MoveOn $87 Billion Mislead Ad a Roaring Success

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 11:46:38 AM12/4/03
to

From MoveOn.Org

We have some great news. Weeks of on-the-ground testing have shown that our "$87 Billion" TV ad successfully gets the truth out about President Bush and his policies. Our tests showed that an impressive 4% of viewers changed their positions to disfavor Bush after seeing the ad. Even experts who have been in this field for years were blown away.

So today, we're launching our first really big MoveOn Voter Fund ad buy. We’re putting the "$87 Billion" ad to work in several key swing states -- putting up close to two million dollars to make sure that every TV viewer these states sees the ad multiple times. With the results so far, we know that this ad buy will have a measurable impact. Now please help us continue to fund this effort by giving $25, $50, or $100, or whatever you can. Remember, every two dollars you contribute will be matched by another dollar from our major contributors.

You can watch the "$87 Billion" ad and contribute right now at:

http://www.moveonvoterfund.org

In the ad, we ask, "If there's money for Iraq, why isn't there money for America?" At a time when schools are being closed, prescription drugs are unaffordable for many Americans, and even police and emergency first responders don't have the funding they need, the message clearly hits home.

To our knowledge, no one's ever run an ad this deep so far before an election. But together, we have an opportunity to shape the political landscape now -- before President Bush and the Democratic candidates start attacking each other on TV and voters tune out. Our purpose is not to tell voters how to vote, but to educate them about Bush's policies and let them decide. Our tests show that the ads are working.

This campaign is a great example of how we'll get our message through -- by being nimbler, by being empirical, by being more strategic, and by speaking the truth. Our purpose is not to tell voters how to vote, but to educate them about Bush's policies and let them decide. Our tests show that the ads are working.

We'll also win by embracing democracy. The great power of this ad is that it comes directly from the MoveOn membership. On September 15th, we sent out a message inviting MoveOn members to share their thoughts on the $87 billion President Bush requested for Iraq in an ActionForum. Thousands of us participated, and the message came through loud and clear: folks weren't happy with the sum of money, especially given the service cuts here at home and the failure of President Bush's postwar policy.

Two days later, we launched a petition calling on Congress to vote against the $87 billion. Hundreds of thousands signed, and, working with the Win Without War coalition, over half a million of us contacted Congress by phone, email, or fax in the run-up to the vote. The huge energy from the grassroots prompted us to produce an ad along the same theme, aimed at getting press and influencing Congress' debate. The ad, which only ran in Washington DC and New York, got free play on most of the major TV networks, and certainly stiffened the backbones of the bill's opponents. But when the issue came down to a vote, we lost.

Legislators always like to think that once they've cast a vote that their constituents don't like, they can shuffle it under the rug. Together, we warned them that there would be repercussions for this vote. And now, for many of them, the ads are coming home. It's clear that Americans are deeply troubled by the Republican leadership's willingness to spend billions of dollars on the occupation in Iraq -- with most of that money going to big corporate friends like Halliburton -- while slashing services here at home. With this big buy, we'll push the message that started with a MoveOn ActionForum into the very center of American politics.

We'll need your help. Like every other ad we do, this one will be supported by our contributions. By pitching in $25, $50, or $100, you can help fund an ad that clearly works. You can view the ad and contribute securely online by credit card or check at:

http://www.moveonvoterfund.org/

For inspiring this potent ad, and for all the great work you do, thank you.

Sincerely,
--Carrie, Eli, James, Joan, Noah, Peter, Wes, and Zack
  The MoveOn.org Team
  December 4th, 2003

P.S. For some early press on this effort, check out this article from the LA Times, posted on the Detroit News web site in Michigan:
http://www.detnews.com/2003/politics/0312/04/a08-341607.htm

Politically Incorrect

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 1:11:43 PM12/4/03
to
Meanwhile, Back at the Crawford Ranch, WE is basking in 72% personal approval rating.
The Hate Bush Campaign won't work! Understand? Nah, don't think you will ever learn.
back to alternate class, DUMMY!
"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote in message news:OxJzb.225897$Dw6.801680@attbi_s02...

Who Cares?

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 1:35:30 PM12/4/03
to

"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote in message
news:OxJzb.225897$Dw6.801680@attbi_s02...

From MoveOn.Org

<snip>

MoveOn.org is making sure the President Bush is re-elected in '04 by
their smear tactics! Keep up the good work, boys and girls!

But then again,
Who Cares?


Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 1:42:41 PM12/4/03
to
Oh, yeah, the moron with the 30 second attention span forgets that the latest polls show 61%, not 72%, and that that represents a THIRTY PERCENT CRASH from 9/11. And best of all, it's STILL going down.
 
Go back to slurping from the toilet, pinhead. :)
"Politically Incorrect" <to...@okoto.net> wrote in message news:zNKzb.4312$K52....@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com...

Gregory Gadow

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 1:44:32 PM12/4/03
to
Politically Incorrect wrote:

> The Hate Bush Campaign won't work! Understand? Nah, don't think you
> will ever learn.

So pointing out the misleads and outright lies of the Bush
Administration, and asking logical questions such as "If there is $87
billion dollars for foreigners, why are public schools in the US so
impoverished? Why are local police and fire departments being forced to
downsize? Why are so many Americans hungry and homeless?" are all part
of a "Hate Bush Campaign?"

