Obama-Che 2008
Willielmus de Noers
--
W. de N.
"The greater the hold of government upon the life of the individual citizen, the greater the risk of war."
-- John Hospers
doofy
> http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28915&only&rss
>
I was going to go out on a limb and say the republican shills are
starting up the mill, but then I saw the Fox News logo, and knew I was
not out on a limb.
But where is Obama? Who says he has anything to do with this?
And what do you think this "information" tells you about Obama and his
ability to be president?
I mean, we just twice elected a draft-dodging cocaine-addict alcoholic.
And he has certainly led this country in an admirable fashion.
If you watch Fox, how to you react to their snearing derision style of
delivering unbiased news?
cajun-gwailo
> http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28915&only&rss
>
> --
> W. de N.
che might come in useful right about now. the incumbents are acting a
little TOO comfortable in their offices.....like maybe they are
thinking "doesn't matter who you nominate!"
metonymy
wrote:
>I mean, we just twice elected a draft-dodging cocaine-addict alcoholic.
> And he has certainly led this country in an admirable fashion.
>
>If you watch Fox, how to you react to their snearing derision style of
>delivering unbiased news?
I'm with Duh. This looks like the start of the Swiftboating of Obama.
not a sig
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> I was going to go out on a limb and say the republican shills are
> starting up the mill, but then I saw the Fox News logo, and knew I was
> not out on a limb.
Facts is facts no matter who reports 'em. The video is pretty
conclusively authentic.
> But where is Obama? Who says he has anything to do with this?
No one. This simply illustrates the kind of people who support him.
> And what do you think this "information" tells you about Obama and his
> ability to be president?
It illustrates the kind of people who support him, i.e., the people
he'll need to please to get elected.
> I mean, we just twice elected a draft-dodging cocaine-addict alcoholic.
> And he has certainly led this country in an admirable fashion.
Don't get me started on the draft-dodging cocaine-addict alcoholic.
He's neither better nor worse than the others.
> If you watch Fox, how to you react to their snearing derision style of
> delivering unbiased news?
I don't watch Fox. I don't remember where I saw the link, but it's to
a local Fox affiliate.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, metonymy <meto...@newsguy.com> proclaimed:
> I'm with Duh. This looks like the start of the Swiftboating of Obama.
Facts is facts no matter who reports them. Sometimes the truth hurts.
bbb
> Verily, on Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:17:12 -0600, in accordance with the
> prophecy, metonymy <meto...@newsguy.com> proclaimed:
>
>> I'm with Duh. This looks like the start of the Swiftboating of Obama.
>
> Facts is facts no matter who reports them. Sometimes the truth hurts.
>
GWB
<junk...@crankletters.com> wrote:
>che might come in useful right about now.
Why, you need somebody murdered?
doofy
> Verily, on Tue, 12 Feb 2008 13:49:19 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>
>>I was going to go out on a limb and say the republican shills are
>>starting up the mill, but then I saw the Fox News logo, and knew I was
>>not out on a limb.
>
>
> Facts is facts no matter who reports 'em. The video is pretty
> conclusively authentic.
Fox twists the "facts". Is there substantiation that this is actually
an Obama Campaign Headquarters? Besides the Obama sign?
>
>
>>But where is Obama? Who says he has anything to do with this?
>
>
> No one. This simply illustrates the kind of people who support him.
>
I'm sure there's people supporting the republican candidate that you
wouldn't want to claim either.
BR Y'at
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:40:22 -0800 (PST), cajun-gwailo
>
> >che might come in useful right about now.
>
> Why, you need somebody murdered?
A couple of years ago I had a student worker who wore a Che T-shirt up
here one day. I asked him if he knew who Che Guevara was. He had no
clue. Apparently, it's a fashion statement for some people. I think he
saw somebody on MTV wearing one. I did advise him not to go into the
coffee room w/ the shirt. In hindsight, maybe I shouldn't have said
anything. It would've been pretty funny to see what a couple of
conservative hawkish types (Korean War era) had to say about it. The
word 'meatgrinder' comes to mind. Those guys go nuts over stuff like
that. I just thought 'what a jerk', but I had to explain that some
folks are totally offended by it. So now I have to wonder how much
those campaign workers really know about Guevara.
doofy
> So now I have to wonder how much
> those campaign workers really know about Guevara.
If they're latinos, they probably know a lot more than the general populace.
When your feudal capitalist home country keeps you in grinding poverty,
and makes sure there are only two classes, poor and villa owners,
someone like Che looks pretty good.
Sort of reminiscent of the last 8 years.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
Do the videos look faked to you?
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, GWB <gwb...@eatel.net> proclaimed:
> >che might come in useful right about now.
>
> Why, you need somebody murdered?
Che couldn't help you much if he had to use his hands. They're in a
jar of formaldehyde on Fidel Castro's desk.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@notme.com> proclaimed:
> > Facts is facts no matter who reports 'em. The video is pretty
> > conclusively authentic.
>
> Fox twists the "facts". Is there substantiation that this is actually
> an Obama Campaign Headquarters? Besides the Obama sign?
Oh, please . . . please don't tell me you actually believe the whole
thing was fabricated by the local Fox affiliate. You don't really
believe that, do you?
> >>But where is Obama? Who says he has anything to do with this?
> >
> > No one. This simply illustrates the kind of people who support him.
>
> I'm sure there's people supporting the republican candidate that you
> wouldn't want to claim either.
