o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxWcCjNw6yk
theothr1
"Neil X." wrote ...
I thought you didn't comment on other's
mental abilities from afar.... didn't I just
hear that last week?
But let's review the facts:
http://geniusofinsanityworld.blogspot.com/2004/10/american-fascism.html
Andrew
news:y5eoj.5059$0o7...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
Yup. It was, and is, just Dubya using the religious right as a means to gain
power... Hell, his pops did the same thing, although he was far less
convincing than even Dubya...
And one of these years, the religious right is going to see that they are
just being used by the Wall Street faction of the Republican party, are
going to split away and run a third-party candidate and fracture the
Republican party as we know it... Of course, the nightmare scenario is that
at the same time, the Democrats will probably do something insanely stupid,
fracture their own party, and we'll wind up with Jerry-Falwell-lite in the
Oval Office...
JimK
wrote:
Well, if McCain is elected, don't be surprised if Rudy ends up being
rewarded for his endorsement with a cabinet position if he wants one.
Can you imagine the Justice Department being run by Giuliani? Or
Homeland Security? Now, I'm not sure how much these guys really like
each other (I suspect not all that much), but politics is politics.
JimK
DGDevin
"k sturm" <kas...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3Oeoj.1630$Ch6....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...
> Ritter said that they are still talking about them as "terrorists" every
> day and that they still plan to attack Iran. In the spring. With nukes.
> That THAT is the war we have to think about, talk about, scream about, and
> try to stop before it starts. If they do it, they will suspend the
> election so all this arguing about it and watching it like a sport is just
> futile anyway. We all should be paying attention to what they are saying
> about Iran and pushing our representatives to make a law that stops it.
> Now.
>
> If Scott Ritter is right again, that is...
Is this the same Scott Ritter who stated confidently in Feb. of '05 that
Bush had ordered preparations for the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities
to be complete by June of that year, and who repeated his claim two months
later for Al Jeezera with the added info that the strike deadline had been
at the insistence of Israel, but who later had to explain that he hadn't
actually said the attack would take place at that time, that Scott Ritter?
Is this the same Ritter who claimed in '06 that John Bolton's speechwriter
had told him the speech justifying an attack on Iran had already been
written, that Ritter? Is this the Ritter who claimed during the Clinton
administration that Iraq was getting away with concealing prohibited weapons
from UN inspectors and that Saddam could rebuild his WMD program within
months if he wanted, that Ritter? Would this be the Ritter who had a bit of
trouble over arrests for trying to get underage girls online to meet him for
fun and games, that Ritter?
Is this one of those 'other sources' you prefer to go to given that you have
totally written-off the mainstream media?
So when this spring nuclear attack on Iran does not take place and the U.S.
election proceeds as usual, will Scott Ritter remain on your list of
reliable sources, or will even you consider his credibility to be just a bit
tarnished at that point?
Ray
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:12:03 -0800 (PST), Ray <rayb...@hotmail.com>
Yup. We ain't out of the woods with McCain to be sure.
Neil X.
> "Neil X." wrote ...:> Kathy wrote:
>
> : >
> : > If they do it, they will suspend the election
> :
> :
> : <rolls eyes>
> :
> : You're bordering on the delusional, Kathy..........
> :
> : Peace,
> : Neil X.
> - -
> I thought you didn't comment on other's
> mental abilities from afar.... didn't I just
> hear that last week?
I said it was unwise to judge someone's sanity from afar. And I have
done no such thing. From the Oxford University Press Dictionary of
Philosophy:
******************
delusion
Generally, any false opinion that a person persists in may be called a
delusion. In the philosophy of perception, delusions such as
hallucinations are sometimes distinguished from more everyday
illusions, such as the bent appearance of a stick in water, or a
mirage. Mirages and standard illusions are public and repeatable.
******************
> But let's review the facts:http://geniusofinsanityworld.blogspot.com/2004/10/american-fascism.html
Do you believe the elections have even 1% chance of being canceled?
If so, you're delusional too.
Peace,
Neil X.