That being the case, the only hope for this country is to get as many
people hating Bush as possible.
--
Gregory Gadow
tech...@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear

"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin


Bob Harrington

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 3:06:45 PM12/4/03
to

"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote in message
news:BeLzb.303091$275.1043153@attbi_s53...

> Oh, yeah, the moron with the 30 second attention span forgets that
> the latest polls show 61%, not 72%, and that that represents a
> THIRTY PERCENT CRASH from 9/11. And best of all, it's STILL going
down.
>
> Go back to slurping from the toilet, pinhead. :)

Looks like he will have to wait until the bowl refills after you drank
it dry...

http://www.wftv.com/politics/2678022/detail.html

Bush' overall _personal_ approval rating is 72% (_UP_ from 65% before
the Iraq visit), his job approval rating is 61% (_UP_ from 56%) - hell,
even a majority of _Democrats_ have a positive opinion of the President!

We already know that even simple feats of comprehension are beyond your
reach, but thanks for playing! :)

Clave

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 3:17:34 PM12/4/03
to
"Bob Harrington" <r...@blarg.net> wrote in message
news:ptMzb.421064$HS4.3346037@attbi_s01...

>
> "Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote in message
> news:BeLzb.303091$275.1043153@attbi_s53...
> > Oh, yeah, the moron with the 30 second attention span forgets that
> > the latest polls show 61%, not 72%, and that that represents a
> > THIRTY PERCENT CRASH from 9/11. And best of all, it's STILL going
> down.
> >
> > Go back to slurping from the toilet, pinhead. :)
>
> Looks like he will have to wait until the bowl refills after you drank
> it dry...
>
> http://www.wftv.com/politics/2678022/detail.html
>
> Bush' overall _personal_ approval rating is 72% (_UP_ from 65% before
> the Iraq visit), his job approval rating is 61% (_UP_ from 56%) - hell,
> even a majority of _Democrats_ have a positive opinion of the President!

Which we all know are numbers meant to do little more than entertain the
children.

His re-elect numbers are pretty much all that count, and they're hovering right
about where his father's were, and dropping.


Bush vs. Generic Democratic Candidate for '04
=============================================
% Vote for Bush % Vote for Democrat
4/30/03 53 40
8/11/03 48 40
9/13/03 49 44
10/13/03 46 47

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Politics/iraq_economics031014_poll.html

Jim

Bob Harrington

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 3:45:29 PM12/4/03
to
Clave wrote:
> "Bob Harrington" <r...@blarg.net> wrote in message
> news:ptMzb.421064$HS4.3346037@attbi_s01...
>>
>> "Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote in message
>> news:BeLzb.303091$275.1043153@attbi_s53...
>>> Oh, yeah, the moron with the 30 second attention span forgets that
>>> the latest polls show 61%, not 72%, and that that represents a
>>> THIRTY PERCENT CRASH from 9/11. And best of all, it's STILL going
>> down.
>>>
>>> Go back to slurping from the toilet, pinhead. :)
>>
>> Looks like he will have to wait until the bowl refills after you
>> drank
>> it dry...
>>
>> http://www.wftv.com/politics/2678022/detail.html
>>
>> Bush' overall _personal_ approval rating is 72% (_UP_ from 65% before
>> the Iraq visit), his job approval rating is 61% (_UP_ from 56%) -
>> hell,
>> even a majority of _Democrats_ have a positive opinion of the
>> President!
>
> Which we all know are numbers meant to do little more than entertain
> the children.

Unless, of course, they somehow support your "opinions".

Who Cares?

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 3:47:00 PM12/4/03
to

"Clave" <ClaviusFair...@cablespeed.com> wrote in message
news:171d96a810cd26f1...@news.teranews.com...

But put him up against a real Demoncrat candidate and he wins every
time. You vote for people, not "generics".

Who Cares?

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 3:51:38 PM12/4/03
to

"Gregory Gadow" <tech...@serv.net> wrote in message
news:3FCF8090...@serv.net...

| Politically Incorrect wrote:
|
| > The Hate Bush Campaign won't work! Understand? Nah, don't think
you
| > will ever learn.
|
| So pointing out the misleads and outright lies of the Bush
| Administration, and asking logical questions such as "If there is
$87
| billion dollars for foreigners, why are public schools in the US so
| impoverished?

They are? Compared to what?

|Why are local police and fire departments being forced to
| downsize?

Better question: Why is police/fire funding always "special levy"
instead for "first dollar"?

|Why are so many Americans hungry and homeless?"

They aren't and you know it.

|are all part
| of a "Hate Bush Campaign?"

Yup.

|
| That being the case, the only hope for this country is to get as
many
| people hating Bush as possible.
| --
| Gregory Gadow

It is back-firing on the liberal/leftist/progressive/neo-socialists.
His approval ratings are holding pretty constant, and none of the
demoncrat candidates can touch him in a one on one poll. Kerry,
Clark, Dean and the rest are so busy fighting with each other and
espousing hate towards Bush that they haven't been able to show
anything to the public to get their interest. And it is driving many
hard core lefties nuts.

Gau-zhi

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 4:26:34 PM12/4/03
to

"Who Cares?" <whoc...@freetidet.org> wrote in message
news:u7Nzb.28407$sb4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...