You're absolutely right, Let me know if you find a McCain (or
whoever) campaign office with an Aryan Nations flag on the wall.
Willielmus de Noers
the prophecy, "BR Y'at" <pat....@yahoo.com> proclaimed:
> folks are totally offended by it. So now I have to wonder how much
> those campaign workers really know about Guevara.
I wonder that, too. That's one of the most recognizable faces around
these days, but a lot of (younger) people don't really know who Che
was. I've even encountered some older people who know who he was but
are in total denial about his murderous career. They actually think
he was a heroic liberator.
The flag is a Cuban flag, BTW. I'd like to know what they think
they're expressing.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> When your feudal capitalist home country keeps you in grinding poverty,
> and makes sure there are only two classes, poor and villa owners,
> someone like Che looks pretty good.
Oh, so the people in Cuba are not in grinding poverty any more? Come
on. The only people in Cuba who are better off under Castro are
Castro and his cronies. It ain't where I'd go for my medical care, I
can tell you that.
Half the world wanted the poor oppressed people of Rhodesia to throw
off their colonial chains and claim the prosperity that was rightfully
theirs, the prosperity that had been denied them by the "white
minority government." So they finally got their "one man, one vote."
One time. The result was Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, who solemnly
assures us that he only wants what's best for his people.
How did Steve Jobs become wealthy?
How did Steve Wozniak become wealthy?
How did Oprah Winfrey become wealthy?
How did William Lear become wealthy?
Etc., etc.
Even guys like George Lucas, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, etc.,
although their families were well-off, pretty much made it on their
own.
My father was a welder. Dropped out of school in the 8th grade,
worked all his life until he died at 60. My mother was a high-school
graduate who worked as a secretary most of her life. I managed to get
through college (a couple of times). I never had what I would call a
"good job," certainly never had what I'd call a "career," but I
managed to buy a house with a pool and a couple of cars along the way.
I'm retired, not in luxury, maybe not even "comfortably," but I manage
to keep the electricity on.
I could have done a lot better if I'd been willing to relocate and
leave Memphis, but (at that time) I wasn't. What a fool I was, in
retrospect. But it was my choice.
In short, my feudal capitalist home country hasn't kept me in grinding
poverty. I'm sure not rich, but I don't think I'm poor either. I
don't have a villa. Maybe I am poor and just don't know it.
For all its faults, I think we've got a pretty good country, but
unfortunately getting worse instead of better. Certainly better than
a very long list of others I could name. I wouldn't live in Cuba for
all the money in the world (wait a minute, that didn't come out
exactly right), or Zimbabwe, or even Canada.
Making the rich poor will not make the poor rich. This is not a
zero-sum game. There's plenty for everyone. All they've got to do is
go get it. If they don't want it bad enough, that's not my fault.
doofy
>> Fox twists the "facts". Is there substantiation that this is actually
>> an Obama Campaign Headquarters? Besides the Obama sign?
>
> Oh, please . . . please don't tell me you actually believe the whole
> thing was fabricated by the local Fox affiliate. You don't really
> believe that, do you?
Bill, I was very specific in what I posted. Quit twisting it.
I'm not saying it's fabricated. I'm saying it's not an Obama Campaign
Headquarters office. Thus the "twist".
Prove it was an Obama Campaign Headquarters office.
> You're absolutely right, Let me know if you find a McCain (or
> whoever) campaign office with an Aryan Nations flag on the wall.
I'm sure if the Democratic populace had the resources to scour the
nation, one could be found.
The Republicans, and Fox, rely on the fact that there are people out
there who only need a "red" flag waved in front of their face, and the
proper words supplied to them, and they will vote the way they are told.
Congratulations. You've found your place in life.
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:10:29 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>> When your feudal capitalist home country keeps you in grinding poverty,
>> and makes sure there are only two classes, poor and villa owners,
>> someone like Che looks pretty good.
>
> Oh, so the people in Cuba are not in grinding poverty any more? Come
> on. The only people in Cuba who are better off under Castro are
> Castro and his cronies. It ain't where I'd go for my medical care, I
> can tell you that.
Do you think the US embargo might have something to do with it?
>
> In short, my feudal capitalist home country hasn't kept me in grinding
> poverty. I'm sure not rich, but I don't think I'm poor either. I
> don't have a villa. Maybe I am poor and just don't know it.
If the Republicans had their way, this would be a feudal capitalist
country. Luckily, they can't use 9/11 forever to fuck us all.
>
> For all its faults, I think we've got a pretty good country, but
> unfortunately getting worse instead of better. Certainly better than
> a very long list of others I could name. I wouldn't live in Cuba for
> all the money in the world (wait a minute, that didn't come out
> exactly right), or Zimbabwe, or even Canada.
>
> Making the rich poor will not make the poor rich. This is not a
> zero-sum game. There's plenty for everyone. All they've got to do is
> go get it. If they don't want it bad enough, that's not my fault.
>
Preventing the rich from reaping untold profits by undercutting the
population would be helpful though.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> >> Fox twists the "facts". Is there substantiation that this is actually
> >> an Obama Campaign Headquarters? Besides the Obama sign?
> >
> > Oh, please . . . please don't tell me you actually believe the whole
> > thing was fabricated by the local Fox affiliate. You don't really
> > believe that, do you?
>
> Bill, I was very specific in what I posted. Quit twisting it.
>
> I'm not saying it's fabricated. I'm saying it's not an Obama Campaign
> Headquarters office. Thus the "twist".
>
> Prove it was an Obama Campaign Headquarters office.
