Your opinions on George W. Bush
Chris Assaf
I think he might just love my ideas. ;-)Anyway, what is your opinion of him?
Ubiquitous
cassa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>What is your opinion of George W. Bush? Is he a good president?
He's a great president, given all the problems he inherited from Clinton.
--
======================================================================
ISLAM: Winning the hearts and minds of the world, one bomb at a time.
BookerT
> Hello, what is your opinion of George W. Bush? Is he a good president?
What we need is a brother in the White House..... maybe Colin
Powell.... but Bush is alright and he's down with Colin Powell anyway.
Bout time someone bust Sadamm Hussein ass anyway!
Chris Assaf
> In article <dbd0d335.03082...@posting.google.com>,
> cassa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >What is your opinion of George W. Bush? Is he a good president?
>
> He's a great president, given all the problems he inherited from Clinton.
He is doing a great job for america.
Heights Below
Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a clue
and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic policy.
How Icebreaker Got His Groove Back
news:457af811.0308...@posting.google.com...
> Terrible president who's sold our country to the highest bidder.
Who was the highest bidder? The only selling i've seen done from the White
House was when President Clinton illegally sold ICBM technology to Communist
China over Pentagon objections. Or how money from Communist China military
Generals found its way ton DNC coffers. Or how Clinton and the DNC sold at
least one cemetery plot at Arlington National for campaign contributions.
And you've got the unmitigated audacity to accuse the current administration
of selling out the country? You've cojones the size of Australia to state
that with a straight face.
> Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a clue
> and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic policy.
Not gonna happen. The Democrats have so far not proffered a single
candidate, save perhaps Liebermann, who is strong on national defense. None
of these Dems, again, save perhaps Edwards and Liebermann, really seem to
like America or Americans. They seem to have nothing to offer the public but
criticism of the current administration. No solutions. No answers. Just
bleak outlooks. And just like when the Republicans kept spinning their
wheels in 98-99 on the LewinskyGate issue, no matter how eloquently they
spelled out the illegality of what Clinton did to the American people, they
could never get traction on the issue and so it will be with the Democrats
when it comes to the issue of national security and Iraq. They have tripped
overthemselves in a losing proposition to excorciate Bush on Iraq and the
American people are simply not buying it. Just like in 98/99, a time came
when everyones minds were made up on the issues and no one was going to
change. And now we see with Iraq and national security that minds have been
made up. No one is going to change. The wise man would get off that horse
and on to another one, but there only appears to be one, perhaps two,
sensible Democrats running for President. Beating up on the military, the
Commander-in-Chief during wartime...being traditionally lax on national
security...these aren't conducive to getting yourself elected in '04.
----------------------------------
ICEBREAKER
"A moving vision of the future. King's dream was of an America without
racism of anykind. The tragedy of course was that all of this footage is in
black and white. Imagine how powerful it would have been in color."
KazamaSmokers
> cassa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >What is your opinion of George W. Bush? Is he a good president?
>
> He's a great president, given all the problems he inherited from Clinton.
And people say comedy is dead...
Chris
"Ubiquitous" <web...@polaris.net> wrote in message
news:CPmdnZh0oeq...@comcast.com...
> In article <dbd0d335.03082...@posting.google.com>,
> cassa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >What is your opinion of George W. Bush? Is he a good president?
>
> He's a great president, given all the problems he inherited from Clinton.
He did great with the 3 big problems Clinton left him. Peace, Properitry
and a Budget Surplus.
>
> --
> ======================================================================
>
William December Starr
His Groove Back" <the_artist_forme...@yahoo.com> said:
>> Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a
>> clue and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic
>> policy. ["Heights Below"]
>
> Not gonna happen. The Democrats have so far not proffered a single
> candidate, save perhaps Liebermann, who is strong on national
> defense.
How do you know that?
> None of these Dems, again, save perhaps Edwards and Liebermann,
> really seem to like America or Americans.
???? What gives you that impression?
> They seem to have nothing to offer the public but criticism of the
> current administration. No solutions. No answers. Just bleak
> outlooks. And just like when the Republicans kept spinning their
> wheels in 98-99 on the LewinskyGate issue, no matter how eloquently
> they spelled out the illegality of what Clinton did to the American
> people,
What do you believe that Clinton did "to the American people" that
was illegal?
[ *snip* ]
> Beating up on the military, the Commander-in-Chief during
> wartime...being traditionally lax on national security...these
> aren't conducive to getting yourself elected in '04.
Beating up on the military? Who do you think is doing that?
And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state is
the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities with?
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
Brad Filippone
: Terrible president who's sold our country to the highest bidder.
: Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a clue
: and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic policy.
They had that clue (just barely) in 2000. Gore got the popular vote. And
the electoral vote too were it not for Bush chicanery.
Brad
Relish
SLAM DUNK!
Delaney
> Terrible president who's sold our country to the highest bidder.
>
> Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a clue
> and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic policy.
One name: Howard Dean.
- Delaney
* Dean in 2004!
How Icebreaker Got His Groove Back
news:bi97l7$3ms$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> In article <vkfthu4...@corp.supernews.com>, "How Icebreaker Got
> His Groove Back" <the_artist_forme...@yahoo.com> said:
>
> >> Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a
> >> clue and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic
> >> policy. ["Heights Below"]
> >
> > Not gonna happen. The Democrats have so far not proffered a single
> > candidate, save perhaps Liebermann, who is strong on national
> > defense.
>
> How do you know that?
I'm not going to get into a debate about what the defintion of "know" is.
> What do you believe that Clinton did "to the American people" that
> was illegal?
In the LewinskyGate matter he lied to a grand jury...
> Beating up on the military? Who do you think is doing that?
>
> And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state is
> the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities with?
You offer a loaded question, no, make that "bait". And I am refusing to take
it.
I'm going to give you the example of former Senator Max Cleland. If the
Democrats running for President have *any* sense about them, they'll look at
his example and learn from it.
Max Cleland was a long-standing figure head in Georgia politics, a well
respected member of the House of Representatives and from 1996 to 2002
served as one of Georgia's two Senators in Washington D.C. Cleland was the
poster boy of the Georgia Democratic Party. Considered to be untouchable. A
Vietnam veteran who had two legs and an arm blown off. And yet he got voted
out of office by a fairly decent margin last November because he was
considered to be too soft on national security or, at the very least,
playing fast and loose with the Homeland Security Bill by holding it up in
Congress until he could get unionization privileges for thousands of TSA
workers. Georgia voters didn't take too kindly to seeing the Homeland
Security bill held up so that Cleland could reward his union constituents so
they gave Cleland the boot in a stunning, come from behind win for Saxby
Chambliss. A once Democratic stronghold, figurehead and lock in Georgia
politics was brought down and replaced with a Republican freshman who
promised to work with the administration to fight terrorism. Zell Miller,
the other Georgia senator, will not run for re-election and the Democrats
are pissing their pants that they'll lose that seat to yet another
Republican. They should be scared. They probably will lose that seat.
When a triple-amputee, Vietnam vet can get voted out of office for being
considered too soft on terrorism and national security, what chance do a
bunch of rich, priviledged politicans like Gephardt, Dean, Kerry and Graham
have when they've all been bashing the current president? I'll tell you:
none.