Another way to look at that poll is to consider the sum of all democratic
challengers' votes to be roughly equal to GW's.
As you say, in a one on one, none stand a chance against GW.

--
"The democrat is a young conservative; the conservative is an
old democrat. The aristocrat is the democrat ripe, and gone to
seed,-because both parties stand on the one ground of the
supreme value of property, which one endeavors to get, and
the other to keep." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

"A liberal is a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet." - Frank Rizzo


Clave

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 4:30:12 PM12/4/03
to
"Bob Harrington" <r...@blarg.net> wrote in message
news:J1Nzb.228260$Dw6.804248@attbi_s02...

> Clave wrote:
> > "Bob Harrington" <r...@blarg.net> wrote in message
> > news:ptMzb.421064$HS4.3346037@attbi_s01...
> >>
> >> "Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote in message
> >> news:BeLzb.303091$275.1043153@attbi_s53...
> >>> Oh, yeah, the moron with the 30 second attention span forgets that
> >>> the latest polls show 61%, not 72%, and that that represents a
> >>> THIRTY PERCENT CRASH from 9/11. And best of all, it's STILL going
> >> down.
> >>>
> >>> Go back to slurping from the toilet, pinhead. :)
> >>
> >> Looks like he will have to wait until the bowl refills after you
> >> drank
> >> it dry...
> >>
> >> http://www.wftv.com/politics/2678022/detail.html
> >>
> >> Bush' overall _personal_ approval rating is 72% (_UP_ from 65% before
> >> the Iraq visit), his job approval rating is 61% (_UP_ from 56%) -
> >> hell,
> >> even a majority of _Democrats_ have a positive opinion of the
> >> President!
> >
> > Which we all know are numbers meant to do little more than entertain
> > the children.
>
> Unless, of course, they somehow support your "opinions".


Yeah -- I see you weren't all that entertained by the *real* numbers below.

That's OK -- you keep squatting in the corner, nodding like a chimp on crack and
muttering "personal approval -- personal approval -- personal approval."

Jim

Bob Harrington

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 6:14:08 PM12/4/03
to

Short drive...


Bob Harrington

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 6:18:35 PM12/4/03
to

Oh, all right. I guess I'll just have to settle for the 61%. We'll see
in less than a year how overly optimistic/deluded you folks are. And
then you can happily shriek that _two_ elkections were stolen!

Politically Incorrect

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 7:32:59 PM12/4/03
to
Beg you pardon- My attention span of 30 seconds is obviously longer than yours!
I repeat: ( get someone to explain it to you) : 72% PERSONAL APPROVAL RATING
Come back when alternative learning class is over.  LOL!
"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote in message news:BeLzb.303091$275.1043153@attbi_s53...
Oh, yeah, the moron with the 30 second attention span forgets that the latest polls show 61%, not 72%, and that that represents a THIRTY PERCENT CRASH from 9/11. And best of all, it's STILL going down.
Approval Rating! Come back after class is out.

Clave

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 7:29:06 PM12/4/03
to

"Politically Incorrect" <to...@okoto.net> wrote in message
news:%mQzb.7550$KX5.3659380837@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...

Beg you pardon- My attention span of 30 seconds is obviously longer than yours!
I repeat: ( get someone to explain it to you) : 72% PERSONAL APPROVAL RATING
Come back when alternative learning class is over. LOL!


Psst -- 46% re-elect rating against 47% for "unnamed Democrat."

Jim


Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack )

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:37:51 PM12/4/03
to

If 72% like Bush, the other numbers like 47% for an unnamed Democrat are
just hypothetical. We can't know what the difference 72% - 46% will
really do, we can't even really seriously guess, until later.

SteveR

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:34:27 PM12/4/03
to
In article <3FCF8090...@serv.net>,
Gregory Gadow <tech...@serv.net> wrote:

> Politically Incorrect wrote:
>
> > The Hate Bush Campaign won't work! Understand? Nah, don't think you
> > will ever learn.
>
> So pointing out the misleads and outright lies of the Bush
> Administration, and asking logical questions such as "If there is $87
> billion dollars for foreigners, why are public schools in the US so
> impoverished?

Didn't Bush just back a Kennedy initiative that increased school funding?

Fiscal mismanagement within the system existed prior to the Bush admin,
and the rhetorical assumption that the billions towards foreign policy
somehow suddenly impoverished schoolchildren in Tupelo is laughable.

> Why are local police and fire departments being forced to
> downsize?

Because tenured middle-middle-middle-apparatchiks have a great union.

> Why are so many Americans hungry and homeless?" are all part
> of a "Hate Bush Campaign?"

Irrational assumption that Bush, and only Bush, caused economic and
foreign policy events of the turn of the century is so profoundly
illogical that people label the phenomenon as "bush hate" - which is
much kinder than the alternative explanation/label - moron.

>
> That being the case, the only hope for this country is to get as many
> people hating Bush as possible.

That's the ticket - scoff at any notion of any "hate bush" ethos while
using "hate bush" as your platform. That's exactly what the RNC is
counting on.