It is very clear that it was paid for and staffed by volunteers in the
Obama campaign, and that it would soon be staffed by paid employees of
the Obama campaign. If that's not an Obama Campaign office, I don't
know what is.
Of course, if you're saying that if the office space wasn't selected,
rented, paid for and staffed by paid staff who are employees of the
"Obama for President" campaign, from day one, then it's not an Obama
campaign office . . . well, OK, then . . . I dunno . . .
The more I learn about this guy, the scarier it gets.
Here's his church:
"A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA."
What on earth does that mean?
bbb
I believe Benico del toro is playing che in an upcoming movie. purrrrrr.
he's almost as sexy as a young tommy lee jones.
expect the adulation to get worse.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> > Oh, so the people in Cuba are not in grinding poverty any more? Come
> > on. The only people in Cuba who are better off under Castro are
> > Castro and his cronies. It ain't where I'd go for my medical care, I
> > can tell you that.
>
> Do you think the US embargo might have something to do with it?
I don't see how. The embargo is so porous and there are so many
exceptions and loopholes that pretty much every other nation on earth
trades with Cuba. In fact, the US is one of the leading exporters to
Cuba.
Particularly since the US economy is in such a shambles (we keep
hearing), and everybody else's economy is booming (we keep hearing),
and the US has lost its place as a world economic power (we keep
hearing), it's hard for me to see how the embargo could have much of
an effect. It's more likely that the Cuban economic system is
fundamentally flawed.
I'd be interested to read some sort of an analysis of the practical
effect of the embargo. Maybe it does prevent US capital investment in
Cuba, but if that was allowed, then the rich would be the only ones
who could invest, and they'd grind the faces of the poor Cubans, and
we'd be right back where we started. Then again, one of the things
that started the embargo in the first place was the seizure of private
property by the Cuban government. The Castro regime can end the
embargo any time they want to. Just give back what they stole.
> > Making the rich poor will not make the poor rich. This is not a
> > zero-sum game. There's plenty for everyone. All they've got to do is
> > go get it. If they don't want it bad enough, that's not my fault.
>
> Preventing the rich from reaping untold profits by undercutting the
> population would be helpful though.
I guess it depends on your definition of "the rich" and "undercutting"
and "the population." I just can't envision the US economy in those
terms. Mexico, Haiti, Cuba, Venezuela, maybe.
I'd rather be poor in America than be rich in any of those countries.
NotMe
news:h544r3pp9d9vpuq68...@4ax.com...
| http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28915&only&rss
|
Second photo looks EXACTLY like the inside of the U-Store N Lock we just
unloaded all the junk our pack rat relatives left us.
Interesting the only light in the room seems to come under the roll up door
and the camera flash.
bbb
after reading this quick bio as a refresher, I can't see what the
war-guys would be so upset about. was it because he was a communist or
a marxist? what would they do with someone wearing a mao or lenin
image? i just don't get that knee-jerk reactionary single mindedness if
that's the reason.
http://www.time.com/time/time100/heroes/profile/guevara01.html
NotMe
| Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:02:04 -0800, in accordance with the
| prophecy, doofy <no...@notme.com> proclaimed:
|
| > > Facts is facts no matter who reports 'em. The video is pretty
| > > conclusively authentic.
| >
| > Fox twists the "facts". Is there substantiation that this is actually
| > an Obama Campaign Headquarters? Besides the Obama sign?
|
| Oh, please . . . please don't tell me you actually believe the whole
| thing was fabricated by the local Fox affiliate. You don't really
| believe that, do you?
|
| > >>But where is Obama? Who says he has anything to do with this?
| > >
| > > No one. This simply illustrates the kind of people who support him.
| >
| > I'm sure there's people supporting the republican candidate that you
| > wouldn't want to claim either.
|
| You're absolutely right, Let me know if you find a McCain (or
| whoever) campaign office with an Aryan Nations flag on the wall.
How much is it worth to you?
What if I show McCain shaking hands with Saddam Hussein? Adolph Hitler?
For the right price I can give you video of McCain hanging the Aryan Nations
flag with his own hands.
bbb
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 04:51:35 GMT, in accordance with the
> prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
>
>> Willielmus de Noers wrote:
>>> Verily, on Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:17:12 -0600, in accordance with the
>>> prophecy, metonymy <meto...@newsguy.com> proclaimed:
>>>
>>>> I'm with Duh. This looks like the start of the Swiftboating of Obama.
>>> Facts is facts no matter who reports them. Sometimes the truth hurts.
>>>
>> Videos never lie?
>
> Do the videos look faked to you?
>
But I felt the question had to posed.
metonymy
<libe...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>Facts is facts no matter who reports them. Sometimes the truth hurts.
It's a meaningless fact, publicizing it simply serves to create the
impression that Obama is a communist. Which is not a fact.
I suspect we could find counter examples among supporters of Bush /
McCain. But do we want to go down this road? I'd rather see
constructive criticism of Obama's policy proposals.
not a sig
bbb
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:19:54 -0600, in accordance with the
> prophecy, GWB <gwb...@eatel.net> proclaimed:
>
>>> che might come in useful right about now.
>> Why, you need somebody murdered?
>
> Che couldn't help you much if he had to use his hands. They're in a
> jar of formaldehyde on Fidel Castro's desk.
>
doofy
> But do we want to go down this road? I'd rather see
> constructive criticism of Obama's policy proposals.