Democrats are determined to stab themselves over with many pains trying to
tar and feather the current president as a liar (which is a huge laugh when
we consider the unparalled dishonesty, lies and deceit from the previous
administration), as a killer and as a war-monger. It hasn't worked. It's not
working. It won't work.
Andrew Ryan Chang
>> Terrible president who's sold our country to the highest bidder.
>
>Who was the highest bidder? The only selling i've seen done from the White
>House was when President Clinton illegally sold ICBM technology to Communist
>China over Pentagon objections. Or how money from Communist China military
>Generals found its way ton DNC coffers. Or how Clinton and the DNC sold at
>least one cemetery plot at Arlington National for campaign contributions.
>And you've got the unmitigated audacity to accuse the current administration
>of selling out the country? You've cojones the size of Australia to state
>that with a straight face.
Right, bring up all that and forget about untendered contracts
going to Halliburton, the recent executive order giving legislative carte
blanche to multinational oil companies in Iraq, Enron and the continuing
coverup over who wrote "Cheney's" energy policy, and the whole sordid
Iran-Contra mess from another previous Presidency.
>sensible Democrats running for President. Beating up on the military, the
It is a staggering claim that Bush is pro-military when his
Administration wants to cut danger pay in order to save a few measly
hundreds of millions of dollars. I know, that sounds like a lot of money,
but it's piddling compared to other major costs of running the world's
richest 300-million-person country. His favourite tax cuts alone cost
many times more than said danger pay.
And that's to say nothing of the way the other cost-cutting has
left American soldiers in the field undersupplied. But sure, by all
means, let's cheer for Bush: a guy who skipped out on the Vietnam War by
getting a cushy National Guard post thanks to family ties... and then
*went AWOL from even that a YEAR before his term was up*, without any
plausible excuse to this day.
followups to talk.politics.misc .
--
When I log into my Xenix system with my 110 baud teletype, both vi
*and* Emacs are just too damn slow. They print useless messages like,
'C-h for help' and '"foo" File is read only'. So I use the editor
that doesn't waste my VALUABLE time. -Patrick J. LoPresti
David Johnston
>
> And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state is
> the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities with?
Well that's obvious. Iraq.
KazamaSmokers
> "Heights Below" <norma...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:457af811.0308...@posting.google.com...
> > Terrible president who's sold our country to the highest bidder.
>
> Who was the highest bidder? The only selling i've seen done from the White
> House was when President Clinton illegally sold ICBM technology to Communist
> China over Pentagon objections.
HA! Cite, you chooch.
lazarus
<chrissi...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
>"Ubiquitous" <web...@polaris.net> wrote in message
>news:CPmdnZh0oeq...@comcast.com...
>> In article <dbd0d335.03082...@posting.google.com>,
>> cassa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >What is your opinion of George W. Bush? Is he a good president?
>>
>> He's a great president, given all the problems he inherited from Clinton.
>
>
> He did great with the 3 big problems Clinton left him. Peace, Properitry
>and a Budget Surplus.
I'd love for one of these Bush fans to list all the positive things
he's done.
--
lazarus
"Folly it may seem," said Haldir. "Indeed, in nothing is the power
of the Dark Lord more clearly shown than in the estrangement that
divides all those who still oppose him." -- J.R.R. Tolkien
TheJacksonFive
anything to do with anything this country does is insane. All the President
is and has been for years is a figurehead.. a public speaker for whatever
special interest groups paid the most to finance his campaign.
Nothing bothers me more than Democrats and Republicans bitching about who
makes the US better because the fact is? Both parties suck the fucking shaft
at running this country. Period. Move along.
G-Money
-My one serious post for the decade.
"Chris Assaf" <cassa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dbd0d335.03082...@posting.google.com...
Relish
Another name - George McGovern
How Icebreaker Got His Groove Back
news:bi9h1q$pol$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca...
> Right, bring up all that and forget about untendered contracts
> going to Halliburton,
Whether "untendered contracts" is accurate or not, allowing Halliburton
access to Iraq is not quite the same thing as selling sensitive missle
technology to the largest Communist nation on the planet. Halliburton is/was
actually fully qualified to do the jobs needed in Iraq.
> the recent executive order giving legislative carte
> blanche to multinational oil companies in Iraq,
What executive order?
> Enron
Nothing to do with Bush. Quit trying to tar and feather Dubya with
everything. Enron rose and practically collapsed under Clinton's
administration and there's nothing to suggest that Clinton had any more or
any less to do with Enron's mess than Dubya did. Move on.
> and the continuing
> coverup over who wrote "Cheney's" energy policy,
Granted.
> and the whole sordid
> Iran-Contra mess from another previous Presidency.
Geez, you're really reaching now. Not only was Dubya not the President back
then, but neither was his father.
> It is a staggering claim that Bush is pro-military when his
> Administration wants to cut danger pay in order to save a few measly
> hundreds of millions of dollars. I know, that sounds like a lot of money,
> but it's piddling compared to other major costs of running the world's
> richest 300-million-person country. His favourite tax cuts alone cost
> many times more than said danger pay.
I don't know or understand the complexities of that argument, though i've
heard it before, so i'll pretty much let it stand. I do know from talking to
people who served in all arms of the military during Clinton that Bush is
much more respected than Clinton ever was.
>
> And that's to say nothing of the way the other cost-cutting has
> left American soldiers in the field undersupplied. But sure, by all
> means, let's cheer for Bush: a guy who skipped out on the Vietnam War by
> getting a cushy National Guard post thanks to family ties... and then
> *went AWOL from even that a YEAR before his term was up*, without any
> plausible excuse to this day.
As opposed to Bill Clinton, who simply got strings pulled to get him out of
Vietnam service so he could go protest against his own country from the
comfy confines of Oxford?
Look Andrew, let me tell you something about people such as myself who dont'
give a rat's turd about George W. Bush.....it's not that i'm giving him a
free pass on any controversial issues. It's just that a) not a single critic
of his has ever brought up any credible evidence that showed him to be the
horrible person they want to make him out to be. Other than being a simple
minded man who kicked an alcohol addiction and finally got serious about
life around age 40, he's vanilla as they come.
But most importantly b) after eight years of Bill and Hillary hiding Rose
Law firm records that were subpoenaed...firing the White House travel office
and then trashing their reputations in order to make the firing
justified......numerous administration officials under investigation by his
own attorney general, including good friend Ron Brown.....defiling an intern
repeatedly and then attempting to get others to cover up the ethical
violation by lying about it to a grand jury...by indulging in his own sexual
addictions in ways that left the national security of this country
exposed....by Hillary claiming it was all a "vast, right-wing conspiracy"
when she of all people should know what her husband is capable of...by
Hillary standing by her man after telling Mike Croft on 60 minutes, several
years before, that she wasn't some woman "standing by her man, at home
baking cookies".....by fiddling with an intern while Americans burned in
Waco, Oklahoma, The World Trade Center, Kenya, Tanzania, Saudi
Arabia....selling missle technology to the Chinese...selling a burial plot
in Arlington National to wealthy campaign donors....White House "coffees"
i.e. fundraisers...the Buddhist Temple/"no controlling legal
authority"...not allowing military personnel to wear their uniform inside
the White House or at least the Oval Office....slipping past security tape
to rummage through Vince Foster's belongings while the body was barely
cold...grabbing Kathleen Willey....raping Juanita Broadrick......fondling
Eleanor Mondale...and I could go on...........after all that, it's very hard
to get worked up over what Bush is alleged to have done. It's like, the
Democrats and the liberals did nothing to hold Clinton accountable for 8
years; he was unrestrained and unbridled throughout his administration. His
corruption knew no boundaries. And now these same people want me to get all
worked up and all hot and bothered over tiny little misdeeds they claim Bush
has made? They "swallowed the camel" during Clinton's 8 years but are now
"trying to strain the gnat" with Bush and I for one am just mentally
exhausted, still, from Clinton.