> "If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
> -- Benjamin Franklin
>
>

--
'If you walk away from Iraq, the jihadis will follow you wherever you go.
You may think you've left them behind, but they will pursue you.'
---Senior Minister of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew

Clave

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:43:11 PM12/4/03
to
"Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack )"
<std...@backpacker.com> wrote in message
news:3FCFE16F...@backpacker.com...

Like the lying asshole you are, you're mixing approval rating with re-elect
numbers. They really must hurt you a lot.

Jim


SteveR

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:46:52 PM12/4/03
to
In article <u7Nzb.28407$sb4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"Who Cares?" <whoc...@freetidet.org> wrote:

They were already nuts, they're just standing up to be counted at the
moment.

Edward Glamkowski

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 12:26:12 PM12/5/03
to
Gregory Gadow <tech...@serv.net> wrote in message
> Politically Incorrect wrote:
> > The Hate Bush Campaign won't work! Understand? Nah, don't think you
> > will ever learn.
>
> So pointing out the misleads and outright lies of the Bush
> Administration, and asking logical questions such as "If there is $87
> billion dollars for foreigners, why are public schools in the US so
> impoverished? Why are local police and fire departments being forced
> to downsize? Why are so many Americans hungry and homeless?" are all
> part of a "Hate Bush Campaign?"
>
> That being the case, the only hope for this country is to get as many
> people hating Bush as possible.

moveon.org is itself full of nothing but misleads and lies.

I've already painfully detailed it once on their first anti-Bush ad,
shall I do it again now?

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=c49f8b5e.0309181423.257fbfa2%40posting.google.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

Here's one hint:
Schools, fire, police, the hungry and homeless are all problems that
are handled at the local and state level, not the federal level.

National defense and foreign affairs, however, *ARE* in the realm of
federal responsibility, and in fact the states are explicitly
forbidden
from engaging in such things on their own.

Read the constitution sometime, you'll find it most informative.
moveon.org clearly hasn't read it. They certainly rely upon their
followers to not have read it.

M

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 2:21:59 PM12/5/03
to
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 20:45:29 GMT, "Bob Harrington" <r...@blarg.net> wrote:

>Clave wrote:
>> "Bob Harrington" <r...@blarg.net> wrote in message
>> news:ptMzb.421064$HS4.3346037@attbi_s01...
>>>
>>> "Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote in message
>>> news:BeLzb.303091$275.1043153@attbi_s53...
>>>> Oh, yeah, the moron with the 30 second attention span forgets that
>>>> the latest polls show 61%, not 72%, and that that represents a
>>>> THIRTY PERCENT CRASH from 9/11. And best of all, it's STILL going
>>> down.
>>>>
>>>> Go back to slurping from the toilet, pinhead. :)
>>>
>>> Looks like he will have to wait until the bowl refills after you
>>> drank
>>> it dry...
>>>
>>> http://www.wftv.com/politics/2678022/detail.html
>>>
>>> Bush' overall _personal_ approval rating is 72% (_UP_ from 65% before
>>> the Iraq visit), his job approval rating is 61% (_UP_ from 56%) -
>>> hell,
>>> even a majority of _Democrats_ have a positive opinion of the
>>> President!
>>
>> Which we all know are numbers meant to do little more than entertain
>> the children.
>
>Unless, of course, they somehow support your "opinions".

That's probably the best nail on the head that I've seen in quite a while. We can all find numbers
and polls and figures to support what we wish to believe, if we look hard enough.

Where numbers REALLY count though is the return coverage during an election. Nobody wants to vote
for the loser. If, for example, you live in on the West Coast, by the time you even wake up, there
are already strong numbers from the rest of the states. I am a strong advocate of blacking out
coverage until the polls close, nationwide. Those of you in Hawaii, wouldn't that be nice?

---M

M

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 2:30:13 PM12/5/03
to

Therein lies the problem, Steve. Yes, the polls currently say that a generic Democratic candidate
would have a narrow margin against Bush. But the minute you put any of the above names in the blank
slot, the numbers change dramatically. Hypothetical vs. reality. What that particular poll is really
telling us is that people want a change, just not anyone that currently is running against W. If the
Dems could conjur up more than a hate monger, they might have a chance. Until then.....probably not.

---M

Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack )

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 2:55:34 PM12/5/03
to

What are you talking about? I didn't mix anything.

Gau-zhi

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 3:37:00 PM12/5/03
to

"M" <m...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3fd0dd00...@news.east.earthlink.net...

This is the clearest explanation I've seen yet of current numbers. Good job.

--
"The democrat is a young conservative; the conservative is an
old democrat. The aristocrat is the democrat ripe, and gone to
seed,-because both parties stand on the one ground of the
supreme value of property, which one endeavors to get, and
the other to keep." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

"A liberal is a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet." - Frank Rizzo


>

Gau-zhi

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 3:45:19 PM12/5/03
to

"Edward Glamkowski" <eglam...@angelfire.com> wrote in message
news:c49f8b5e.03120...@posting.google.com...


The very definition of the "useful idiot" that the left depends on. The more
uneducated, welfare dependant voters, the better. If you can get someone to
hate Bush with a single emotionally charged paragraph, some irrelevant
statistics, and a dose of misleading statements, you too can start up a
website and attract useful idiots.

SteveR

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 8:05:14 PM12/5/03
to
In article <3fd0dd00...@news.east.earthlink.net>,
m...@nospam.com (M) wrote:


That wasn't my post you were replying to, but...