>
Yeah, like THAT is going to happen.
bbb
doofy
> The more I learn about this guy, the scarier it gets.
Assuming you're actually learning anything about the guy. But, whatever
makes you comfortable.
bbb
I never see anything rational on policy, but I can tell you anything you
want to know about how osama was feeding britney drugs.
--
No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the
continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if promontory were, as well as if a manor
of thy friend's or of thine own were. Any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for
whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
bbb
Can you smell it? sniiiiffff. Ah. The ripe scent of political
animosities rearing their head on usenet.
Smells a bit like stale beer and armpits.
doofy
doofy
> Willielmus de Noers wrote:
>> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:59:20 -0800, in accordance with the
>> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>>>>> Fox twists the "facts". Is there substantiation that this is
>>>>> actually an Obama Campaign Headquarters? Besides the Obama sign?
>>>> Oh, please . . . please don't tell me you actually believe the whole
>>>> thing was fabricated by the local Fox affiliate. You don't really
>>>> believe that, do you?
>>> Bill, I was very specific in what I posted. Quit twisting it.
>>>
>>> I'm not saying it's fabricated. I'm saying it's not an Obama
>>> Campaign Headquarters office. Thus the "twist".
>>>
>>> Prove it was an Obama Campaign Headquarters office.
>>
>> It is very clear that it was paid for and staffed by volunteers in the
>> Obama campaign, and that it would soon be staffed by paid employees of
>> the Obama campaign. If that's not an Obama Campaign office, I don't
>> know what is.
>>
>> Of course, if you're saying that if the office space wasn't selected,
>> rented, paid for and staffed by paid staff who are employees of the
>> "Obama for President" campaign, from day one, then it's not an Obama
>> campaign office . . . well, OK, then . . . I dunno . . .
The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack
Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign.
bbb
Burrrrn
One (non-political) thing that seems to stand out about this man is that
he isn't fat. Kinda sad that it would be an exception. I recall that
bush was trim when he started, but the man is such a moron it was easy
to overlook.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
> after reading this quick bio as a refresher, I can't see what the
> war-guys would be so upset about. was it because he was a communist or
> a marxist?
That's part of it, and (IMHO) more than enough reason to despise him.
But it's also because he was a vicious psychopath who was personally
responsible for numerous murders.
> http://www.time.com/time/time100/heroes/profile/guevara01.html
Without doubt, the most flattering portrait of a psychopathic murderer
I've ever read. But consider the source, as they say.
His supposedly fearless last words ("Shoot, coward, you're only going
to kill a man") were more likely something closer to , "Do not shoot!
I am Che Guevara and worth more to you alive than dead."
While he was in charge of the La Cabaña Fortress prison, he oversaw
the extrajudicial execution of perhaps as many at 500 people. He is
quoted as saying, "I don't need proof to execute a man, I only need
proof that it's necessary to execute him."
There's plenty more, but nothing would convince the useful idiots on
the left (including those in the Obama campaign) that the Time
magazine biographical sketch is nonsense.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, metonymy <meto...@newsguy.com> proclaimed:
> It's a meaningless fact, publicizing it simply serves to create the
> impression that Obama is a communist. Which is not a fact.
I'm not so sure. But I doubt that even those who put up the flags are
communists in the literal sense. I think they're more likely just
naive, misguided, intellectually shallow zealots who have no idea what
communism (or capitalism, or fascism, or any other -ism) actually is.
> I suspect we could find counter examples among supporters of Bush /
> McCain. But do we want to go down this road? I'd rather see
> constructive criticism of Obama's policy proposals.
I'd rather see someone else running.
But his proposals are the usual big-government, soak-the rich,
increase spending, concentrate-more-power crap we've heard before.
bbb
the time piece was the first link that seemed to have any substance.
How many people are being held at gitmo? I hear they are going to start
executing people.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> > http://www.tucc.org/about.htm
> >
> > "A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA."
> >
> > What on earth does that mean?
> >
>
> http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/government/a/obama_church.htm
From the link:
-------------------------------
It is true that Barack Obama belongs to Chicago's Trinity United
Church of Christ, which he joined in the early 1980s. It is also true
that TUCC describes itself as "unashamedly black," and as having a
"non-negotiable commitment to Africa."
It is not true, however, that one must be black in order to attend.
---------------------------------
Nobody said it was.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> >> Of course, if you're saying that if the office space wasn't selected,
> >> rented, paid for and staffed by paid staff who are employees of the
> >> "Obama for President" campaign, from day one, then it's not an Obama
> >> campaign office . . . well, OK, then . . . I dunno . . .
>
> The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack
> Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign.
When the staff paid by the Obama campaign moves in, will it be an
"official headquarters for his campaign" then?
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
> > http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/government/a/obama_church.htm
>
> Burrrrn
Except for the fact that it is true that Barack Obama belongs to
Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, which describes itself as
"unashamedly black," and as having a "non-negotiable commitment to
Africa."
The apologist can claim "that's not racist" all they want, I suppose.
doofy
I'm sorry, but Che Guevera has nothing to do with me. The only brush
I've had with him is the movie "Motorcycle Diaries", which was actually
not a bad movie.
But, you now have a reason to paint the ENTIRE Democratic voting
populace, and this candidate, as Marxists.
I hope at least you're tired from all your effort.
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:09:16 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>>> http://www.tucc.org/about.htm
>>>
>>> "A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA."
>>>
>>> What on earth does that mean?