I laugh at the parallels you people try and make between Bush and Clinton.
Bush isn't even smart enough to be 1/10th as corrupt and vicious as Billary
was.
Relish
> "Andrew Ryan Chang" <arc...@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> news:bi9h1q$pol$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca...
>
>
>>Right, bring up all that and forget about untendered contracts
>>going to Halliburton,
>
>
> Whether "untendered contracts" is accurate or not, allowing Halliburton
> access to Iraq is not quite the same thing as selling sensitive missle
> technology to the largest Communist nation on the planet. Halliburton is/was
> actually fully qualified to do the jobs needed in Iraq.
Plus it wasn't even the first choice.
Another Slam Dunk. Will you marry me? ;-)
bush_screws_the_troops
>... anyone on this group that thinks the President has
>anything to do with anything this country does is insane...
As compared to someone attempting to diagnose from misconstructions of posts ... ?
If Bush had told the public about the warnings he received from other countries
in advance of 9/11, the hijackers would have been tackled in the aisles, long
before they could get to the first flight attendant, who would have been ready
to disable them to prevent them from running up against the reinforced cabin
door, precluding access to the the armed crew in the cockpit.
PNAC wanted America attacked, so much they wrote of it. They have much
influence over the Bush family, with its tradition of dealing with enemies of the
USA such as the Nazis. The Poppy Bush CIA had even prepared a plan for
the attack on US citizens on US soil, to incite the population into support of
unjustified military activity: it's entitled "Operation Northwood".
So Bush kept quiet about all the warnings, stopped the FBI from investigating
the bin Ladens (Bush business associates as they were), stopped the drones from
following Osama (making certain of his usability as the designated scapegoat), even
stopped pilots from carrying sidearms, legally, in July 2001, then went off on his long
record-breaking vacation. Stock market option transactions were made just before
9/11/2001 which were based *specifically* on the crimes to come, but they weren't
ordered by bin Laden. Then the US air defense system got stood down on 9/11.
Bush immediately accused bin Laden, yet has never offered any evidence against
him. Bush is killing witnesses, obstructing investigations, and taking advantage of
those tragic deaths and injuries to promote his corrupt cronies' war and oil scams.
Don't be duped: dump Dubya.
bush_screws_the_troops
There has been no war declared, however.
You err.
bush_screws_the_troops
>On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 16:21:29 -0700, "Chris" <chrissi...@netzero.com> wrote:
>>"Ubiquitous" <web...@polaris.net> wrote in message news:CPmdnZh0oeq...@comcast.com...
>>> In article <dbd0d335.03082...@posting.google.com>, cassa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> >What is your opinion of George W. Bush? Is he a good president?
>>> He's a great president, given all the problems he inherited from Clinton.
>> He did great with the 3 big problems Clinton left him. Peace, Properitry
>>and a Budget Surplus.
>
>I'd love for one of these Bush fans to list all the positive things
>he's done.
There's yet to be seen even a one.
Clinton left Bush with drones and the FBI after the bin Ladens,
the Hart Rudman Commissions' findings, and stern warnings to
make terrorism a priority. Bush, in the terrorism business, took
the longest vacation and let the USA get hit, to please his pals
from PNAC. Bush is costing the American taxpayer more than
any other crooked politician in US history. He's costing the US
troops their health and their lives, for his lies and corruption.
How Icebreaker Got His Groove Back
Sure. Why not? I could use a little relish on my weiner.
And it's not as if I have any particular love for Bush or Republicans. I
just find it ludicrous and disingenious for the Democrats to all of a sudden
want some honesty and moral accountability in the White House. Bill Clinton
was the most corrupt president this country has ever seen. Richard Nixon
pales in comparison.
Brad Filippone
Distribution:
BushScrewstheTroops wrote:
: You err.
I guess bombing the hell out them is peace then?
Brad
Relish
>
>
> Sure. Why not? I could use a little relish on my weiner.
>
> And it's not as if I have any particular love for Bush or Republicans.
Neither do I. I'm an ex-Dem myself and have never been a registered
Rep. I consider myself a centrist and vote for the best person for
the job, not the party platform.
> I
> just find it ludicrous and disingenious for the Democrats to all of a sudden
> want some honesty and moral accountability in the White House. Bill Clinton
> was the most corrupt president this country has ever seen. Richard Nixon
> pales in comparison.
Of course it's ludicrous. The Dems are scrambling to taint Bush's
presidency because, as a man of character and integrity, he eclipses
Clinton's performance completely. Do I agree with everything Bush
says? No. Do I respect him for meaning what he says. Definitely. Do
I trust him (unlike Clinton) to do what he thinks is bestfor the
country? Absolutely.
Relish
You mean the action that removed a disgusting, abusive, dangerous
regieme so that it can no longer threaten the world and its own
people? And yes, WMD have been used and would have been used had we
not taken out Saddam and his minions. To deny that is to be an idiot.
bush_screws_the_troops
>Brad Filippone wrote:
>> BushScrewstheTroops wrote:
>> : Mistaken, David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>>
>> : >William December Starr wrote:
>> : >> And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state is
>> : >> the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities with?
>> : >
>> : >Well that's obvious. Iraq.
>>
>> : There has been no war declared, however.
>>
>> : You err.
>>
>> I guess bombing the hell out them is peace then?
>
>
>You mean the action that removed a disgusting, abusive, dangerous
>regieme so that it can no longer threaten the world and its own
>people?
That regime was installed by those participating in the Bush mob.
Do you support them because you look forward to more of their
crimes in the future, too?
> And yes, WMD have been used and would have been used had we
>not taken out Saddam and his minions.
Why would anyone believe that?
>... to be an idiot...
That's how you end up a bushit.
bush_screws_the_troops
>BushScrewstheTroops wrote:
>: Mistaken, David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>: >William December Starr wrote:
>: >> And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state is
>: >> the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities with?
>: >Well that's obvious. Iraq.
>
>: There has been no war declared, however.
>
>: You err.
>
>I guess bombing the hell out them is peace then?
>
>Brad
You guess wrong.
It's a terrorist invasion by Bush.
How Icebreaker Got His Groove Back
"Relish" <relis...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3F48EE6C...@hotmail.com...
> How Icebreaker Got His Groove Back wrote:
> >>Another Slam Dunk. Will you marry me? ;-)
> >
> >
> > Sure. Why not? I could use a little relish on my weiner.
> >
> > And it's not as if I have any particular love for Bush or Republicans.
>
> Neither do I. I'm an ex-Dem myself and have never been a registered
> Rep. I consider myself a centrist and vote for the best person for
> the job, not the party platform.
