"Chuck" wrote
You mean like the debunked Swiftboat vets
for Bush, or WMDs that didn't exist, or the
immediate nuclear threat that didn't exist, or
al Queda links that never were, or how about
compassionate conservatism, or vote for
me or the terrorists will get you...

Propagandist indeed...

Chuck

I'll go with spoiled brat.

Chuck wrote:

Propagandist indeed..

That can go for both major parties and the third parties.

Go vote on Tuesday. Vote your values and beliefs. Remember that your vote
last 4 years. I am afraid many people are going to vote out of emotions,
rather than informed decision making.

The Bible tells us to pray for our leaders. We need to pray for our leaders
from the local elections all the way to the national. And please, no Bible or
Christian bashing :-)

Randy ka4nma

"Chuck" wrote in message
news:sQehd.3217$GN4.1349@okepread02...

Ed Price wrote in message
news:qZdhd.87705$kz3.49376@fed1read02...

"Chuck" wrote in message
news:%zbhd.3210$GN4.3006@okepread02...
Yes, Saddam was a first-class jerk and two-
bit tyrant, but was not an immediate threat to
America - he lost 2 wars and was sanctioned
by the UN - his army was left impotent, his
major weapons were destroyed after the gulf
war, his WMD programs were in shambles,

But Sadaam PROMISED us the "mother of all battles". We had to assume he
was
armed to the teeth. If you can't trust a guy like Sadaam to make a threat
meaningful, gee, who can you trust?

Do you honestly believe a de-fanged

Sadaam "de-fanged"? Hell, even his left-overs are still killing us.

two-bit

If I had a penny for every 2-bits Sadaam had, I'd have my executive
assistant insult you.

tyrant is going to admit to the world he's
impotent? But then, true believers will believe
in just about anything that fits their illusions...

Strange, I was just going to suggest you consult a mirror.


GWB is a war criminal - too bad you support
a real war criminal - and that's not spin.

Indeed Chuck, that's not spin. I'd call you an honest, straightforward
propagandist; what we used to simply refer to as a liar.

You mean like the debunked Swiftboat vets for Bush

Your judgement only. Odd, the only time Kerry managed anything, he left with
270-some "employees" ****ed at him; and they still are, 35 years later.

or WMDs that didn't exist,

Sadaam didn't need WMD to invade Kuwait or to threaten Saudi Arabia. He
certainly had some previously, and had no compunction about using them. To
me, WMD are a non-issue; it's not what he didn't have, it's what he did that
matters.

or the
immediate nuclear threat that didn't exist,
al Queda links that never were,

Usually, your types put the administration in the impossible position of
trying to prove a negative, but this statement looks like you accept some
way to do so. I'm impressed!

or how about
compassionate conservatism, or vote for
me or the terrorists will get you...

Propagandist indeed...

Chuck


Lose the thought somewhere in that last rant, Chuckie? Successful big liars
need to keep focused.

Ed
wb6wsn

"Ed Price" wrote in message
news:2wlhd.87747$kz3.12494@fed1read02...

"Chuck" wrote in message
news:sQehd.3217$GN4.1349@okepread02...

Ed Price wrote in message
news:qZdhd.87705$kz3.49376@fed1read02...

"Chuck" wrote in message
news:%zbhd.3210$GN4.3006@okepread02...
Yes, Saddam was a first-class jerk and two-
bit tyrant, but was not an immediate threat to
America - he lost 2 wars and was sanctioned
by the UN - his army was left impotent, his
major weapons were destroyed after the gulf
war, his WMD programs were in shambles,
...
GWB is a war criminal - too bad you support
a real war criminal - and that's not spin.

Indeed Chuck, that's not spin. I'd call you an honest, straightforward
propagandist; what we used to simply refer to as a liar.

You mean like the debunked Swiftboat vets for Bush

Your judgement only. Odd, the only time Kerry managed anything, he left
with
270-some "employees" ****ed at him; and they still are, 35 years later.

Perhaps I give greater credibility to the folks
who served with Kerry in this regard, than
the vile rhetoric of folks with an un-American
religious/political agenda. Kerry was not alone
in his distain for that war, but the hawks who
opposed his position then, are still carrying a
grudge now - after all these years - that's both
obsessive and perverted IMO!

When a President has more loyalty to his
mega-corporate cronies and the looney
megalomaniac Pat Robertson, than he has
for the common folk, he does not deserve
to hold the office.

Chuck

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:23:57 -0800, "Ed Price"
wrote:
Usually, your types put the administration in the impossible position of
trying to prove a negative
Consistent in that they couldn't prove a positive either.
As Philip Gold offered: "Screw Up, Move On."