Lfh
> > - -
> > I thought you didn't comment on other's
> > mental abilities from afar.... didn't I just
> > hear that last week?
>
> I said it was unwise to judge someone's sanity from afar.
Prolly, but since this is just pixel fun, I will brave it nonetheless
and question your own sanity in trying to reason with Rocks. ;)
Fred
theothr1
"DGDevin" <wrote
: Is this one of those 'other sources' you prefer to go to given that you
: totally written-off the mainstream media?
--
You say that like you get REAL news from the msm.
Top stories from the morning sleeze
(GMA, Today, CNN American Morning)
consisted of Super Bowl Recipes,
Britney's newest ordeal (RIP Anna Nicole)
and the top exercise myths.
Would you have guessed that our
attorney general, Michael Mukasey
sat before the Senate yesterday and couldn't
tell us, if an American citizen is
water boarded, he's not sure if it's
torture?
Amy Goodman talked about
it FIRST thing on her broadcast today!
http://www.democracynow.org/
Now... go to the those mainstream sites
and see if Mukasey is ANYWHERE on
their front page! Go on....
- - -
Thank you Patrick Leahy for having some balls.
Did your mainstream media give you this
with your morning Joe?
**
January 30, 2008 -- "I had hoped today would provide more clarity on so many
critical issues. Instead, we heard references to legal opinions,
justifications, and facts that remain hidden from Congress and the American
people.
It is a hallmark of our democracy that we say publicly what the laws are and
what conduct they prohibit. We have seen what happens when hidden decisions
rendered in secret memos are withheld from the people's elected
representatives and from the American people. It erodes our civil liberties
and undermines our values as a nation of laws.
As I said when opening this hearing, it is not enough just to say that
waterboarding is not currently authorized. The Attorney General of the
United States should be able to declare that it is wrong, it is illegal, and
it is beyond the pale. It has been for over a century.
Earlier today, I put in the record a letter I received from Major General
John Fugh, Rear Admiral Don Guter, Rear Admiral John Hutson and Brigadier
General David Brahms. They write with absolute clarity: "Waterboarding is
inhumane, it is torture, and it is illegal." They also quote the sitting
Judge Advocates General of the military services from our Committee's
hearing last year in which they unanimously and unambiguously agreed that
waterboarding is inhumane, illegal and a violation of law.
By not declaring that waterboarding is off limits, this administration
undercuts the moral authority of the United States. Repressive regimes
around the world are saying that whether they waterboard or torture will
depend on the circumstances as they see them and whether they think they
need to. This endangers American citizens and military personnel around the
world and lowers the standards of human rights everywhere.
If an American were waterboarded anywhere in the world, no Senator and no
other American would have to know the "circumstances" and purported
justifications for it before condemning it. Tragically, this administration
has so twisted America's role, law and values that our own Attorney General
cannot say that waterboarding of an American is illegal. That is how far
from our moorings we have strayed.
Oversight helps make government work better, and hearings like this are
accountability moments. The answers we have heard today leave the American
people considerably short of what they deserve and what they should expect
from the government that acts in their name.
This Committee wants to help you repair the damage that has been done to the
Justice Department. I look forward to working closely with Attorney General
Mukasey, and I hope that together we can find ways to restore strong
leadership and independence to the Department of Justice."
Source: Senator Patrick Leahy
theothr1
"Lfh" < wrote ...
, "Neil X." wrote:
> > - -
> > I thought you didn't comment on other's
> > mental abilities from afar.... didn't I just
> > hear that last week?
>
> I said it was unwise to judge someone's sanity from afar.
Prolly, but since this is just pixel fun, I will brave it nonetheless
and question your own sanity in trying to reason with Rocks. ;)
Fred
- -
Ahhh, don't worry Mr. Hall Monitor.
Neil will be alright talking to the girls.
Andrew
news:8apoj.9919$hI1...@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
> "DGDevin" <wrote
> : Is this one of those 'other sources' you prefer to go to given that you
> have
> : totally written-off the mainstream media?
> :
> --
> You say that like you get REAL news from the msm.