Polls right now are mostly meaningless - other than their historical
comparisons, and Bush's numbers until now put him in about as good a
statistical position as any modern president that was re-elected.

I'm not quite so sure people are "ready for a change" - liberal
democrats certainly are, but that's a given - and I see more of an
increase in volume and hyperbole, not an increase in numbers, for the
democrats.

Oddly, it's the hyperbole that is likely to turn off the deciding
independent voters - but I suspect it will tone down during the
campaign, and they'll look for ways to attack Bush from the right.

Their default message will be that they will clean up the "mess", and
that will be problematic if there are positive trends on the major
fronts leading up to the election. I think the democrats are going to
have a Bob Dole moment, it's just a question of who gets to be Bob '04.

Hillary or Dean or Clark or a combo thereof. Judging by performance so
far, democrats are sunk.

alohacyberian

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 3:08:24 AM12/6/03
to
"Edward Glamkowski" <eglam...@angelfire.com> wrote in message
news:c49f8b5e.03120...@posting.google.com...
> moveon.org is itself full of nothing but misleads and lies.
>
> I've already painfully detailed it once on their first anti-Bush ad,
> shall I do it again now?
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=c49f8b5e.0309181423.257fbfa2%40posting.google.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
> Here's one hint:
> Schools, fire, police, the hungry and homeless are all problems that
> are handled at the local and state level, not the federal level.
>
> National defense and foreign affairs, however, *ARE* in the realm of
> federal responsibility, and in fact the states are explicitly
> forbidden
> from engaging in such things on their own.
>
> Read the constitution sometime, you'll find it most informative.
> moveon.org clearly hasn't read it. They certainly rely upon their
> followers to not have read it.
>
That is to say that moveon.org is put together by a group of political
illiterates pandering to political illiterates. Fortunately most of them
don't vote and will resultantly be very disappointed in the results of the
next election. I guess it's just part of political illiteracy. KM
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/


Ohia

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 9:25:58 AM12/6/03
to
Politically illiterate? Is that someone who doesn't agree with the zionist
chokehold on american politics? Since politics is not a language I'm afraid
your alliteration is very poor, if not idiotic.

You obfuscators come up with the strangest expressions. Now if you only had
the literary skills to explain exactly what a "political illiterate" is.
Seems to me that GW bush would fall into this category as he is just plain
unread and has no thirst for knowledge nor any intention of bettering
himself or this counttry.


SteveR

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 11:17:33 AM12/6/03
to
In article
<Y7gAb.400223$0v4.19...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote:

> "Edward Glamkowski" <eglam...@angelfire.com> wrote in message
> news:c49f8b5e.03120...@posting.google.com...
> > moveon.org is itself full of nothing but misleads and lies.
> >
> > I've already painfully detailed it once on their first anti-Bush ad,
> > shall I do it again now?
> >
> >
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=c49f8b5e.0309181423.257fbfa2%40posting.go
> ogle.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
> >
> > Here's one hint:
> > Schools, fire, police, the hungry and homeless are all problems that
> > are handled at the local and state level, not the federal level.
> >
> > National defense and foreign affairs, however, *ARE* in the realm of
> > federal responsibility, and in fact the states are explicitly
> > forbidden
> > from engaging in such things on their own.
> >
> > Read the constitution sometime, you'll find it most informative.
> > moveon.org clearly hasn't read it. They certainly rely upon their
> > followers to not have read it.
> >
> That is to say that moveon.org is put together by a group of political
> illiterates pandering to political illiterates. Fortunately most of them
> don't vote and will resultantly be very disappointed in the results of the
> next election. I guess it's just part of political illiteracy. KM

Look at Move On's track record - they didn't even manage to prevent the
impeachment which they were formed to prevent, and the people they've
backed politically haven't benefited from their help.

Just another money pit for the disaffected, who believe the more they
contribute and the louder they cry, the better chance they have of
forestalling the death of the left in the US.

Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 11:19:23 AM12/6/03
to

"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-18D44...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

>
> Look at Move On's track record - they didn't even manage to prevent the
> impeachment which they were formed to prevent, and the people they've
> backed politically haven't benefited from their help.

Oooo, that's riiiight, Clinton never finished his term because of the
$50,000,000 blow job witch hunt... what's the matter, Stevie, lost another
loan to Ditech? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Crowe, Estrada, Energy Bill... and the list goes on and on... :)


SteveR

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 11:31:47 AM12/6/03
to
In article <fknAb.447067$Fm2.441369@attbi_s04>,
"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:

> "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:texxdriver-18D44...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> >
> > Look at Move On's track record - they didn't even manage to prevent the
> > impeachment which they were formed to prevent, and the people they've
> > backed politically haven't benefited from their help.
>
> Oooo, that's riiiight, Clinton never finished his term because of the
> $50,000,000 blow job witch hunt... what's the matter, Stevie, lost another
> loan to Ditech? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

As you may recall, Clinton was impeached.

Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 8:36:27 PM12/6/03
to

"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-04445...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

>
> As you may recall, Clinton was impeached.

