|
Is that a radio wire?
political commentary wrote:
The point is you want to elect a cheater. Thats not a very smart thing to do is it? You mean as opposed to a confessed war criminal, who in congressional hearings admitted to burning villages, killing innocent women and children, and shooting unarmed enemy soldiers in the back as they ran? That kind of thing? Like Kerry? tom K0TAR |
But that is totally untrue!
He was invited to Congress to pass on information that was spoken about at a Vietnam veterans get together that occured a few weeks earlier. He at no time admitted to first hand knoweledge on the veracity of the cruelty claims made at that convention. And I do not believe the GOP claims otherwise. He was at that time a veteran himself as well as being against the war but if I remember correctly many showed their feelings by crossing the border, where as he protested using the ideals that all fight for .........free speech . Bush chose the service aproach that many tried for and was successful, both he and Kerry were just part of those times and neither should be villified. If one has first hand knoweledge then he has the right of free speech, when one uses free speech without true knoweledge and for his own means then he/she betrays the ideals for which one fights for. Art "Tom Ring" wrote in message . .. political commentary wrote: The point is you want to elect a cheater. Thats not a very smart thing to do is it? You mean as opposed to a confessed war criminal, who in congressional hearings admitted to burning villages, killing innocent women and children, and shooting unarmed enemy soldiers in the back as they ran? That kind of thing? Like Kerry? tom K0TAR |
Tom Ring wrote in message . .. political commentary wrote: The point is you want to elect a cheater. Thats not a very smart thing to do is it? You mean as opposed to a confessed war criminal, who in congressional hearings admitted to burning villages, killing innocent women and children, and shooting unarmed enemy soldiers in the back as they ran? That kind of thing? Like Kerry? Tom, Kerry went to congress to parrot the issues of other Viet Nam vets. The repugnant party - the party of lies and deception - spins this event to malign a true war hero. http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1097982/posts In contrast... any leader who's army invades a sovereign country that is not an immediate threat to the invading country, is, according to international law, a war criminal. 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, and there were no proven ties to al Queda. GWB is a war criminal - too bad you support a real war criminal - and that's not spin. Chuck tom K0TAR |
Chuck wrote:
Tom Ring wrote in message . .. SNIP In contrast... any leader who's army invades a sovereign country that is not an immediate threat to the invading country, is, according to international law, a war criminal. You mean like Roosevelt attacking GERMANY ?? Or TRUMAN attacking North Korea ?? Chuck tom K0TAR -- To reply, remove the NOSPAM |
"Chuck" wrote in message news:%zbhd.3210$GN4.3006@okepread02... Yes, Saddam was a first-class jerk and two- bit tyrant, but was not an immediate threat to America - he lost 2 wars and was sanctioned by the UN - his army was left impotent, his major weapons were destroyed after the gulf war, his WMD programs were in shambles, But Sadaam PROMISED us the "mother of all battles". We had to assume he was armed to the teeth. If you can't trust a guy like Sadaam to make a threat meaningful, gee, who can you trust? GWB is a war criminal - too bad you support a real war criminal - and that's not spin. Indeed Chuck, that's not spin. I'd call you an honest, straightforward propagandist; what we used to simply refer to as a liar. Ed wb6wsn |
NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg k7zfg @sbcglobal.net "NN7KexNOSPAM wrote in message ... Chuck wrote: Tom Ring wrote in message . .. SNIP In contrast... any leader who's army invades a sovereign country that is not an immediate threat to the invading country, is, according to international law, a war criminal. You mean like Roosevelt attacking GERMANY ?? Germany was a direct threat to the entire world, let alone the USA. Or TRUMAN attacking North Korea ?? The N. Korea conflict was a UN operation. Want to try again? Chuck |
Ed Price wrote in message news:qZdhd.87705$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 two-bit 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... 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, 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 Ed wb6wsn |
Chuck wrote:
NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg k7zfg @sbcglobal.net "NN7KexNOSPAM wrote in message ... Chuck wrote: Tom Ring wrote in message et... SNIP In contrast... any leader who's army invades a sovereign country that is not an immediate threat to the invading country, is, according to international law, a war criminal. You mean like Roosevelt attacking GERMANY ?? Germany was a direct threat to the entire world, let alone the USA. Or TRUMAN attacking North Korea ?? The N. Korea conflict was a UN operation. Want to try again? Chuck Neither ATTACKED us, nor THREATENED US! To state otherwise means GREMANY ATTACKED PEARL HARBOR. And, JUST WHAT GIVES THE UN a free pass?? That institution , run by 3rd world DESPOTS, has any creditability in the scheme of things, is like saying that Heidrich loved the Jews, and was legitimate in the "benevolent treatment" of them, during the war! The facts are that : KERRY is a admitted WAR CRIMINAL, and comitted ATTROCITIES-- to state otherwise is to say that those POW's that were tortured - deserved THAT TREATMENT- on Kerrys own testimony. And, as WE WERE ATTACKED ON 9/11, we were as justified in retaliating as in ANY period of time in the history of the Republic-- or are you willing to SERVE A SUMMONS to these idiots, and say that they are being sued ?? To even try to justify your position is to beg for further attacks. But, I guess you think that the World Trade Center was Justifiably attacked, or worse- WE DESERVED IT ! Jim NN7K -- To reply, remove the NOSPAM |