>>>
>> http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/government/a/obama_church.htm
>
> From the link:
>
> -------------------------------
> It is true that Barack Obama belongs to Chicago's Trinity United
> Church of Christ, which he joined in the early 1980s. It is also true
> that TUCC describes itself as "unashamedly black," and as having a
> "non-negotiable commitment to Africa."
>
> It is not true, however, that one must be black in order to attend.
> ---------------------------------
>
> Nobody said it was.
>
An email on that site said that, and since the author of the email is
conservative, and your are too, then you must have written it. ;-)
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:21:28 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>>>> Of course, if you're saying that if the office space wasn't selected,
>>>> rented, paid for and staffed by paid staff who are employees of the
>>>> "Obama for President" campaign, from day one, then it's not an Obama
>>>> campaign office . . . well, OK, then . . . I dunno . . .
>> The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack
>> Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign.
>
> When the staff paid by the Obama campaign moves in, will it be an
> "official headquarters for his campaign" then?
>
When pigs fly, will we need wide brim hats?
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:24:09 GMT, in accordance with the
> prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
>
>>> http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/government/a/obama_church.htm
>> Burrrrn
>
> Except for the fact that it is true that Barack Obama belongs to
> Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, which describes itself as
> "unashamedly black," and as having a "non-negotiable commitment to
> Africa."
>
> The apologist can claim "that's not racist" all they want, I suppose.
>
To tell the truth, I don't like that church manifesto either. But we've
seen enough of the Republican agenda, and enough Clintons.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> > But do we want to go down this road? I'd rather see
> > constructive criticism of Obama's policy proposals.
>
> Yeah, like THAT is going to happen.
From the Obama campaign website (I hope that's "official" enough):
OBAMA calls for strengthening federal hate crimes legislation and
reinvigorating enforcement at the Department of Justice's Criminal
Section.
RESPONSE: Great. Pass another federal law.
I oppose hate crime statutes. They are selectively applied. A crime
is a crime, regardless of the motivation. If we are going to punish
people based on what they were "thinking," that's a slippery slope.
OBAMA wants to ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement
agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police
departments to prohibit the practice.
RESPONSE: Great. Pass another federal law and give away more money.
Where I live, we often hear radio/TV descriptions of perpetrators of
crimes; "the suspect is a male, 5'10", 180 lbs, wearing a red shirt."
"Was he white or black?" "I didn't notice . . . that might be racial
profiling."
If the TSA doesn't take a closer look at an olive-skinned male, 28
years old, wearing a beard and a burnoose, but strip-searches Grandma
because they're strip-searching every 10th person and she's #10,
there's something wrong with that.
Certain characteristics (yes, including race) are relevant in the
investigation of crime. If I knew that a perpetrator was a male black
20 years old driving a blue car, shouldn't I be allowed to stop male
blacks driving blue cars but ignore white females driving blue cars?
Or should I be forbidden from doing so because it would be "racial
profiling?"
Oh, the statute would never be interpreted THAT way. Sure. Trust the
government on that.
Don't ever doubt it. It would.
OBAMA: more federal programs on education, starting with "early care
and education for infants." More money for Head Start, more money for
child care, more money, more money, more money for [fill in the
blank], blah blah, yadda yadda, the thing the thing the thing.
RESPONSE: Great. More federal laws, more federal spending.
The federal government should get out of the education business. It
never should have gotten into it in the first place.
I guess I could go through the rest of it, but it wouldn't make any
difference. Pretty much everything Obama espouses involves more
federal laws, more federal spending, more federal control, all of
which I vehemently oppose.
If McCain espoused it, I'd still be opposed to it.
If Hillary espoused it, I'd still be opposed to it.
If Ron Paul espoused it, I'd still be opposed to it. But I would also
know that Ron Paul had suddenly gone insane.
That's why I'll probably vote Libertarian in November. Obama,
Hillary, McCain, all the rest of them are the opposite of
libertarians.
But I realize that there are some people who just love the idea of
more federal laws, more federal spending, more federal control, and
see no problem at all with that.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on that.
Maybe that's not "constructive" enough, but I see nothing constructive
in what Obama stands for.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
> How many people are being held at gitmo? I hear they are going to start
> executing people.
That's not what I hear. I hear they're going to start trying people,
under the law, in accordance with due process . . . which Che did not
do. He just decided that certain people needed to be executed, and
executed them,
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> But, you now have a reason to paint the ENTIRE Democratic voting
> populace, and this candidate, as Marxists.
That's not what I'm doing. I'm suggesting that the Marxists have
chosen the candidate they like the best, and it's Obama.
doofy
shut up.
metonymy
wrote:
I am an optimist in this regard,
not a sig
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:58:40 GMT, in accordance with the
> prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
>
>> How many people are being held at gitmo? I hear they are going to start
>> executing people.
>
> That's not what I hear. I hear they're going to start trying people,
> under the law, in accordance with due process . . . which Che did not
> do. He just decided that certain people needed to be executed, and
> executed them,
>
Maybe they needed killin'.
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:20:25 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>> But, you now have a reason to paint the ENTIRE Democratic voting
>> populace, and this candidate, as Marxists.
>
> That's not what I'm doing. I'm suggesting that the Marxists have
> chosen the candidate they like the best, and it's Obama.
>
Which other viable candidate do you think they should have chosen? They
probably would have gone with Richardson had it been his turn.