By a gaggle of hypocrits. And acquitted. Deal with it, putz. :)


SteveR

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 8:52:14 PM12/6/03
to
In article <vuvAb.321881$275.1079423@attbi_s53>,
"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:


At least you accept that he was impeached.

alohacyberian

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 5:10:28 AM12/7/03
to
"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-18D44...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
Little do they realize, the death rattle is already in the throats of the
moribund American Left. KM

alohacyberian

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 5:10:29 AM12/7/03
to
"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

> In article <vuvAb.321881$275.1079423@attbi_s53>,
> "Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:
> > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:texxdriver-04445...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > >
> > > As you may recall, Clinton was impeached.
> >
> > By a gaggle of hypocrits, putz. :)

>
> At least you accept that he was impeached.
>
Well, at least he accomplished something while he was in office other than an
aromatic cigar and a stained dress. KM

SteveR

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 11:54:22 AM12/7/03
to
In article
<p0DAb.161996$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote:

> "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > In article <vuvAb.321881$275.1079423@attbi_s53>,
> > "Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:
> > > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > news:texxdriver-04445...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > > >
> > > > As you may recall, Clinton was impeached.
> > >
> > > By a gaggle of hypocrits, putz. :)
> >
> > At least you accept that he was impeached.
> >
> Well, at least he accomplished something while he was in office other than an
> aromatic cigar and a stained dress. KM

His ardent apologists revere him. A 2-bit career politician who
flourished in a state that rests reliably on the bottom end of all
measurable standards needs only oratorical gifts and political instinct
to successfully gain a constituency which is not particularly concerned
about particulars that would indicate an empty suit.

Clave

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 12:48:34 PM12/7/03
to
"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-CA7C1...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

Who coincidentally presided over 8 of the best years this country's ever had.

Yeah, right. And Reagan was a Saint.

Jim


SteveR

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 3:36:28 PM12/7/03
to
In article <vt6ps6i...@corp.supernews.com>,
"Clave" <ClaviusFair...@cablespeed.com> wrote:

> "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:texxdriver-CA7C1...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > In article
> > <p0DAb.161996$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> > "alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > > > In article <vuvAb.321881$275.1079423@attbi_s53>,
> > > > "Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:
> > > > > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:texxdriver-04445...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As you may recall, Clinton was impeached.
> > > > >
> > > > > By a gaggle of hypocrits, putz. :)
> > > >
> > > > At least you accept that he was impeached.
> > > >
> > > Well, at least he accomplished something while he was in office other than
> an
> > > aromatic cigar and a stained dress. KM
> >
> > His ardent apologists revere him. A 2-bit career politician who
> > flourished in a state that rests reliably on the bottom end of all
> > measurable standards needs only oratorical gifts and political instinct
> > to successfully gain a constituency which is not particularly concerned
> > about particulars that would indicate an empty suit.
>
> Who coincidentally presided over 8 of the best years this country's ever had.


Coincidentally.

Clave

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 3:46:00 PM12/7/03
to
"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-B06AE...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

Now just repeat that over and over before you fall asleep.

Jim


alohacyberian

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 2:56:13 AM12/8/03
to
"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-CA7C1...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

> In article
> <p0DAb.161996$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote:
> > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > > At least you accept that he was impeached.
> > >
> > Well, at least he accomplished something while he was in office other
than an
> > aromatic cigar and a stained dress. KM
>
> His ardent apologists revere him. A 2-bit career politician who
> flourished in a state that rests reliably on the bottom end of all
> measurable standards needs only oratorical gifts and political instinct
> to successfully gain a constituency which is not particularly concerned
> about particulars that would indicate an empty suit.
>
Fortunately, the loving wife he is so fond of two-timing, isn't going to
achieve the same success. KM

alohacyberian

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 2:56:14 AM12/8/03
to
"Clave" <ClaviusFair...@cablespeed.com> wrote in message
news:vt6ps6i...@corp.supernews.com...

> "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:texxdriver-CA7C1...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > In article
> > <p0DAb.161996$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> > "alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote:
> > > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > > > In article <vuvAb.321881$275.1079423@attbi_s53>,
> > > > At least you accept that he was impeached.
> > > >
> > > Well, at least he accomplished something while he was in office other
than
> an
> > > aromatic cigar and a stained dress. KM
> >
> > His ardent apologists revere him. A 2-bit career politician who
> > flourished in a state that rests reliably on the bottom end of all
> > measurable standards needs only oratorical gifts and political instinct
> > to successfully gain a constituency which is not particularly concerned
> > about particulars that would indicate an empty suit.
>
> Who coincidentally presided over 8 of the best years this country's ever
had.
>

Isn't it amazing what a Republican Congress can achieve? KM

Mitchell Holman

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 8:11:45 AM12/8/03
to
"alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote in news:y8WAb.166137
$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

>
>
> Isn't it amazing what a Republican Congress can achieve? KM


The biggest spending spree in US history
that even conservatives are finding alarming?

Conservatives blast Bush on spending

Medicare bill triggers unusual barrage from key constituency

THE WASHINGTON POST
12/05/03

WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 — Last month’s passage of a Medicare
prescription drug benefit that could cost $2 trillion over
20 years, after three years of sharp increases in federal
spending, has provoked an unusual barrage of criticism of
President Bush from conservative leaders.

