RadioBanter - N3CVJ denies failures, while Presidential Commission admitsfailures.

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 12:11:32 -0400, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:
From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:33:14 -0400, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:
Disagreeing viewpoints aren't a problem for the majority..it's people
like you that
mistakenly feel those who hold views contrary to your own are somehow of
the minority.

The last election pretty much confirms this.

Exactly, as a certain faction (like yourself) who voted for Bush
continue to mistakenly believe Bush had a majority of the people in the
US vote for him (he didn't)

Then how do you explain how he won?
=A0
That you mistake the majority of registered voters who actually voted
for the majority of the people in the US is your problem. That you fall
victim to the deliberate disinformation campaign that Bush had a mandate
is a bonus.
It's people like you that are unable to come to terms with the fact
that those large number of people who disagree with you need not conform
to what you feel is appropriate.

It is you who are in the minority, but somehow

think you are in the majority despite evidence,

Yes, evidence showing YOU are in the minority not the majority as
relates to many, many positions among these pages. A perfect example is
your shining belief that speeders are criminals simply because they
break a certain law,

You just keep repeating that lie in the hopes

that it'll suddenly become true. I NEVER ever

made the statement that speeders are

criminals.

You did in many fashion. For instance, you responded (concerning the
speeder being called a criminal) "if the shoe fits" and you have indeed
labeled those who commit civil infractions as "criminal". The speeding
analogy was used to exterminate your poor analogy that dx'ers and
freebanders are criminals. You changed the equation by adding additional
parameters invoking that dx and freebanding can lead to other charges in
certain instances,..same with speeding. You are still unable to
comprehend neither offense is a criminal offense.

Democrats are still

losing seats in congress, despite the

unpopular war in Iraq. The desperation of

these same democrats who just can't

understand why they are losing, has become

so obvious, that they don't even try to hide

their crass, shrill, and unprofessional attacks

against Republicans.

Goes bothways,,,,like Delay and the comments he made regarding hatred
and his threats against judges that you couldn't even locate on your
own.

Which pales in comparison to the vitriol

spouted by the likes of Al Gore, Howard Dean,
Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, and others. =A0=A0

60% of this majority you continue to invoke as justifications for
whatever the Bush camp does agree with stem cell research, yet, in the
third week of May, Bush said, addressing this situation "There is no
such thing as a spare embryo" while attempting to explain his reasoning
for opposing it. In the first place, what about this majority now, Dave?
In the second place, each and EVERY single company that is involved with
assisting infertile couples conceive tosses away countless embryos on a
regular and ongoing basis. What the hell is Bush talking about?
Now we have found abuses at Gitmo concerning the koran -were- true. As
always, more lipservice from Bushyboy, downplaying it as "a few isolated
incidences"...yes, incidents that are becoming commonplace and part of a
pattern of this administration.
In fact, you weren't even aware your own party acknowledged global
warming,

You're lying again.

Which are you claiming isn't true, now? The fact that you weren't aware
of global warming, asked for proof, was shown, then changed your claim
to one of how much effect it actually has on the world, or the fact that
you were not aware your own party acknowledged such?
Either one is there for the reading.
You have pretty much ascertained to the group that even though you fancy
yourself as educated on such subjects, you fall way short.

Well, sure, when held against your wild

imagination,

Try not and let your anger dictate your posts become personal because as
much as you need to believe it, global waming is not my imagination.

I do fall short. But when held

against the truth, I do just fine.

When the truth is presented, you attack it, the poster, change the
subject, snip it, or claim the information is incorrect..Lol. Such was
done with your wild ants that democracy was not only taking place in
Iran, but that Iraq was improving. You asked for reports and were given
several.
On other occasion, you ask for what you mistakenly misrepresent to
yourself as "proof", and when such is given, you claim the information
is wrong because "mistakes happen",,,lol...I agree, and the only mistake
here is made by yourself..repeatedly.

That only makes the people rebel against

them even more.

At least one democrat understands this. It's

interesting to watch Hillary Clinton try to

reinvent herself as a "moderate",

As many, many republicans have distanced themselves from Bush...

A few uncertain doubters does not constitute

"many".

Well respected senators, generals, advisors and others on the front line
not constitute uncertain doubters. Ditton for all those defectors who
resigned from the Bush admin.

and to distance herself from some of her more
vocal compadres. I guess she figures that we'll
all forget her former leftist politics, and that

farce that was supposed to be universal

heathcare.

That you consider healthcare for our own people as leftist politics
while we continue to offer free health care to all the Iraqis who simply
ask for it illustrates your level of comprehension.

.As is typical for you, you divert from one issue

to another.

Something is very wrong with you, as -you- brought up health care. As is
standard with your incompetence you blame another for your goofy gaffes.

I oppose all forms of socialized medicine

whether it be for us or Iraqi's.

Yet, instead of being proactive (as you prefer to imagine yourself) and
doing something about it or even speaking out about it, you choose to
ignore the wild spending of health care spent on Iraq, and instead
choose to whine and snivel and continue to be impotently REactive about
history that has no relation to the present situation. Frank has
demonstrated the reason you employ this particular method is because you
can not discuss current political situations due how little informed you
are of current affairs.

The majority makes the rules. It's fine that the

rights of the minority are considered but it

makes no logical sense that the needs of that

minority outweighs the needs of the majority.