This support is based on race. They just happen to be flying an
annoying flag.
doofy
Well, I need my eyes checked. Do you have any openings?
metonymy
<libe...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:58:40 GMT, in accordance with the
>prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
>
>> How many people are being held at gitmo? I hear they are going to start
>> executing people.
>
>That's not what I hear. I hear they're going to start trying people,
>under the law, in accordance with due process . . . which Che did not
>do. He just decided that certain people needed to be executed, and
>executed them,
Military tribunals, secret trials, special rules. It's not a fair
trial unless it's held in a regular US court, with the press attending
and the accused are given competent counsel.
The US is a big rich country we can afford this. If these guys are
executed afyer secret trials, it will be yet another stain on US honor
by the current administration.
By the way, if these guys are guilty, I'm in favor of the death
penelty. But I'd like to see a fair trial.
not a sig
Willielmus de Noers
"Americans like to talk about (or be told about) Democracy but, when
put to the test, usually find it to be an 'inconvenience.' We have
opted instead for an authoritarian system *disguised* as a Democracy.
We pay through the nose for an enormous joke-of-a-government, let it
push us around, and then wonder how all those assholes got in there."
-- Frank Zappa
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> To tell the truth, I don't like that church manifesto either. But we've
> seen enough of the Republican agenda, and enough Clintons.
Unless the alternative is even worse, which it is. Much, much worse.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> > That's not what I hear. I hear they're going to start trying people,
> > under the law, in accordance with due process . . . which Che did not
> > do. He just decided that certain people needed to be executed, and
> > executed them,
>
> Maybe they needed killin'.
That defense is only valid within the borders of the former
Confederacy.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> This support is based on race. They just happen to be flying an
> annoying flag.
I think you might be onto something there.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, metonymy <meto...@newsguy.com> proclaimed:
> >> How many people are being held at gitmo? I hear they are going to start
> >> executing people.
> >
> >That's not what I hear. I hear they're going to start trying people,
> >under the law, in accordance with due process . . . which Che did not
> >do. He just decided that certain people needed to be executed, and
> >executed them,
>
> Military tribunals, secret trials, special rules. It's not a fair
> trial unless it's held in a regular US court, with the press attending
> and the accused are given competent counsel.
>
> The US is a big rich country we can afford this. If these guys are
> executed afyer secret trials, it will be yet another stain on US honor
> by the current administration.
>
> By the way, if these guys are guilty, I'm in favor of the death
> penelty. But I'd like to see a fair trial.
So would I. Let's see how it plays out before we start accusing the
government of executing people secretly and arbitrarily like Che did.
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:24:22 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>> To tell the truth, I don't like that church manifesto either. But we've
>> seen enough of the Republican agenda, and enough Clintons.
>
> Unless the alternative is even worse, which it is. Much, much worse.
>
Don't vote for him.
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:09:21 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>> This support is based on race. They just happen to be flying an
>> annoying flag.
>
> I think you might be onto something there.
>
At least you didn't say "I think you might be on something there."
doofy
> So would I. Let's see how it plays out before we start accusing the
> government of executing people secretly and arbitrarily like Che did.
I think you have to admit that it's somewhat of a smoking gun that
Cheney begins with Che.
doofy
Something tells me that, if a few more of these things surface, the
Super Delegates are going to put Hilary in the Ovary Office.
Molesworth
<d9308f18-ae24-420e...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
"BR Y'at" <pat....@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 13, 12:19 am, GWB <gwb3...@eatel.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:40:22 -0800 (PST), cajun-gwailo
> >
> > <junkm...@crankletters.com> wrote:
> > >che might come in useful right about now.
> >
> > Why, you need somebody murdered?
>
> A couple of years ago I had a student worker who wore a Che T-shirt up
> here one day. I asked him if he knew who Che Guevara was. He had no
> clue. Apparently, it's a fashion statement for some people. I think he
> saw somebody on MTV wearing one. I did advise him not to go into the
> coffee room w/ the shirt. In hindsight, maybe I shouldn't have said
> anything. It would've been pretty funny to see what a couple of
> conservative hawkish types (Korean War era) had to say about it. The
> word 'meatgrinder' comes to mind. Those guys go nuts over stuff like
> that. I just thought 'what a jerk', but I had to explain that some
> folks are totally offended by it. So now I have to wonder how much
> those campaign workers really know about Guevara.
A few years ago (post 1991 anyway) there was a fashion house in London
selling T-shirts and dresses carrying CCCP and a star..
--
Molesworth
Molesworth
Willielmus de Noers <libe...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:10:29 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
> > When your feudal capitalist home country keeps you in grinding poverty,
> > and makes sure there are only two classes, poor and villa owners,
> > someone like Che looks pretty good.
>
> Oh, so the people in Cuba are not in grinding poverty any more? Come
> on. The only people in Cuba who are better off under Castro are
> Castro and his cronies. It ain't where I'd go for my medical care, I
> can tell you that.
Being British, I thought I'd pop into Cuba and have a look at the
property market there (before the rush when Castro pops his clogs) but
my son went there last August, so I asked him to have a look for me.
His reply was 'You never, never, never want to buy anything in Cuba. The
place is falling apart, except for the new state buildings which all
look like warehouses. There is nothing worth anything in Cuba'.
Which I thought rather harsh. Because if the country is in such a shit
state, then property will be cheap as chips atm.
Only problem is, will I live long enough to enjoy the return on the
investment?
--
Molesworth
bbb
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:14:38 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>>> But do we want to go down this road? I'd rather see
>>> constructive criticism of Obama's policy proposals.