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:15:12 GMT, "NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg"
wrote: Neither ATTACKED us, nor THREATENED US! Germany declared war on the United States 11 December 1941. When did we attack them previous to that date? Well, the answer to that is that the Destroyers Greer, Kearney and Reuben James attacked German submarines. THIS is the Nazi explanation for their declaration. In fact, the USS Kearney, DD-432, was torpedoed by the U-568 on 17 October 1941. Six weeks before, the U-652 attacked the Greer. Well, I suppose Roosevelt melted under pressure to leave Adolf alone, but then we had the sinking of the Reuben James 30 October 1941 (63 years and a day ago). For these affronts to their national dignity, the Nazis had no choice but defend themselves against us - and, well, one thing led to another as the saying goes. To state otherwise means GREMANY ATTACKED PEARL HARBOR. And, JUST WHAT GIVES THE UN a free pass?? That institution , run by 3rd world DESPOTS, Was created by the United States, in San Francisco. The facts are that : KERRY is a admitted WAR CRIMINAL, and comitted ATTROCITIES and Bush is crack smoker and was AWOL from assignment. Just what makes either suitable? Because they are not the other? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
"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. |
Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:15:12 GMT, "NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg" wrote: Neither ATTACKED us, nor THREATENED US! Germany declared war on the United States 11 December 1941. When did we attack them previous to that date? Well, the answer to that is that the Destroyers Greer, Kearney and Reuben James attacked German submarines. THIS is the Nazi explanation for their declaration. Not to mention that Lend - Lease could be (argueably) considered an act of war (certanly, NOT an act of Neutrality)!! In fact, the USS Kearney, DD-432, was torpedoed by the U-568 on 17 October 1941. Six weeks before, the U-652 attacked the Greer. Well, I suppose Roosevelt melted under pressure to leave Adolf alone, but then we had the sinking of the Reuben James 30 October 1941 (63 years and a day ago). For these affronts to their national dignity, the Nazis had no choice but defend themselves against us - and, well, one thing led to another as the saying goes. To state otherwise means GREMANY ATTACKED PEARL HARBOR. And, JUST WHAT GIVES THE UN a free pass?? That institution , run by 3rd world DESPOTS, Was created by the United States, in San Francisco. Yeh, and also the League of Nations- But I Repeat: Just WHAT gives ANY of these folks the power to USURP ANY NATIONS National Sovernity ? The facts are that : KERRY is a admitted WAR CRIMINAL, and comitted ATTROCITIES and Bush is crack smoker and was AWOL from assignment. Has he admitted to it ?? Kerry DID (see the NEW SOLDIER, authored by Kerry, Himself!!) Just what makes either suitable? Because they are not the other? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC But, also, then JUST WHAT GAVE US THE RIGHT TO DECLARE WAR ON ENGLAND, so as to found our own independance?? Is George Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, ect. to be considered criminals, or heros? Is Ho-Chi Minh a Hero? Castro? Stalin? Guess it depends on just WHO views history, and from what viewpoint! NN7K -- To reply, remove the NOSPAM |
NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg wrote:
Richard Clark wrote: On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:15:12 GMT, "NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg" wrote: Neither ATTACKED us, nor THREATENED US! Germany declared war on the United States 11 December 1941. When did we attack them previous to that date? Well, the answer to that is that the Destroyers Greer, Kearney and Reuben James attacked German submarines. THIS is the Nazi explanation for their declaration. Not to mention that Lend - Lease could be (argueably) considered an act of war (certanly, NOT an act of Neutrality)!! In fact, the USS Kearney, DD-432, was torpedoed by the U-568 on 17 October 1941. Six weeks before, the U-652 attacked the Greer. Well, I suppose Roosevelt melted under pressure to leave Adolf alone, but then we had the sinking of the Reuben James 30 October 1941 (63 years and a day ago). For these affronts to their national dignity, the Nazis had no choice but defend themselves against us - and, well, one thing led to another as the saying goes. To state otherwise means GREMANY ATTACKED PEARL HARBOR. And, JUST WHAT GIVES THE UN a free pass?? That institution , run by 3rd world DESPOTS, Was created by the United States, in San Francisco. Yeh, and also the League of Nations- But I Repeat: Just WHAT gives ANY of these folks the power to USURP ANY NATIONS National Sovernity ? The facts are that : KERRY is a admitted WAR CRIMINAL, and comitted ATTROCITIES and Bush is crack smoker and was AWOL from assignment. Has he admitted to it ?? Kerry DID (see the NEW SOLDIER, authored by Kerry, Himself!!) Just what makes either suitable? Because they are not the other? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC But, also, then JUST WHAT GAVE US THE RIGHT TO DECLARE WAR ON ENGLAND, so as to found our own independance?? Is George Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, ect. to be considered criminals, or heros? Is Ho-Chi Minh a Hero? Castro? Stalin? Guess it depends on just WHO views history, and from what viewpoint! NN7K My vote goes to such luminaries as Genghis Kahn, Attila the Hun, and Timur the Lame, all of whom did what George just did. Seriously, fellows, you can get it out of your system just by voting on Tuesday. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:36:52 GMT, "Tom Donaly"
wrote: Seriously, fellows, you can get it out of your system just by voting on Tuesday. Hi Tom, DOING better than that. I got myself involved, been working 70 hour weeks for a month, helped register 2800 voters, and collected about 100 ballots BEFORE November 2nd. And then there is Poll Watching to be done ON the 2nd. Come what may - either way - it isn't what is going to happen on the 2nd that counts, it is going to be what happens every day AFTER Tuesday for very many years. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
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 |
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 01:49:57 GMT, "NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg"
wrote: Not to mention that Lend - Lease could be (argueably) considered an act of war (certanly, NOT an act of Neutrality)!! Point is, they never mentioned that. WHAT GIVES THE UN a free pass?? That institution , run by 3rd world DESPOTS, Was created by the United States, in San Francisco. Yeh, and also the League of Nations In fact the League of Nations was not created by the United States, and certainly not in San Francisco. Is George Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, ect. to be considered criminals They were - consult any British source of that era. Is Ho-Chi Minh Castro? Stalin? So were they - consult any American source of that era. As you offer, it is merely the source of the who builds the indictment. Curious point about this last bunch is that they all read and used the writings of Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin to achieve their goals. Ho Chi Minh modeled himself after Gandhi. Gandhi modeled himself after Thoreau ("Civil Disobedience"). Do you count Thoreau among the criminal element? Thoreau willingly embraced such a label. Was Gandhi a terrorist? Ask the Brits - then ask the Indians - then ask the Pakistanis - then ask the administration. :-) 3 out of 4 will give you a straight answer and the last will offer "It's hard work!." Absolutely none of the radical communists learned their craft from those bourgeois elitists Marx/Engels, they only peddled their DOA ideology. ALL of their success came from AMERICAN examples. ALL of their failure came from communism - plain and simple. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
"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 |
In message , Richard Clark
writes On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:36:52 GMT, "Tom Donaly" wrote: Seriously, fellows, you can get it out of your system just by voting on Tuesday. Hi Tom, DOING better than that. I got myself involved, been working 70 hour weeks for a month, helped register 2800 voters, and collected about 100 ballots BEFORE November 2nd. And then there is Poll Watching to be done ON the 2nd. Why can't you Mercans realise you only have ONE ballot for the president. And it can't be 'cast', it can only be held. Unfortunately, the interchangeability of 'ballot' and 'vote' has now entered BBC English. We Limeys have a lot the thank Uncle Sam for, but not, sadly, your despoilation of our language (and your present President, of course). Sorry, I just HAD to complain. Cheers, Ian. -- |
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 13:33:17 +0000, Ian Jackson
wrote: Why can't you Mercans realise you only have ONE ballot for the president. And it can't be 'cast', it can only be held. Unfortunately, the interchangeability of 'ballot' and 'vote' has now entered BBC English. Hi Ian, According to my OED, Ballot has existed in the sense we all use it since 1549. I can't imagine which "Mericans" you could blame then. The notion of not being cast is foreign given the word Ballot derives from Ball, and if anything, for it to work as a secret vote (the meaning of Ballot according to the OED) it had to be placed into a Ballot Box (and having had stood next to one for these several weeks makes me a Balloteer) about as remote to being held as any. Others may appreciate that this all devolves to the idiom "Black Ball." That is, the Ballot indicated if you voted For or Against and you held it hidden in your hand and deposited it unseen by others into the pool of other Ballots which were then reckoned after the completion of the process. If the majority were black, the candidate was defeated. Anyway, back to my Ballotist activities. I've got more Ballots to collect. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:36:52 GMT, "Tom Donaly" wrote: Seriously, fellows, you can get it out of your system just by voting on Tuesday. Hi Tom, DOING better than that. I got myself involved, been working 70 hour weeks for a month, helped register 2800 voters, and collected about 100 ballots BEFORE November 2nd. And then there is Poll Watching to be done ON the 2nd. Come what may - either way - it isn't what is going to happen on the 2nd that counts, it is going to be what happens every day AFTER Tuesday for very many years. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi Richard, the present administration sure has revivified the democratic process by angering everyone it could, and re-starting the culture wars. I don't think a different president will change foreign policy much, though. Once a nation gets as mighty as ours, it seems to get power-drunk therefrom and blows all its resources on controlling the world. The next four years should be interesting, but painful, no matter who controls the White House. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
"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 Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:03:09 GMT, "Tom Donaly"
wrote: Once a nation gets as mighty as ours, it seems to get power-drunk therefrom and blows all its resources on controlling the world. The next four years should be interesting, but painful, no matter who controls the White House. Hi Tom, I agree, and that is why I said it was going to take YEARS and not one day. We live in a decadent society that has lost all proportion of integrity, commitment, and service. When one party rails against a dope smoking president to offer us a crack smoking president; then you know their (plural) system has all the morality of Sodom. Well, I've finished my rounds for this cycle of registration/voting. It's time to move on to my next project in starting another non-profit (my buddies chuckle that I can now lose MORE money legally). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
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." |
Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:03:09 GMT, "Tom Donaly" wrote: Once a nation gets as mighty as ours, it seems to get power-drunk therefrom and blows all its resources on controlling the world. The next four years should be interesting, but painful, no matter who controls the White House. Hi Tom, I agree, and that is why I said it was going to take YEARS and not one day. We live in a decadent society that has lost all proportion of integrity, commitment, and service. When one party rails against a dope smoking president to offer us a crack smoking president; then you know their (plural) system has all the morality of Sodom. Well, I've finished my rounds for this cycle of registration/voting. It's time to move on to my next project in starting another non-profit (my buddies chuckle that I can now lose MORE money legally). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi Richard, good luck with your non-profit. Around here, selfishness, unbridled acquisitiveness, social paranoia, and soul-deforming greed, are all considered to be the real manifestations of morality. I hope the American people will stop shooting each other in the back and learn to get along some day. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
"chuck" wrote in message news:C8vhd.88148$kz3.43033@fed1read02... "Ed Price" wrote in message news:2wlhd.87747$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 Some things can be forgiven, some can be forgotten. But how can you savage the opinion of 270-some veterans with a judgement of "obsessive and perverted"? Of course, their feelings are being used for political influence (remember Kerry saying he was "reporting and ready for duty"). But you are way out of line to judge their memories. I suppose your close really says it all; you say the candidate is loyal to "mega-corporate cronies" and "loonies". Ahhhh, I'm dealing with the Almighty Chuck, the mortal who can discern cronies from friends and who can define the Common Folk. Yep, that answers everything. Ed wb6wsn |
Randy,
I value and believe in my emotions. Now what should I do? Seriously, "informed decision making" is a personal action that of necessity includes the context of an individual's emotions. What is informed for you may be just plain stupid for me, and vice versa. How could one ever completely separate "informed" decisions from emotions? 73, Gene W4SZ Theplanters95 wrote: 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. |