Ex-Dem myself. Actually, a former die-hard liberal. Voted for Jesse in 1984.
Voted for Dukakis in '88. Voted for Perot in 1992. Didn't vote in 1996.
While I did vote for Bush in 2000, it was more of a vote against
Clinton/Gore than a vote for Bush. I guess I finally grew up and realized
that the permissive, liberal wing of the Democratic party was choking the
lifeblood out of this country and that the Democrats were nothing more than
a bunch of socialists hell bent on making more people dependent upon
government, not less. I managed to escape the brainwashing, only to see
Terry McAuliffe lead the party over a cliff.
I don't regret the decision I made. The way the Democrats tried to pick and
choose the parts of Florida they wanted for a recount embarassed me. Then
they cried about it ever since. They've never quite gotten over losing that
election and have yet to take any responsibility for allowing it to be so
close to begin with. Gore was not his own man and thus suffered under the
weight of Clinton's considerable baggage. They lost major strongholds in
2002 and yet still have not reflected in their rhetoric that they've learned
anything. They refuse to see the way the country is trending, and therefore,
will lose in 2004. I suspect the Democrats won't be able to get power back,
in the White House, until at least 2012.
nob...@junk.comcast.net
>> He did great with the 3 big problems Clinton left him. Peace, Properitry
>>and a Budget Surplus.
>I'd love for one of these Bush fans to list all the positive things he's
>done.
He got parts of the world that didn't already hate us to hate us?
Alan
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
**** Please use address alanh(at)min.net to reply via e-mail. ****
Posted using registered MR/2 ICE Newsreader #564
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Ryan Chang
>people? And yes, WMD have been used and would have been used had we
>not taken out Saddam and his minions. To deny that is to be an idiot.
Are you intentionally changing the subject (yet again) or just
misled? The liberal claim is not -- and has never been -- that Saddam has
never had WMDs. Quite the contrary; Saddam used them as far back as the
early 1980s against his own people. What's being debated is what he had
in 2003 and what the Adminstration knew at that point earlier this year.
Considering that Bush has claimed that Saddam wouldn't let
inspectors in, I am not convinced that he himself honestly knows why
America went to war...
lazarus
>In <amrgkv8s1vm6q6is1...@4ax.com>, on 08/24/03
> at 12:53 AM, lazarus <lazaru...@cox.net> said:
>
>>> He did great with the 3 big problems Clinton left him. Peace, Properitry
>>>and a Budget Surplus.
>
>>I'd love for one of these Bush fans to list all the positive things he's
>>done.
>
>He got parts of the world that didn't already hate us to hate us?
True, he is a uniter rather than a divider......
The True George Davidson
[correct stuff snipped]
I agree.
William December Starr
His Groove Back" <the_artist_forme...@yahoo.com> said:
>> What do you believe that Clinton did "to the American people" that
>> was illegal?
>
> In the LewinskyGate matter he lied to a grand jury...
Lying to the grand jury was illegal but it wasn't done "to the
American people."
>> Beating up on the military? Who do you think is doing that?
>>
>> And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state is
>> the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities with?
>
> You offer a loaded question, no, make that "bait". And I am
> refusing to take it.
You say that the Democratic candidates are "beating up on the
military," but you won't provide any details about this "beating up"
when questioned about it.
You say that the Democratic candidates are "beating up on... the
Commander-in-Chief during wartime," but you won't provide any details
about this "war" when questioned about it.
You say that the Democratic candidates are "being traditionally lax
on national security," but you won't provide any details about this
"laxness" when questioned about it.
Why is all that?
(Now if all you're talking about is the way that the Republican
machine is _painting_ the Democrats as being, without any reference
to actual reality, then I might agree with you.)
[ *snip* ]
> Democrats are determined to stab themselves over with many pains
> trying to tar and feather the current president as a liar (which is
> a huge laugh when we consider the unparalled dishonesty, lies and
> deceit from the previous administration),
What "unparalleled dishonesty, lies and deceit" would that be? Or is
this another topic that you don't want to provide any details about?
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
William December Starr
David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> said:
>> And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state
>> is the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities
>> with?
>
> Well that's obvious. Iraq.
Nope. That war's over.
Andrew Ryan Chang
>David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> said:
>
>>> And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state
>>> is the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities
>>> with?
>>
>> Well that's obvious. Iraq.
>
>Nope. That war's over.
Yeah. The Prez told us so, out on the flight deck of an aircraft
carrier so close to shore that a helicopter could easily have made the
trip despite White House BS on that subject, wearing a flight suit to
remind us of the National Guard duty he skipped out on and the lies he
told about when his jet's model was retired, standing on a carrier
artfully turned so the coast of San Diego wouldn't be visible in the
background.
... that's one of the longer sentences I've written. Sorry.
Relish
> Relish <relis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Brad Filippone wrote:
>>
>>>BushScrewstheTroops wrote:
>>>: Mistaken, David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>: >William December Starr wrote:
>>>: >> And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state is
>>>: >> the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities with?
>>>: >
>>>: >Well that's obvious. Iraq.
>>>
>>>: There has been no war declared, however.
>>>
>>>: You err.
>>>
>>>I guess bombing the hell out them is peace then?
>>
>>
>>You mean the action that removed a disgusting, abusive, dangerous
>>regieme so that it can no longer threaten the world and its own
>>people?
>
>
> That regime was installed by those participating in the Bush mob.
Who the fuck cares? It went wrong. It was bad. It had to go.
> Do you support them because you look forward to more of their
> crimes in the future, too?
God, you're an idiot.
>
>
>>And yes, WMD have been used and would have been used had we
>>not taken out Saddam and his minions.
>
>
> Why would anyone believe that?
Uh, because he USED them????
PLONK
Relish
Oh, my God, I think I've met my poltical twin :-)
Relish
> the US had them.
Okay, now you've gone beyond idiot.
PLONK
Relish
> In article <vkgglnd...@corp.supernews.com>, "How Icebreaker Got
> His Groove Back" <the_artist_forme...@yahoo.com> said:
>
>
>>>What do you believe that Clinton did "to the American people" that
>>>was illegal?
>>
>>In the LewinskyGate matter he lied to a grand jury...
>
>
> Lying to the grand jury was illegal but it wasn't done "to the
> American people."
Yeah it was, when he made that pathetically arrogant speech.
Relish
> William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> said:
>>
>>
>>>>And why do you believe that this is "wartime?" What nation-state
>>>>is the United States currently at engaged in armed hostilities
>>>>with?
>>>
>>>Well that's obvious. Iraq.
>>
>>Nope. That war's over.
>
>
> Yeah. The Prez told us so, out on the flight deck of an aircraft
> carrier so close to shore that a helicopter could easily have made the
> trip despite White House BS on that subject, wearing a flight suit to
> remind us of the National Guard duty he skipped out on and the lies he
> told about when his jet's model was retired, standing on a carrier
> artfully turned so the coast of San Diego wouldn't be visible in the
> background.
Wow, you guys really are scared.
The Sentinel
news:3f492110$1$nynaurff$mr2...@news.md.comcast.giganews.com...