>
> Top stories from the morning sleeze
> (GMA, Today, CNN American Morning)
> consisted of Super Bowl Recipes,
> Britney's newest ordeal (RIP Anna Nicole)
> and the top exercise myths.
Hey, here's an idea: quit watching that crap.
Lfh
I rest my case.
Fred
Lfh
> "DGDevin" <wrote
> : Is this one of those 'other sources' you prefer to go to given that you
> have
> : totally written-off the mainstream media?
> :
> --
> You say that like you get REAL news from the msm.
>
> Top stories from the morning sleeze
> (GMA, Today, CNN American Morning)
> consisted of Super Bowl Recipes,
> Britney's newest ordeal (RIP Anna Nicole)
> and the top exercise myths.
>
> Would you have guessed that our
> attorney general, Michael Mukasey
> sat before the Senate yesterday and couldn't
> tell us, if an American citizen is
> water boarded, he's not sure if it's
> torture?
Good lord, Rocks, why would he have to guess when it was in the Yahoo
headline box. It don't get much more msm than that.
Fred
LP
>
> Do you believe the elections have even 1% chance of being canceled?
> If so, you're delusional too.
Knowing the hubris of this current bunch of thugs that occupy dubya's
cabinet, do you think there is a 1% chance that they could find a way
to manipulate the national security alert level to "red" in the days
before the next election?
LP
DGDevin
> You say that like you get REAL news from the msm.
In other words since you'd rather not respond to what I actually posted,
you'll substitute something I didn't and use that as an opportunity to wave
your own placard.
> Top stories from the morning sleeze
> (GMA, Today, CNN American Morning)
> consisted of Super Bowl Recipes,
> Britney's newest ordeal (RIP Anna Nicole)
> and the top exercise myths.
The mainstream news media covers a lot of crap, I hate it, so what? On the
other hand the blogosphere is packed with people and organizations that
either push their own whatever-wing agendas or are tuned into frequencies
that only they can hear, you get your information from that world at your
peril.
> Would you have guessed that our
> attorney general, Michael Mukasey
> sat before the Senate yesterday and couldn't
> tell us, if an American citizen is
> water boarded, he's not sure if it's
> torture?
I watched him on TV news, so I wouldn't have to guess at his attempts to
evade the issue.
> Amy Goodman talked about
> it FIRST thing on her broadcast today!
> http://www.democracynow.org/
>
> Now... go to the those mainstream sites
> and see if Mukasey is ANYWHERE on
> their front page! Go on....
It was all over TV news, I watched multiple pieces on it, and I just
scrolled down a list of links on CNN, Reuters, MSNBC, Fox, NY Times and so
on, perhaps not their lead story but it's there nonetheless.
I respectfully suggest that when you get your information from certain
sources and you assign a high level of credibility to them for philosophical
reasons you leave yourself open to be being misled, in effect you are at
risk of tunnel vision. The problem is that Democracy Now! is no more
inherently reliable or trustworthy than any other pressure group. They have
limited means to collect information and they have their own agenda, they
have no special claim to impartiality or accuracy any more than does the NRA
or the NOW. I can understand why one would mistrust the MSM, I don't hold
them in especially high regard either, but what baffles me is why anyone
would feel free to substitute other organizations which don't even pretend
to be impartial and then act on the limited and often biased reporting they
get there as if it is holy writ.
Of course if you *want* to believe that Bush is going to nuke Iran in the
spring and then cancel the election then questioning those sources that
treat Scott Ritter's latest gem as verified fact is not something that would
appeal to you. That's your right if that's what you want to do, just don't
pretend that cherrypicking the propaganda that appeals to you makes you
better informed than the folks watching "news" about Britney Spears and fad
diets and the Hollywood writer's strike, because you aren't.
ML
No doubt that it is possible of becoming a reality.
I may be delusional, but not about this.
Perhaps it is the masses in denial about the Evil Bush People who are
delusional.
DGDevin
"Lfh" <onetas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c665e39a-8d62-4cd5...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Would you have guessed that our
>> attorney general, Michael Mukasey
>> sat before the Senate yesterday and couldn't
>> tell us, if an American citizen is
>> water boarded, he's not sure if it's
>> torture?