>> Yeah, like THAT is going to happen.
>
> From the Obama campaign website (I hope that's "official" enough):
>
> OBAMA calls for strengthening federal hate crimes legislation and
> reinvigorating enforcement at the Department of Justice's Criminal
> Section.
>
> RESPONSE: Great. Pass another federal law.
>
> I oppose hate crime statutes. They are selectively applied. A crime
> is a crime, regardless of the motivation. If we are going to punish
> people based on what they were "thinking," that's a slippery slope.
>
Now you're just making up stuff to get upset about.
No hate crime laws exists that punish people for what they are thinking.
Can't be bothered reading the rest after that opening.
bbb
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:20:25 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>> But, you now have a reason to paint the ENTIRE Democratic voting
>> populace, and this candidate, as Marxists.
>
> That's not what I'm doing. I'm suggesting that the Marxists have
> chosen the candidate they like the best, and it's Obama.
>
party as the one they like the best.
bbb
LOLOL you're a clever little prick.
bbb
Speaking of ovaries, I wonder if Hilary is still fertile? Just think -
a pregnant president.
metonymy
wrote:
>> We'll just have to agree to disagree on that.
>>
>> Maybe that's not "constructive" enough, but I see nothing constructive
>> in what Obama stands for.
>>
>
> shut up.
I see it as a matter balance. I think we are best served by centrist
policies, but the last 8 years has pushed us far to the right. We
need a sharp tug to the left to get us back to the center.
This is a superficial kind of analysis, but it works for me.
not a sig
doofy
That would require having sex.
doofy
Take back that "little" part.
doofy
That doesn't take a great leap.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> >> To tell the truth, I don't like that church manifesto either. But we've
> >> seen enough of the Republican agenda, and enough Clintons.
> >
> > Unless the alternative is even worse, which it is. Much, much worse.
>
> Don't vote for him.
Count on it. Probably not McCain either.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
> > I think you might be onto something there.
>
> At least you didn't say "I think you might be on something there."
No need to point out the obvious.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
Plus, I've never seen them together.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
I've been wondering sort of the same thing. Would the Clinton camp
launch one of their famous politics-of-personal-destruction dirty
tricks against Obama, with that outcome in mind?
Or vice versa?
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, Molesworth <ukm...@bellsouth.net> proclaimed:
> Being British, I thought I'd pop into Cuba and have a look at the
> property market there (before the rush when Castro pops his clogs) but
> my son went there last August, so I asked him to have a look for me.
>
> His reply was 'You never, never, never want to buy anything in Cuba. The
> place is falling apart, except for the new state buildings which all
> look like warehouses. There is nothing worth anything in Cuba'.
>
> Which I thought rather harsh. Because if the country is in such a shit
> state, then property will be cheap as chips atm.
>
> Only problem is, will I live long enough to enjoy the return on the
> investment?
Or will some other collectivist thug come along and nationalize
everything again, including your property?
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
> No hate crime laws exists that punish people for what they are thinking.
In fact, that's exactly what hate crime laws do punish -- what people
were thinking while they were committing the crime, in addition to
punishing them for the crime itself.
> Can't be bothered reading the rest after that opening.
Bottom line: More federal government programs, more federal spending,
more federal government control, higher taxes.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, metonymy <meto...@newsguy.com> proclaimed:
> I see it as a matter balance. I think we are best served by centrist
> policies, but the last 8 years has pushed us far to the right.
No, we didn't! Big government spending, huge deficits, homeland
security surveillance, all the things we've all bitched about on this
newsgroup that happened during the Bush administration -- none of
those things represent true conservative values, and certainly not
true libertarian values. Conservatives/libertarians have come to hate
Bush for his betrayal of what we hired him to do, and are wary of
McCain because he's no better, and find Obama and Hillary completely
unacceptable. Bad as it's become, it can only get worse no matter who
wins.
I want a smaller, less expensive, less intrusive, less powerful, less
imperialistic federal government. That sure isn't Bush, nor any of
the others.
Willielmus de Noers
prophecy, Curtis <Cur...@bacd.fake> proclaimed:
> The President needs to be a Republican to offset the Democrat Congress.
There's a lot of merit in that.
Gridlock is good. A stalemate between the executive and the
legislative branches is good. Partisan bickering and posturing while
not actually doing anything is good. A "do-nothing Congress" that
fails to meet most of its legislative goals is a good thing.
In fact, the baseball steroid investigation, stupid as it is, might
even be a good thing since it keeps the participants occupied instead
of on the floor of Congress spending more money, or passing one more
stupid law, or doing some real damage.
bbb
> prophecy, Molesworth <ukm...@bellsouth.net> proclaimed:
>
>> Being British, I thought I'd pop into Cuba and have a look at the
>> property market there (before the rush when Castro pops his clogs) but
>> my son went there last August, so I asked him to have a look for me.
>>
>> His reply was 'You never, never, never want to buy anything in Cuba. The
>> place is falling apart, except for the new state buildings which all
>> look like warehouses. There is nothing worth anything in Cuba'.
>>
>> Which I thought rather harsh. Because if the country is in such a shit
>> state, then property will be cheap as chips atm.
>>
>> Only problem is, will I live long enough to enjoy the return on the
>> investment?
>
> Or will some other collectivist thug come along and nationalize
> everything again, including your property?
>
are merely visitors on this earth. The native Indians got that right.
--
No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the
continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if promontory were, as well as if a manor
of thy friend's or of thine own were. Any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for
whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
bbb
> prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
>
>> No hate crime laws exists that punish people for what they are thinking.