> In <amrgkv8s1vm6q6is1...@4ax.com>, on 08/24/03
> at 12:53 AM, lazarus <lazaru...@cox.net> said:
>
> >> He did great with the 3 big problems Clinton left him. Peace,
Properitry
> >>and a Budget Surplus.
>
> >I'd love for one of these Bush fans to list all the positive things he's
> >done.
>
> He got parts of the world that didn't already hate us to hate us?
Such as?
bush_screws_the_troops
Thanks.
There's no way 9/11 could have happened without Bush
clearing the way for it and keeping the warnings secret.
Little old grannies would have whacked the hijackers with
their walkers rather than let those planes be used that way.
ruud
> web...@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote in message news:<CPmdnZh0oeq...@comcast.com>...
> > In article <dbd0d335.03082...@posting.google.com>,
> > cassa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > >What is your opinion of George W. Bush? Is he a good president?
> >
> > He's a great president, given all the problems he inherited from Clinton.
Hilarious.
> He is doing a great job for america.
So that's two brainwashed by the conservative media so far... any more??
Or are you both corporate moguls?
trickster
> Here is the thing.. anyone on this group that thinks the President has
> anything to do with anything this country does is insane. All the President
> is and has been for years is a figurehead.. a public speaker for whatever
> special interest groups paid the most to finance his campaign.
>
> Nothing bothers me more than Democrats and Republicans bitching about who
> makes the US better because the fact is? Both parties suck the fucking shaft
> at running this country. Period. Move along.
>
> G-Money
> -My one serious post for the decade.
You're right both (dem and rep) suck! They prostitute themselves to
the highest corporate bidder. Then the system wants people to believe
that its all about these two factions. Anyone who has read
Machiavelli would see what going on. He wrote something to the effect
where you keep two factions fighting, the people will focus on it, so
the ones who are in charge and keep on with the business that they
want to do (i.e. corporations).
bush_screws_the_troops
[re: That regime was installed by those participating in the Bush mob.]
>Who the fuck cares?
Those who think. Why don't you?
>It went wrong. It was bad. It had to go.
Rumsfeld was shaking Saddam's hands as Saddam was killing people,
and you were fine with that then.
Hoping for even worse, now, aren't you.
That's what you'll get when you support those who make such problems.
>God, you're an idiot.
You say that because you believe God talks to Bush, don't you.
You'll believe anything, if you believe Saddam still had WMDs.
You gullible people sure are susceptible to being conned.
bush_screws_the_troops
>... really are scared...
That's how you got conned.
Get brave, get smart, get rid of Bush.
bush_screws_the_troops
>Oh, my God, I think I've met my poltical twin ...
You've mispelled "poltroonical" ...
It's your cowardice that got you cowed.
edje tha ninga
><devo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>... anyone on this group that thinks the President has
>>anything to do with anything this country does is insane...
>
>As compared to someone attempting to diagnose from misconstructions of posts ... ?
>
>
>If Bush had told the public about the warnings he received from other countries
>in advance of 9/11, the hijackers would have been tackled in the aisles, long
>before they could get to the first flight attendant, who would have been ready
>to disable them to prevent them from running up against the reinforced cabin
>door, precluding access to the the armed crew in the cockpit.
>
>
>PNAC wanted America attacked, so much they wrote of it. They have much
>influence over the Bush family, with its tradition of dealing with enemies of the
>USA such as the Nazis. The Poppy Bush CIA had even prepared a plan for
>the attack on US citizens on US soil, to incite the population into support of
>unjustified military activity: it's entitled "Operation Northwood".
>
>
>So Bush kept quiet about all the warnings, stopped the FBI from investigating
>the bin Ladens (Bush business associates as they were), stopped the drones from
>following Osama (making certain of his usability as the designated scapegoat), even
>stopped pilots from carrying sidearms, legally, in July 2001, then went off on his long
>record-breaking vacation. Stock market option transactions were made just before
>9/11/2001 which were based *specifically* on the crimes to come, but they weren't
>ordered by bin Laden. Then the US air defense system got stood down on 9/11.
>Bush immediately accused bin Laden, yet has never offered any evidence against
>him. Bush is killing witnesses, obstructing investigations, and taking advantage of
>those tragic deaths and injuries to promote his corrupt cronies' war and oil scams.
>
>
>Don't be duped: dump Dubya.
I think all this, and more, will come out in a really big book once
Bush is out of office, hopefully sooner than later.
I, for one, will be in line to get that book as soon as it is
released.
Andrew Ryan Chang
>"Andrew Ryan Chang" <arc...@sfu.ca> wrote in message
>> the recent executive order giving legislative carte
>> blanche to multinational oil companies in Iraq,
>
>What executive order?
#13303, "Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain
Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest".
A full PDF may be found at [1], or HTML at [2]. One non-American
analysis is at [3], though in recent weeks there have been quite a few
that you can look up for yourself.
[1] http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/executive_orders/2003.html
[2] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030522-15.html
[3] http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2003/08/17/stories/2003081700811400.htm
--
Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first
alphabetically, but because it's the standard. Everyone else loves ed
because it's ED!
-Patrick J. LoPresti
Linda Harms
the_artist_forme...@yahoo.com says...
>
> > What do you believe that Clinton did "to the American people" that
> > was illegal?
>
> In the LewinskyGate matter he lied to a grand jury...
How many US troops died as a result of Clinton's lies?
How many US troops have died (so far) as a result of Bush's lies?
--
Linda Harms
New York, NY
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Macbeth, Act 5 Scene 5
David Johnston
>
> In article <vkgglnd...@corp.supernews.com>,
> the_artist_forme...@yahoo.com says...
>
> >
> > > What do you believe that Clinton did "to the American people" that
> > > was illegal?
> >
> > In the LewinskyGate matter he lied to a grand jury...
>
> How many US troops died as a result of Clinton's lies?
>
> How many US troops have died (so far) as a result of Bush's lies?
>
Not a one. His "lies" didn't cause the conquest of Iraq.
Deathmunky
> >Don't be duped: dump Dubya.
>
> I think all this, and more, will come out in a really big book once
> Bush is out of office, hopefully sooner than later.
>
> I, for one, will be in line to get that book as soon as it is
> released.
It's been released. It's called "Fairy-tales for left wing losers".
Hank Gillette
Relish <relis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, now you've gone beyond idiot.
>
> PLONK
Keep plonking and you'll have no one to direct your wild ravings towards.
--
Hank Gillette
Robert L. Jefferson
a President can you be when you can't even pronounce on of the vital
words of the times "Nuclear" weapons? And how serious can you be when
you take orders from another politician who isn't even American? We
all know Sharon is Bush's puppeter. Want an example? Here a great
one. Pal. Prime Minister Abu Muhammad comes to DC, meets with Bush,
Our "esteemed" president (at the news conference that followed) comes
out and says "the building of the wall" (you guys know which wall)
"will be ceased." Soon after Bush meets with Sharon, and what do you
find out from Sharon's own words? Would you guess it, the wall will
continue to be build and will be completed. That's the exact opposite
of what Bush said. BTW while Sharon said this, Bush was on his right
side with a little smile. Like a five year old sucking on a lollypop.
tricks...@yahoo.com (trickster) wrote in message news:<f1ff6f4a.03082...@posting.google.com>...
z
Bush confident that there are still countries left to piss off
Monday, February 25, 2002
President George Bush told reporters today in the Rose Garden that he
was confident that many countries remain that we have not yet
offended. "Look at Botswana and New Caledonia. They don't hate us
yet." Added Bush, "It's not over, we still have a lot of hard work
ahead of us."