> Good lord, Rocks, why would he have to guess when it was in the Yahoo
> headline box. It don't get much more msm than that.
> Fred
Or when it was all over the national TV news last night. I never cease to
be amazed at the incompetence of the corporate media conspiracy to suppress
certain stories, wouldn't such suppression work better if they didn't put
the stories on the evening news for everyone to see?
Avant Grape
> Avant Grape wrote:
>> Octopus Ride wrote:
>>> "Neil X." <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:e2233d43-8393-4634...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>> Every politician is shameless. Giuliani was less unpalatable to me
>>>> than other GOPers because he wasn't a religious fanatic. Huckabee and
>>>> Mitt, they're as batshit crazy as Dubya when it comes to Absolute
>>>> Truth. Religious nuts do things like invade Iraq for no reason other
>>>> than that God whispered in their ear that they should do it.
>>>
>>> Huckabee is part of that ilk that believes that Israel is ordained by
>>> god blah blah blah. He'd want to defend it to the death against the
>>> heathen Arabs (as long as there was a good joke or two in it).
>>>
>>
>> I think Huckabee actually has quite a bit of sympathy for the
>> Palestinians.
>
> For the record, Huck's website makes no mention of the Palestinians, but
> he is on record as favoring a Palestinian state, as long as it's outside
> Israel, like Egypt or Saudi Arabia. He actually said this on CBS's "Face
> the Nation" last year. This amounts to ethnic cleansing of the
> Palestinians from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, imo, and I don't
> feel this position shows any sympathy for the Palestinians. JC, maybe
> we'll be in agreement twice in 2 days?
If that's the case, I would definitely agree with you. I'd really like
to hear the Republican candidates talk this issue through. hell, I'd
like all the candidates to talk it through and give us a definitive stance.
Regardless, I don't see Huckabee as the type interested in invading
other countries.
-JC
bongo
> On Jan 30, 9:46 am, Lfh <onetaste2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 30, 9:21 am, LP <so.you...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I agree. I remember hearing a radio spot with him a few months back
> > > > and it seemed like he wanted to out-bellicose Bush and was most
> > > > interested in hammer diplomacy, a "no, f___ YOU" approach.
> > > I too am glad he's done as a candidate for now.
>
> > I am glad we agree on Rudy leaving, but I'm curious about the edit
> > thingy there with the f___ YOU" bit. What the f___ is with that,
> > Larry?
>
> You can't use that word on the internetss!!!
> What the f___ is wrong with YOU?
>
> LP
Shouldn't say f___, no we shouldn't say f___, f___ no!
Avant Grape
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:12:03 -0800 (PST), Ray <ray...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 31, 7:47 am, Avant Grape <avantnograpec...@sbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>>> Brad Greer wrote:
>>>> McCain scares me as well, and I don't think he'd have a problem
>>>> starting a war. But Rudy is such a hard right neocon I have to ignore
>>>> his more liberal social agenda.
>>> Yup. It's the advisers a presidential candidate chooses that offers the
>>> clearest signpost to their foreign policy philosophy. As much as I fear
>>> McCain, he's clearly not anywhere near as dangerous as Rudy. I don't
>>> see any neo-cons hanging with him after all.
>> Yup. Neocon granddaddy and ultra-hawk Norman Podhoretz was a senior
>> Giuliani advisor - the equivalent for me of ~10 reds flags.
>
> Well, if McCain is elected, don't be surprised if Rudy ends up being
> rewarded for his endorsement with a cabinet position if he wants one.
I don't see that happening. Rudy's endorsement is pretty meaningless
after all.
-JC
Ken Fortenberry
> JimK wrote:
>>
>> Well, if McCain is elected, don't be surprised if Rudy ends up being
>> rewarded for his endorsement with a cabinet position if he wants one.
>
> I don't see that happening. Rudy's endorsement is pretty meaningless
> after all.
Meaningless ? Hardly.