THE WALL Street Journal editorial page accuses Bush
of a “Medicare fiasco” and a “Medicare giveaway.” Paul
Weyrich, a coordinator of the conservative movement,
sees “disappointment in a lot of quarters.” Bruce
Bartlett, a conservative economist with the National
Center for Policy Analysis, pronounces himself
“apoplectic.” An article in the American Spectator
calls Bush’s stewardship on spending “nonexistent,”
while Steve Moore of the Club for Growth labels Bush
a “champion big-spending president.”

“The president isn’t showing leadership,” laments
Brian Riedl of the Heritage Foundation, who calculates
that federal spending per household is at a 60-year
high. “Conservatives are angry.”

The spark has been the Medicare prescription drug
benefit, which is expected to cost $400 billion over
10 years and, according to the Congressional Budget
Office, could go as high as $2 trillion over another
10 years. Before its passage, former House majority
leader Richard K Armey (R-Tex.) wrote to the Wall
Street Journal to say that “the conservative, free-
market base in America is rightly in revolt over this
bill” and that “conservatives would be smart, and right,
to reject it.” Some conservatives, including Sens. Trent
Lott (R-Miss.) and Don Nickles (R-Okla.), did just that.

But the Medicare legislation comes on top of a
federal spending increase of 23.7 percent since Bush
took office. “In the last three years we’ve had the
biggest farm bill, the biggest education bill, the
biggest foreign aid bill and now the biggest health
care bill in 30 years,” said Moore of the free-market
Club for Growth. “There’s now not any pretense that
Bush is committed to smaller government.”

http://www.msnbc.com/news/1001912.asp?0cv=CB10&cp1=1

Ohia

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 1:05:23 PM12/8/03
to

"alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote in message
news:x8WAb.166136$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

> "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:texxdriver-CA7C1...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > In article
> > <p0DAb.161996$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> > "alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote:
> > > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > > > At least you accept that he was impeached.
> > > >
> > > Well, at least he accomplished something while he was in office other
> than an
> > > aromatic cigar and a stained dress. KM
> >
Stained by a zionist jew whore, you forgot to ad.


Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 7:18:01 PM12/8/03
to

"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

Of course, that's what allowed him to laugh last and laugh best. :)


Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 7:18:35 PM12/8/03
to

"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-B06AE...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

> > Who coincidentally presided over 8 of the best years this country's ever
had.
>
> Coincidentally.

You wish! :)


SteveR

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 8:29:27 PM12/8/03
to
In article
<x8WAb.166136$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote:

> "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:texxdriver-CA7C1...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > In article
> > <p0DAb.161996$Ec1.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> > "alohacyberian" <alohac...@att.net> wrote:
> > > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > > > At least you accept that he was impeached.
> > > >
> > > Well, at least he accomplished something while he was in office other
> than an
> > > aromatic cigar and a stained dress. KM
> >
> > His ardent apologists revere him. A 2-bit career politician who
> > flourished in a state that rests reliably on the bottom end of all
> > measurable standards needs only oratorical gifts and political instinct
> > to successfully gain a constituency which is not particularly concerned
> > about particulars that would indicate an empty suit.
> >
> Fortunately, the loving wife he is so fond of two-timing, isn't going to
> achieve the same success. KM


Hillary's no loveable empty-suit slickmeister, she's a full blown
big-village socialist collectivist from the Wellesley school of rad
politics and elitist social engineering. I would love to see her run,
but I suspect she is going to be the groomed saviour after Dean reveals
his stunning lack of expertise on so many fronts.

It appears Gore will endorse Dean. My wild-ass guess is that it will be
a Dean/Clark ticket. Kinda like Perot/Stockdale populist blah-fest of
populist platitudes.

SteveR

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 8:42:05 PM12/8/03
to
In article <Zw8Bb.466579$HS4.3629160@attbi_s01>,
"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:

> "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:texxdriver-538F4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > In article <vuvAb.321881$275.1079423@attbi_s53>,
> > "Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:
> >
> > > "SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > news:texxdriver-04445...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> > > >
> > > > As you may recall, Clinton was impeached.
> > >
> > > By a gaggle of hypocrits. And acquitted. Deal with it, putz. :)
> >
> > At least you accept that he was impeached.
>
> Of course, that's what allowed him to laugh last and laugh best. :)

Clinton will go down in history as an answer to Jimmy Carter, in that
the 90's tech boom better masked his failures. His greatest legacy,
other than personal issues, will be his move to center dictated by a
repub congress. Big whoop.


. I do give Dhimmicrats points for conviction, willing as they are to
sacrifice power in order to express such

Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 9:46:43 PM12/8/03
to

"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-21EBB...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

>
> Clinton will go down in history as an answer to Jimmy Carter, in that
> the 90's tech boom better masked his failures.

You and your predictions are such a hoot.

Just look at how history is looking at the Veggie. Maybe then you'll get a
clue.

Bob Harrington

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 5:38:23 AM12/9/03
to

He knows.

You lose...


SteveR

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 8:55:38 AM12/9/03
to
In article <nIaBb.342642$275.1129559@attbi_s53>,
"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:


I think the end of the Soviets may figure in there (not with Dean,
though - he thinks they're still around).

Clinton will have the Korean nuke agreement (with a little help from
mentor Carter), the Palestinian/Israeli peace pact, and a foreign policy
that had Osama scared silly.

Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 12:46:27 PM12/9/03
to

"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-40956...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...