The DOD, NSA and CIA have been working round the clock to try to find
any remaining countries that have yet to pledge their everlasting
hatred for the United States and it's people. According to a CIA
spokesman, "We have been isolating what things each country holds in
the highest regard, so that we can systematically and publicly pledge
to destroy each one. Our top priority are countries with nuclear and
or chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction like Iraq, Iran
or South Korea. The more we can threaten them and make them feel like
they have no other option, but to retaliate, the more effective we
will be."
In an unrelated incident, a hard-of-hearing elderly man in Wisconsin
threw away a Korean-made axe he had purchased from Ace Hardware in
1995. "It's evil," he told his wife.
<http://www.thewiredpress.com/archives/briefs/bush_pisses.html>
Julian D.
'with us or against us.' Those countries against Bush have always
been weak on combatting terrorism. They're cowardly. And scared to
death the terrorists might get mad at them.
"Ah yes, we must mollify angry fanatics who seek our destruction
because otherwise .. they might get mad and seek our destruction."
- Ann Coulter 9/26/2002
JD
> So...we steal from other countries. And...we deserve what we get.
> Yep, I pegged you so well DG.
We do. On both counts. Of course, you have no prob with what wedo as
long as you have a cushy life at someone's expense.
-DG Porter
http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/benson081203.html
"Uday Hussein didn't need a phony study to comprehend Bush's lack
of "nuance." The London Sunday Telegraph recently reported that,
soon after the war began, Uday was deeply depressed. According to
the former director of Iraqi television quoted in the Telegraph,
the last words he heard Uday speak were these: "This time I think
the Americans are serious. Bush is not like Clinton. I think this is the end."
http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2003/073003p.htm
"On the tape, Hussein acknowledged the death of his sons Uday
and Qusay Hussein and called their deaths "good news" - which is
more than the Democrats have said." - Ann Coulter; July 31, 2003
Ubiquitous
: What we need is a brother in the White House..... maybe Colin
: Powell.... but Bush is alright and he's down with Colin Powell anyway.
: 'Bout time someone bust Sadamm Hussein ass anyway!
I'm not too keen on Powell, but Condaleesa Rice seems with it.
Ubiquitous
: In article <vkgglnd...@corp.supernews.com>,
: the_artist_forme...@yahoo.com says...
:> > What do you believe that Clinton did "to the American people" that
:> > was illegal?
:>
:> In the LewinskyGate matter he lied to a grand jury...
:
: How many US troops died as a result of Clinton's lies?
: How many US troops have died (so far) as a result of Bush's lies?
You seem to be a wee bit confused. Bush has never lied.
Clinton, on the other hand...
Andy Jakcsy
'Course not. He only cheats, steals, and kills, but never LIES. Whoever lies
should be SHOT, I daresay...
----
"You said I could have the day off."
"I'm sorry. I must have been lying."
--Erotica/Stripperella and Chief Stroganoff, Stripperella: The Wrath of Klinko
LCS30
djax...@aol.commentary (Andy Jakcsy) wrote:
>
> Ubiquitous troll-o-meterz:
>
> <<
> >In rec.arts.tv Linda Harms <onpe...@aol.com> wrote:
> >: In article <vkgglnd...@corp.supernews.com>,
> >: the_artist_forme...@yahoo.com says...
> >
> >:> > What do you believe that Clinton did "to the American people" that
> >:> > was illegal?
> >:>
> >:> In the LewinskyGate matter he lied to a grand jury...
> >:
> >: How many US troops died as a result of Clinton's lies?
> >: How many US troops have died (so far) as a result of Bush's lies?
> >
> >You seem to be a wee bit confused. Bush has never lied.
> >
> >>
>
> 'Course not. He only cheats, steals, and kills, but never LIES. Whoever lies
> should be SHOT, I daresay...
>
>
Yawn.
David L. Moffitt
Kalun D
Julian D. crayoned:
>>>>>I'd love for one of these Bush fans to list all the positive things he's
>>>>>done.
heh all you dittowad f*cks how come you can't answer this one?
>>>>
>>>>He got parts of the world that didn't already hate us to hate us?
>>>
>>>Such as?
>>
>>Bush confident that there are still countries left to piss off
>>Monday, February 25, 2002
>>President George Bush told reporters today in the Rose Garden that he
>>was confident that many countries remain that we have not yet
>>offended. "Look at Botswana and New Caledonia. They don't hate us
>>yet." Added Bush, "It's not over, we still have a lot of hard work
>>ahead of us."
yeah, that's why he's set the new world record for US pResident vacations
>>The DOD, NSA and CIA have been working round the clock to try to find
>>any remaining countries that have yet to pledge their everlasting
>>hatred for the United States and it's people. According to a CIA
>>spokesman, "We have been isolating what things each country holds in
>>the highest regard, so that we can systematically and publicly pledge
>>to destroy each one. Our top priority are countries with nuclear and
>>or chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction like Iraq, Iran
>>or South Korea. The more we can threaten them and make them feel like
>>they have no other option, but to retaliate, the more effective we
>>will be."
>>In an unrelated incident, a hard-of-hearing elderly man in Wisconsin
>>threw away a Korean-made axe he had purchased from Ace Hardware in
>>1995. "It's evil," he told his wife.
any bets he's a ditto monkey?
> 'with us or against us.'
who is "us" the bushonian cabal? the oil mongers? the war mongers? the
vote scammers? the consolidated corporate media monopoly? Or is it the
sheep (and ditto monkeys) pacified and indoctrinated by the orwellian
boob tube, after all 90 percent get there news from a TV media
controlled by only 6 giant conservative corporations. Keep repeating the
"liberal media" lie rush pig, it's working on the ditto monkeys.
> Those countries against Bush have always
> been weak on combatting terrorism.
you mean like the bushie cabal protecting their oil buddies in saudi?
After all 15 of the 911 perps were suposedly saudis. What's with those
censored pages in the 911 report?
you mean like countries who were hesitant to support oil/war mongers in
their unprovoked pre-emptive attack on a 3rd world country with a 400 to
one military advantage? I believe that's what the nuremberg trials and
geneva convention were all about, preventing pre-emptive wars?
> They're cowardly.
no cowardly is going AWOL in a Texas guard slot that was guaranteed to
never see the vietnam battlefield, and then sending troops to die for
his cronies oil war. And then doing a ball buffer strut in a flight suit
for the corporate media to screw the minds of sheople everywhere. What a
fucking phony.
> And scared to
> death the terrorists might get mad at them.
and hesitant to make lifetime enemies out of innocent civilians
>
> "Ah yes, we must mollify angry fanatics who seek our destruction
> because otherwise .. they might get mad and seek our destruction."
> - Ann Coulter 9/26/2002
Ah yes we must bomb innocents so we can create angry fanatics who will
seek our destruction, after all we need to have someone to fight in our
wars to support the corrupt military cia/drug oilmonger complex
> JD
>>So...we steal from other countries. And...we deserve what we get.
>>Yep, I pegged you so well DG.