Here in bumfuck, cornfield Illinois the Republicans are scrambling
to replace Giuliani delegates with McCain delegates. Illinois and
all of its delegates was a coldlock cinch for Giuliani until day
before yesterday. They've been caught with their pants down here
in downstate Illinois but all those Giulianis will be replaced by
McCains by Feb 5 and the endorsement was *everything*.
--
Ken Fortenberry
Neil X.
No, I don't think so. Sorry. As much as I agree that they are evil
f*cks, they are simply not going to do that. They believe they love
America. Their vision of America is one that you and I would abhor,
if we were to understand it, but suspending elections and cancelling
democracy in the US, well, that's just not a neocon thing. They want
to export democracy everywhere in the world, they're jingoistic,
patriotic flag wavers who see themselves as defenders of democracy,
not destroyers of democracy. The last thing they would do is hang
onto power without an election. Ain't gonna happen.
Peace,
Neil X.
Avant Grape
McCain wins the nomination with or without Rudy's support. Who are you
kidding?
-JC
Octopus Ride
"ML" <mary.eg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3fe78a09-11a8-4dfa...@i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
There is no possibility whatsoever of the elections being cancelled for any
reason. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. I will become Dictator and take a newly
sober and refreshed Lindsay Lohan as my Queen before that will happen.
I offer this info so you can relax and enjoy the rest of your evening.
OR
ML
> "ML" <mary.egret1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >> Do you believe the elections have even 1% chance of being canceled?
> >> If so, you're delusional too.
>
> >> Peace,
> >> Neil X.
>
> > No doubt that it is possible of becoming a reality.
> > I may be delusional, but not about this.
> > Perhaps it is the masses in denial about the Evil Bush People who are
> > delusional.
>
> There is no possibility whatsoever of the elections being cancelled for any
> reason. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. I will become Dictator and take a newly
> sober and refreshed Lindsay Lohan as my Queen before that will happen.
>
> I offer this info so you can relax and enjoy the rest of your evening.
>
> OR
Man, you're the best.
You really are.
Octopus Ride
> Man, you're the best.
> You really are.
Wanna be my princess? Lindsay won't mind.
OR
Velvet Jones
> There is no possibility whatsoever of the elections being cancelled
> for any reason. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. I will become Dictator
> and take a newly sober and refreshed Lindsay Lohan as my Queen before
> that will happen.
Why wouldn't you do that anyway? I hear she gives great Lewinsky.
--
VJ
-Who among us has not dreamed of faraway places and intertwined lovers?
LP
I hope your asessment of them is accurate. I tell myself the same
thing sometimes, but when the news is worst, I wonder if they could go
that far.
LP
Octopus Ride
"Velvet Jones" <Vel...@Jones.org> wrote in message
news:47a266b2$0$25053$607e...@cv.net...
> Octopus Ride wrote:
>
>> There is no possibility whatsoever of the elections being cancelled
>> for any reason. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. I will become Dictator
>> and take a newly sober and refreshed Lindsay Lohan as my Queen before
>> that will happen.
> Why wouldn't you do that anyway? I hear she gives great Lewinsky.
Well, I would in a heartbeat, but the impossibility of her desiring such an
arrangement rises far beyond even the impossibilty of cancelled elections.
OR
LP
Well then the way is clear for ML to move in and claim the throne.....
a-haha....
LP
ML
> "Velvet Jones" <Vel...@Jones.org> wrote in message
>
> >> for any reason. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. I will become Dictator
> >> and take a newly sober and refreshed Lindsay Lohan as my Queen before
> >> that will happen.
> > Why wouldn't you do that anyway? I hear she gives great Lewinsky.
>
> Well, I would in a heartbeat, but the impossibility of her desiring such an
> arrangement rises far beyond even the impossibilty of cancelled elections.
>
> OR
Lots of us give great Lewinsky, I'd be willing to bet.
Especially when you are inspired.
Velvet Jones
>
> Lots of us give great Lewinsky, I'd be willing to bet.
> Especially when you are inspired.
Heh heh heh <beg>
ML
My door is open to my friends....