>
> In fact, that's exactly what hate crime laws do punish -- what people
> were thinking while they were committing the crime, in addition to
> punishing them for the crime itself.
How on earth did you arrive at that conclusion? Seriously, your logic
is nucking futs.
>
>> Can't be bothered reading the rest after that opening.
>
> Bottom line: More federal government programs, more federal spending,
> more federal government control, higher taxes.
>
This is why voting counts.
cajun-gwailo
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:24:09 GMT, in accordance with the
> prophecy, bbb <buggerbuggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
>
> > >http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/government/a/obama_church.htm
>
> > Burrrrn
>
> Except for the fact that it is true that Barack Obama belongs to
> Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, which describes itself as
> "unashamedly black," and as having a "non-negotiable commitment to
> Africa."
>
> The apologist can claim "that's not racist" all they want, I suppose.
>
> --
lotsa white folks in africa. lotsa non jews in israel. losta others
everywhere.
cajun-gwailo
>> > How many people are being held at gitmo? I hear they are going to start
> > executing people.
>
> That's not what I hear. I hear they're going to start trying people,
> under the law, in accordance with due process . .
Come on, bill, there is no law that covers the situation @ gitmo, and
no one there has received due process.
cajun-gwailo
, higher taxes.
>
> --
gonna have to pay for the disaster of the last 7 years somehow.
cajun-gwailo
>
> In fact, the baseball steroid investigation, stupid as it is, might
> even be a good thing since it keeps the participants occupied instead
> of on the floor of Congress spending more money, or passing one more
> stupid law, or doing some real damage.
>
it also prevents them from sending the current administration to jail.
metonymy
<libe...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>No, we didn't! Big government spending, huge deficits, homeland
>security surveillance, all the things we've all bitched about on this
>newsgroup that happened during the Bush administration -- none of
>those things represent true conservative values,
Well, my take on that is that they represent actual conservative
values versus the rhetorical values.
When you want to know what someone believes watch what they do versus
what they say.
Btw, plenty of conservatives seem to fully aprove of the current
administration. Listen to Rush for a bit.
not a sig
metonymy
<libe...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:06:19 -0600, in accordance with the
>prophecy, Curtis <Cur...@bacd.fake> proclaimed:
>
>> The President needs to be a Republican to offset the Democrat Congress.
>
>There's a lot of merit in that.
Under many circunstances, I would agree. But not in the set we find
ourselves with today.
not a sig
BR Y'at
>>
> 'your' property? In a very real sense, you don't 'own' anything. We
> are merely visitors on this earth. The native Indians got that right.
>
Oh, get outta my newsgroup ... ya freeloadin' bastid! :-)
doofy
Truly. We've seen what a Republican president and Republican congress
can do to this country, and it ain't pretty. And I didn't hear you
complaining then.
doofy
> Willie's ed doers wrote:
>> Verily, on Thu, 14 Feb 2008 01:25:28 GMT, in accordance with the
>> prophecy, bbb <buggerbug...@bug.com> proclaimed:
>>> No hate crime laws exists that punish people for what they are thinking.
>>
>> In fact, that's exactly what hate crime laws do punish -- what people
>> were thinking while they were committing the crime, in addition to
>> punishing them for the crime itself.
>
> How on earth did you arrive at that conclusion? Seriously, your logic
> is nucking futs.
I think hate crime legislation is aimed at what people SAY while
committing a crime. At least it has been in the past. Otherwise, you
can't prove why they did something.
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:55:49 -0600, in accordance with the
> prophecy, metonymy <meto...@newsguy.com> proclaimed:
>
>> I see it as a matter balance. I think we are best served by centrist
>> policies, but the last 8 years has pushed us far to the right.
>
> No, we didn't! Big government spending, huge deficits, homeland
> security surveillance, all the things we've all bitched about on this
> newsgroup that happened during the Bush administration -- none of
> those things represent true conservative values, and certainly not
> true libertarian values. Conservatives/libertarians have come to hate
> Bush for his betrayal of what we hired him to do, and are wary of
> McCain because he's no better, and find Obama and Hillary completely
> unacceptable. Bad as it's become, it can only get worse no matter who
> wins.
>
> I want a smaller, less expensive, less intrusive, less powerful, less
> imperialistic federal government. That sure isn't Bush, nor any of
> the others.
>
But their votes have been hijacked because they will march in lock-step
to anyone who:
Legalizes faith-based, tax-payer paid aid programs.
Stands in the way of stem-cell research
And all the other quasi-religious mumbo jumbo they can come up with in
their think tanks to make unthinking brainwashed religious sheep pull
their lever on voting day.
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:48:55 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>>> So would I. Let's see how it plays out before we start accusing the
>>> government of executing people secretly and arbitrarily like Che did.
>> I think you have to admit that it's somewhat of a smoking gun that
>> Cheney begins with Che.
>
> Plus, I've never seen them together.
>
I would like to see them together.
doofy
> Verily, on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:47:58 -0800, in accordance with the
> prophecy, doofy <no...@would.nt.be.prudent> proclaimed:
>
>>> I think you might be onto something there.
>> At least you didn't say "I think you might be on something there."
>
> No need to point out the obvious.
>
At least you didn't say "No need to point out the oblivious."
metonymy
wrote:
>And I didn't hear you
>complaining then.
My postings on usenet do not comprise the totality of my opinions.
not a sig