>
> We do. On both counts. Of course, you have no prob with what we do as
> long as you have a cushy life at someone's expense.
yeah, 3rd world blood for oil, so you ditto monkeys can drive from gas
station to gas station in your new record worst gas mileage SUV's.
> -DG Porter
> "Uday Hussein didn't need a phony study to comprehend Bush's lack
> of "nuance."
yeah bushie boys lack of anything except a village idiot look and a
cokehead fratboy smirk, that's very plain for anyone to comprehend
> Bush is not like Clinton. I think this is the end."
is that why Iraq is turning to shit and the bushonian cabal is calling
the UN? Starting to look like a second bushie cabal failure in Iraq.
Yeah it's the end of the usurper's pResidential term.
> "On the tape, Hussein acknowledged the death of his sons Uday
> and Qusay Hussein and called their deaths "good news" - which is
> more than the Democrats have said." - Ann Coulter; July 31, 2003
what's good about killing criminals without a trial?, I thought that's
what communists and Nazis did?, oh wait that's right Coulter IS a Nazi.
David L. Moffitt
"Kalun D" <bush...@911.con> wrote in message
news:3F504E72...@911.con...
:
:
: Julian D. crayoned:
:
: >>>>>I'd love for one of these Bush fans to list all the positive things
he's
: >>>>>done.
:
: heh all you dittowad f*cks how come you can't answer this one?
#1 He causes the sociofascist left to daily soil their Pampers!!! :o)
Tom
GMT you wrote:
<snip post>
1) Please do not cross-post alt.test with other non-test groups except
in the circumstances noted in the latest FAQ.
2) Non test posts to alt.test should have OT in the subject line.
Please bear these points in mind in the future please,
Much Appricated,
----
Tom, Creater of the alt.test FAQ.
alt.test FAQ Webpage: www.atfaq.uni.cc - 25/07 Update Picture Gallery
now added
alt.test Forum: www.atforum.uni.cc - More users needed ! Feel free to
sign up and post some messages!
Herbal
Tom <alt_te...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hello djax...@aol.commentary (Andy Jakcsy), on 30 Aug 2003 03:55:28
> GMT you wrote:
>
> <snip post>
>
> 1) Please do not cross-post alt.test with other non-test groups except
> in the circumstances noted in the latest FAQ.
>
>
STFU/FOAD loser!
Kalun D
N.W.A.R.
Mark
16:09:56 -0400 you typed the following:
>On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 16:00:58 +0100, Tom <alt_te...@yahoo.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>Hello djax...@aol.commentary (Andy Jakcsy), on 30 Aug 2003 03:55:28
>>GMT you wrote:
>>
>><snip post>
>>
>>1) Please do not cross-post alt.test with other non-test groups except
>>in the circumstances noted in the latest FAQ.
>
Look gary why dont you just go elsewhere if your not interested in
going by the rules here. Tom has done a very good job with enforcing
the FAQ in the past and works damn hard here and he dose not need
idoits like you trying to make like worse for him. Just leave or
behave please.
Thanks,
Mark.
Andrew Ryan Chang
BS. One could cite all sorts of lies, including the whopper that
the US invaded because Saddam refused to allow weapons inspectors into
Iraq in 2003.
--
"A rising tide lifts all yachts"
Relish
He did refuse. For 8 months. While he hid or moved those weapons.
Then he let them in (quel surprise). It's amzing how so many people
can be so naive and would rather believe a murdering barbarian
dictator than their own President... just because of politics.
Disgusting.
Relish
> Relish <relis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Andrew Ryan Chang wrote:
>>
>>> BS. One could cite all sorts of lies, including the whopper that
>>>the US invaded because Saddam refused to allow weapons inspectors into
>>>Iraq in 2003.
>>>
>>
>>He did refuse. For 8 months. While he hid or moved those weapons.
>>Then he let them in (quel surprise). It's amzing how so many people
>>can be so naive and would rather believe a murdering barbarian
>>dictator than their own President... just because of politics.
>
>
That explains a lot. Ta-ta...
David Levy
> > Bush isn't my President. For one thing, I live in Canada.
> That explains a lot. Ta-ta...
Canada is a very nice country. If Dubya is re-"elected," I'll be
tempted to live there.
Relish
We'll miss you...
not.
David Levy
> > Canada is a very nice country. If Dubya is re-"elected,"
> > I'll be tempted to live there.
> We'll miss you...
>
> not.
1. Who is "we"? (On whose behalf was that statement made?)
2. On what basis do you arrive at the above conclusion? Why does it
seem unreasonable to you that my disapproval of one nation's leader
would provide incentive to relocate to a neighboring ally? Is it
indefensible (in your mind) to disagree with Bush, or does a hatred of
Canada fuel your apparent condemnation of my character?
3. Do you realize how silly and immature it is to insert "Wayne's
World" shtick into a political discussion?
Daniel Ray Giese
: Relish wrote:
:> > Canada is a very nice country. If Dubya is re-"elected,"
:> > I'll be tempted to live there.
:> We'll miss you...
:>
:> not.
: 1. Who is "we"? (On whose behalf was that statement made?)
Well he can include my behalf, for one ...
: 2. On what basis do you arrive at the above conclusion? Why does it
: seem unreasonable to you that my disapproval of one nation's leader
: would provide incentive to relocate to a neighboring ally? Is it
: indefensible (in your mind) to disagree with Bush, or does a hatred of
: Canada fuel your apparent condemnation of my character?
You misunderstand the statement. He doesn't hate Canada - he hates YOU :-)
(To be serious, a statement that one will move out of he country is
pedantic and meaningless - put up or shut up. Alec Baldwin still has not
left the country after W.'s first win. When a significant population does
start to relocate, and we determine the effects of that relocation, which I
infer could benefit the USA, then you have a discussion.)
: 3. Do you realize how silly and immature it is to insert "Wayne's
: World" shtick into a political discussion?
Oddly enough, Wayne's World was on TV. Your message (as well as mine) are
completely off-topic to rec.arts.tv.
Dan Giese
dr...@uwm.edu
bush_screws_the_troops
>Bush Screws the Troops wrote:
>><devo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>... anyone on this group that thinks the President has
>>>anything to do with anything this country does is insane...
>>
>>As compared to someone attempting to diagnose from misconstructions of posts ... ?
>>
>>
>>If Bush had told the public about the warnings he received from other countries
>>in advance of 9/11, the hijackers would have been tackled in the aisles, long
>>before they could get to the first flight attendant, who would have been ready
>>to disable them to prevent them from running up against the reinforced cabin
>>door, precluding access to the the armed crew in the cockpit.
>>
>>
>>PNAC wanted America attacked, so much they wrote of it. They have much
>>influence over the Bush family, with its tradition of dealing with enemies of the
>>USA such as the Nazis. The Poppy Bush CIA had even prepared a plan for
>>the attack on US citizens on US soil, to incite the population into support of
>>unjustified military activity: it's entitled "Operation Northwood".
>>
>>
>>So Bush kept quiet about all the warnings, stopped the FBI from investigating
>>the bin Ladens (Bush business associates as they were), stopped the drones from
>>following Osama (making certain of his usability as the designated scapegoat), even
>>stopped pilots from carrying sidearms, legally, in July 2001, then went off on his long
>>record-breaking vacation. Stock market option transactions were made just before
>>9/11/2001 which were based *specifically* on the crimes to come, but they weren't
>>ordered by bin Laden. Then the US air defense system got stood down on 9/11.