"Ed Price" wrote in message news:afPhd.88762$kz3.24282@fed1read02... "chuck" wrote in message news:C8vhd.88148$kz3.43033@fed1read02... "Ed Price" wrote in message news:2wlhd.87747$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 Some things can be forgiven, some can be forgotten. But how can you savage the opinion of 270-some veterans with a judgement of "obsessive and perverted"? Of course, their feelings are being used for political influence (remember Kerry saying he was "reporting and ready for duty"). But you are way out of line to judge their memories. --------------------------------------------------------------- Ed, Out of line? ROTFLMAO! One cannot give credence to a piddly few malcontents (270 out of millions) who have an agenda - mainly that of the Christian Coaliton. In contrast, the folks who served with Kerry, have an entirely different story to tell - a credible one! I suppose your close really says it all; you say the candidate is loyal to "mega-corporate cronies" and "loonies". Ahhhh, I'm dealing with the Almighty Chuck, the mortal who can discern cronies from friends and who can define the Common Folk. Yep, that answers everything. It is common knowledge that the Republican party is traditionally aligned to the rich and powerful, which includes mega-corporate interests - "no bid" Halliburton included - only a fool would refute this. As far as loonies, I've named only one: the one who's agenda is to "replace the constitution with the 10 commandments" and to "Disenfranchize all liberals". Rather than offer a credible retort, you attempt to demean my position. Intellectual honesty isn't one of your strong points, I see. Chuck Ed wb6wsn |
Theplanters95 wrote:
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 :-) If anyone ever furnishes proof that there is someone listening to those prayers, I will join in. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
|
Hi, Cecil:
Worldlings have made that challenge since time immemorial. The someone listening is the author of prayer. Join in now, by praying for the grace of faith, just in case your position of apparent unbelief turns out to be the wrong one for all eternity. 73, Dave, N3HE "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... Theplanters95 wrote: 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 :-) If anyone ever furnishes proof that there is someone listening to those prayers, I will join in. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:15:12 GMT, "NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg"
wrote: And, as WE WERE ATTACKED ON 9/11, we were as justified in retaliating as in ANY period of time in the history of the Republic-- You were not attacked by Saddam Hussein on 9/11 so why attack him? |
"chuck" wrote in message news:HARhd.90365$kz3.85164@fed1read02... "Ed Price" wrote in message news:afPhd.88762$kz3.24282@fed1read02... "chuck" wrote in message news:C8vhd.88148$kz3.43033@fed1read02... "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 Some things can be forgiven, some can be forgotten. But how can you savage the opinion of 270-some veterans with a judgement of "obsessive and perverted"? Of course, their feelings are being used for political influence (remember Kerry saying he was "reporting and ready for duty"). But you are way out of line to judge their memories. --------------------------------------------------------------- Ed, Out of line? ROTFLMAO! One cannot give credence to a piddly few malcontents (270 out of millions) who have an agenda - mainly that of the Christian Coaliton. In contrast, the folks who served with Kerry, have an entirely different story to tell - a credible one! I suppose your close really says it all; you say the candidate is loyal to "mega-corporate cronies" and "loonies". Ahhhh, I'm dealing with the Almighty Chuck, the mortal who can discern cronies from friends and who can define the Common Folk. Yep, that answers everything. It is common knowledge that the Republican party is traditionally aligned to the rich and powerful, which includes mega-corporate interests - "no bid" Halliburton included - only a fool would refute this. As far as loonies, I've named only one: the one who's agenda is to "replace the constitution with the 10 commandments" and to "Disenfranchize all liberals". Rather than offer a credible retort, you attempt to demean my position. Intellectual honesty isn't one of your strong points, I see. Chuck On the contrary, intellectual honesty is something you couldn't recognize if it were stuffed up your nose, sideways. Ed |
Even if you do not believe in something does not mean it is not valid.
I do not believe in Islam. That does not mean it does not exist. We need to be careful not to let our emotions cloud our reasoning. nuff said, Randy KA4NMA |
David J Windisch wrote:
Join in now, by praying for the grace of faith, just in case your position of apparent unbelief turns out to be the wrong one for all eternity. I've seen zero proof of immortality. If I have an immortal soul, then so does my dog and so do her fleas. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Theplanters95 wrote:
Even if you do not believe in something does not mean it is not valid. If you faithfully believe that the moon has a green cheese core, does that make it valid? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Ed Price wrote in message news:G6Whd.91362$kz3.46015@fed1read02... "chuck" wrote in message news:HARhd.90365$kz3.85164@fed1read02... Rather than offer a credible retort, you attempt to demean my position. Intellectual honesty isn't one of your strong points, I see. Chuck On the contrary, intellectual honesty is something you couldn't recognize if it were stuffed up your nose, sideways. Ed A response which only serves to confirm... |
More proof for the true and living Christian God than for evolution.
This is an antenna group. Let's get back to antennas. The election is over. Bush won. The people have spoken. Let's all work together to return America to a great nation. Randy |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com