>
> I think the end of the Soviets may figure in there (not with Dean,
> though - he thinks they're still around).

Not with the Veggie either, since he wasn't responsible for anything related
to that nor does he remember anything about it, thank goodness.

Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 12:48:18 PM12/9/03
to

"Bob Harrington" <r...@blarg.net> wrote in message
news:zChBb.478970$Tr4.1323743@attbi_s03...

Still dreaming, eh, putz? :)


Eric da Red

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 1:06:13 PM12/9/03
to
In article <texxdriver-F41D7...@comcast.ash.giganews.com>,
SteveR <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote:
>In article
>
>Hillary's no loveable empty-suit slickmeister, she's a full blown
>big-village socialist collectivist from the Wellesley school of rad
>politics and elitist social engineering.

It's clear you don't know any socialists. It's becoming clearer
that you don't know any women, either.

--
Quote Of The Week: "Bertie [Wooster] was a little milder than W., not
quite so mean-spirited. He had a British butler, and Bush has one too.
His name is Tony Blair." -- Studs Terkel.

Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 1:36:31 PM12/9/03
to

"Eric da Red" <berg...@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:br52ul$2o4$1...@drizzle.com...

> In article <texxdriver-F41D7...@comcast.ash.giganews.com>,
> SteveR <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >In article
> >
> >Hillary's no loveable empty-suit slickmeister, she's a full blown
> >big-village socialist collectivist from the Wellesley school of rad
> >politics and elitist social engineering.
>
> It's clear you don't know any socialists. It's becoming clearer
> that you don't know any women, either.

The only one he managed to snag out of sheer luck left him after he told her
he'd disown the children she had with him if they turned out to be gay.
<chuckle> What a loser, eh?


SteveR

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 1:59:23 PM12/9/03
to
In article <TTnBb.488937$Fm2.472510@attbi_s04>,
"Juan..E.-Jimenez" <b*d&5^-@-*b(d)5+.!c#o$m> wrote:

Absolutely!

SteveR

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 2:00:41 PM12/9/03
to
In article <br52ul$2o4$1...@drizzle.com>,

berg...@drizzle.com (Eric da Red) wrote:

> In article <texxdriver-F41D7...@comcast.ash.giganews.com>,
> SteveR <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >In article
> >
> >Hillary's no loveable empty-suit slickmeister, she's a full blown
> >big-village socialist collectivist from the Wellesley school of rad
> >politics and elitist social engineering.
>
> It's clear you don't know any socialists. It's becoming clearer
> that you don't know any women, either.

Did I diss your mommy?

Bob Harrington

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 9:29:17 PM12/9/03
to

Of you taking up li'l Rachel's mantle as Olympic Bulldozer Wrestling
silver medalist?

You bet!


Juan..E.-Jimenez

unread,
Dec 10, 2003, 9:20:02 AM12/10/03
to

"Bob Harrington" <r...@blarg.net> wrote in message
news:1yvBb.349650$275.1150433@attbi_s53...

> >
> > Still dreaming, eh, putz? :)
>
> Of you taking up li'l Rachel's mantle as Olympic Bulldozer Wrestling
> silver medalist?
>
> You bet!

Still dreaming, putz! :)


Bob Harrington

unread,
Dec 11, 2003, 12:54:59 AM12/11/03
to

Ya gotta admit - it's a very pleasant dream!


alohacyberian

unread,
Dec 11, 2003, 4:57:20 AM12/11/03
to
"SteveR" <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:texxdriver-F41D7...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
Yeah, it's looking that way, Dean appealing to the Leftwing Liberals and the
easily fooled, while Clark will hopeully appeal to the old-guard Democrats
and military people. Oh, yeah, Hillary would make V.I. Lenin and Stalin proud
as hell; fortunately when she was put in charge of health care during the
Clinton Administration, Congress snickered at her pie-in-the-sky Marxist
medicine and never took it seriously. I notice Clark said if nominated, he'd
consider Hillary as a vice-presidential running mate to which she fawned all
over him and herself. Talk about delusionary - Clark's chances of winning the
nomination are about the same as Hussein's chances of resuming his regime in
Iraq. Though I suppose in the 2008 election, a Hillary Clinton--Saddam
Hussein Ticket would gain widespread approval from rank-and-file Leftwing
Liberals. KM

alohacyberian

unread,
Dec 11, 2003, 4:57:21 AM12/11/03
to
"Eric da Red" <berg...@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:br52ul$2o4$1...@drizzle.com...
> In article <texxdriver-F41D7...@comcast.ash.giganews.com>,
> SteveR <texxd...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >In article
> >Hillary's no loveable empty-suit slickmeister, she's a full blown
> >big-village socialist collectivist from the Wellesley school of rad
> >politics and elitist social engineering.
>
> It's clear you don't know any socialists. It's becoming clearer
> that you don't know any women, either.
>

It's become more clear that you don't know the difference between an East
coast big village socialist collectivist and a west coast wild-eyed
hippie-groupie socialist tree-hugger. Hillary might be a hit with males from
the Caspar Milquetoast genre, limp-wristed type "guys" and lesbians, which
gives me pause to wonder which category you fit into. KM

alohacyberian

unread,
Dec 11, 2003, 4:57:22 AM12/11/03