>>Bush immediately accused bin Laden, yet has never offered any evidence against
>>him. Bush is killing witnesses, obstructing investigations, and taking advantage of
>>those tragic deaths and injuries to promote his corrupt cronies' war and oil scams.
>>
>>
>>Don't be duped: dump Dubya.
>
>I think all this, and more, will come out in a really big book once
>Bush is out of office, hopefully sooner than later.
>
>I, for one, will be in line to get that book as soon as it is
>released.
May we learn from having allowed it to happen.
bush_screws_the_troops
There's no way all those Iraqis or the US troops would have
been killed in Iraq if Bush hadn't told his lies to get us there.
bush_screws_the_troops
>... It's called "Fairy-tales ...
You believed that the women and children of Iraq were
after you with nukes, didn't you.
David Levy
> > > > Canada is a very nice country. If Dubya is re-"elected,"
> > > > I'll be tempted to live there.
> > > We'll miss you...
> > >
> > > not.
> > 1. Who is "we"? (On whose behalf was that statement made?)
> Well he can include my behalf, for one ...
Well, I wouldn't expect to be missed by a stranger.
> > 2. On what basis do you arrive at the above conclusion? Why does
> > it seem unreasonable to you that my disapproval of one nation's
> > leader would provide incentive to relocate to a neighboring ally? Is
> > it indefensible (in your mind) to disagree with Bush, or does a hatred
> > of Canada fuel your apparent condemnation of my character?
> You misunderstand the statement. He doesn't hate Canada -
I was referring to this exchange:
Andrew Ryan Chang: "Bush isn't my President. For one thing, I live in
Canada."
Relish: "That explains a lot. Ta-ta..." (ignoring the entire
remainder of Andrew's post)
> he hates YOU :-)
Of course he does; I expressed disapproval of his exalted leader.
> To be serious, a statement that one will move out of he
> country is pedantic and meaningless - put up or shut up.
I stated that I would be *tempted* to relocate to Canada if Bush were
to serve a second term.
I recently visited Canada for the first time, and I believe that I
might enjoy living there. This, however, is not something that I'm
prepared to do at this time, nor can I definitively claim that I will
be prepared to do so in the near future.
The fact that the concept of spending another four years in a nation
whose president is Dubya renders me sick to my stomach would certainly
would provide a great deal of incentive.
> Alec Baldwin still has not left the country after W.'s first win.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/leave.htm
While not conclusively applying to Baldwin, your general comment is
valid.
> : 3. Do you realize how silly and immature it is to insert "Wayne's
> : World" shtick into a political discussion?
> Oddly enough, Wayne's World was on TV. Your message (as
> well as mine) are completely off-topic to rec.arts.tv.
This is true, but that's the newsgroup on which I've been reading the
thread. I didn't realize that you'd posted this response until I
noticed it on Google.
A better method of eliminating off-topic cross-posting is to send
one's initial reply to all of the newsgroups, while setting follow-ups
to only the germane one[s]. (and prominently noting this within the
message)
Ubiquitous
Here's a hint: When you use an example, you should use one that proves
your point.
--
======================================================================
ISLAM: Winning the hearts and minds of the world, one bomb at a time.
Ubiquitous
> (Maybe Cheney's holding back releasing the receipts...)
Wouldn't that be a hoot?
Ubiquitous
d_l...@lifeisunfair.net wrote:
>Canada is a very nice country. If Dubya is re-"elected," I'll be
>tempted to live there.
Promises, promises...
So when are all those Hollywood Elite moving?
--
======================================================================
ISLAM: Winning the hearts and minds of the world, one plane at a time.
David Levy
> > Canada is a very nice country. If Dubya is re-"elected,"
> > I'll be tempted to live there.
> Promises, promises...
Regarding this matter, I haven't promised anything.
And I see that you're still up to your old Followup-To header tricks.
Andrew Ryan Chang
>In article <bj3v4t$6h5$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca>, arc...@sfu.ca wrote:
>>Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>>>You seem to be a wee bit confused. Bush has never lied.
>>
>> BS. One could cite all sorts of lies, including the whopper that
>>the US invaded because Saddam refused to allow weapons inspectors into
>>Iraq in 2003.
>
>Here's a hint: When you use an example, you should use one that proves
>your point.
I did. You said that Bush has never lied, I made mention of one
of his many lies.
"And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he
wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request,
we decided to remove him from power, along with other nations, so
as to make sure he was not a threat to the United States and our
friends and allies in the region."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030714-3.html
If it wasn't such a serious matter, it would be hilarious to note
Kofi Annan's somewhat stunned expression as he listens to Bush drop that
last whopper in the video archive.
--
The degradation which most workers experience on the job is the sum of
assorted indignities which can be denominated as "discipline." Discipline
is what the factory and the office and the store share with the prison and
the school and the mental hospital. -- "THE ABOLITION OF WORK" by Bob Black
Rick
"Heights Below" <norma...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:457af811.0308...@posting.google.com...
> Terrible president who's sold our country to the highest bidder.
>
> Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a clue
> and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic policy.
Domestic policy don't mean squat if a nuke goes of in Manhattan.
Andrew Ryan Chang
>>
>> Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a clue
>> and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic policy.
>
>Domestic policy don't mean squat if a nuke goes of in Manhattan.
Well, that's yet another reason not to vote for Bush, the guy who
doesn't care about non-proliferation.
--
John Tesh: NBC's Counselor Troi.
FDR
"Rick" <sigm...@yahoo.comxxx> wrote in message
news:ZMidnU_i-vD...@comcast.com...
Or if two planes slam into the WTC and you sit in a classroom with a blank
look on your face.
Ubiquitous
: "Heights Below" <norma...@netscape.net> wrote:
:> Terrible president who's sold our country to the highest bidder.
:>
:> Hopefully, in the 2004 election, the American public will have a clue
:> and vote for someone who actually cares to tend to domestic policy.
:
: Domestic policy don't mean squat if a nuke goes of in Manhattan.
Word.
Now, why are you discussing this in this newsgroup?
z
Hey, he was 'petting his goat', and you know how hard it is to stop
until you're done, even if it takes 7 minutes.
Rick
"FDR" <_remove_spam_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mmPYc.1698$2s....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
Rick
"Ubiquitous" <web...@polaris.net> wrote in message
news:ch0g15$t2s$3...@news.utelfla.com...
qwerty
"Rick" <sigm...@yahoo.comxxx> wrote in message
Who had NOTHING to do with the WTC attack!
Nonymous
"Rick" <sigm...@yahoo.comxxx> wrote in message
But he sure had to spend a lot to do it, in effort, money, lives, etc. Oh,
wait. *he* didn't have to pay any of that.
Rick
"qwerty" <nos...@all.noway.com> wrote in message
news:RnvZc.14342$td.1...@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
Rick
"Rick" <sigm...@yahoo.comxxx> wrote in message news:...
letting the inspectors in.
Rick
"Rick" <sigm...@yahoo.comxxx> wrote in message
to hide.
Rick
"Nonymous" <no...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:D-KdnQrmMsr...@giganews.com...