It doesn't matter which group. When rights are being taken away or
infringed upon, the needs you speak of far outweigh any perceived
majority. You come across as "majority is always right" when it has been
illustrated and accepted the majority has been wrong, especially with
this administration.

What is considered right and wrong is usually

relative and depends upon the perspective of

the majority.

Wrong. Rights are not inherent to any majority group, despite what they
and you feel, you are not special,....rights extend to all in this
country, not merely your imagined moral majority.

That has nothing to do with the concept of

what is "right or wrong" and who sets the

standard by which this is gauged.

My gosh, you finally did it. You talked yourself into a circle. It has
everything to do with it. The fact that you feel you have a right to
deny others their rights under the impossible guise that your morals are
somehow superior to those who do not subscribe to your core beliefs
makes about as much sense as your position that rights have nothing to
do with the concept of right or wrong.

And, like it or not, from the time we are little

kids in school, we learned that life is not

always fair, and that those in the majority set

the fads, trends, and rules whether the rest of

us agree or not.

You are dead wrong. Fashion trends and fads have indeed been set by
extreme minority factions on many, many occasions. You're blathering.

Take slavery for example.

I already did. Get your own examples to illustrate how majority rule is
not always right.

Majority rule is always right in the context of

the time it is enacted.

Slavery was never right, David, no matter what the time -or- the
context, nor is beating your wife, but you go on and argue how you agree
these laws were right simply because they were enacted by what you refer
the majority. Perhaps such a ****ed up core belief system is what was
responsible for your marital and personal woes in the first place.

During the time of slavery, the majority

believed it was an acceptable practice.

Eventually the majority changed their belief

and decided that it was no longer an

acceptable practice.

In no time in recent

(a relative term you can apply to mean any length of time you wish)

history has the minority

successfully bent the will of the majority on

major issues.

That's -exactly- what happened on countless issues. Most recently it
happened with the taking of God and religion out of the schools. The
will bends and this majority you continue to misrepresent changes the
law, especially when it is shown the law is -wrong- or poorly
constructed by those you hold as the -majority-. History is rife with
examples of laws that were enacted by the "majority" but were struck
down as unconstitutional and you denying such takes place on a regular
basis is nothing short of astounding.

Change occurs when the majority recognizes

that the time is right for a different direction.

Often brought on by the minority bending the "will" of the majority.

It is not a sudden thing, rather it is a gradual

transition.

Aw gee,,,,you're off and ranting,,er, running on yet another topic.

Liberals

(snip) Liberals founded this country and the fact that Bush has
successfully forced you to accept his redefined albeit incorrect
definition of "liberal" is almost as funny as your blaming everyone but
the current leaders of this country for everything,,you blamed the
liberals, you blamed the queers, you blamed the democrats, hell Dave,
you blamed everyone but the leader of this country for all the problems
we face. It must be nice to go through life believing the person you
voted for has done no wrong, is the leader of this country, and
responsible for nothing except good things.

As another example, I personally think the TV

show, "American Idol" (and most "reality"

shows for that matter) is a complete waste of

time and a total example of vapid vicarious

superficiality, and voyeurism.

Exactly, yet, such audio voyeurism is something you find "juicy". In
fact, it was only a few years ago you claimed practicing audio voyeurism
turned you on,

That is yet another lie.

No, it's not. Google it.

I never made any such

claim.
=A0
=A0You claimed listening to underaged girls on cordless phones speaking
of sex was "juicy". You were not a minor when you spoke of such acts
being "juicy". Now, the moral -majority- of people would find it
disgustingly perverted that a man of your age finds sex talk of minors
"juicy". Your words and actions speak loud and clear to the world,
David, as only you have this incredible belief only you can see yourself
as you really are and that you are misunderstood to the point that you
need reiterate and explain yourself to each and every person you
disagree. You plead and plead that everyone misunderstands you David,
but what you can't comprehend is those people -are- the majority of
posting regs in this group,

I also listened to people making drug deals.

But that doesn't make me a druggie.
=A0
It also doesn't disqualify your remarks just a few short years ago
calling sex talk between minor girls "juicy".
In this example, you not only had to be made aware that intentional
eavesdropping of private conversations is illegal

It was not illegal at the time I was engaged in

listening.

It was. This is another area concernig the law of which you are
extremely ignorant.

Any scanner user could do it.

No David,,the last time this was brought up, you tried and failed with
this excuse. When it was illustrated what a pervert you are, you come
back with the defense that the incident occurred years and years ago,
when you were a younger man. It appears you can remember vividly the
details of such an incident that many years ago, but can not recal a
simple Phelps antenna when inquired of a comment you made a few year's
previous alluding to such. Nevertheless, back when you were that young,
the scanners were not digital, but crystals, and contrary to your claim
"any scanner user could do it", that simply was not the case back then.
In fact, cordless phones came on the market in 1980 and were ALL 27 MHZ
phones, a specific crystal that did NOT come imbedded in "any scanner".
All of this coupled together with your oft-invoked "statistical
probablility" factor, makes you to be one big freegin' liar! LMAO!

If the FCC or the phone lobby doesn't want

people listening in, they need to block out

those frequencies or scramble the

transmissions.

Then the same logic can be applied to use of the freeband. It was always
a crime to eavesdrop on one's private telephone conversation using
electronic equipment, David. It violates federal wiretap law, but your
position of "thinking like a criminal" (your words) is interesting.

We've been all through this before. (As usual)

You don't know what you are talking about.

As usual, you get so caught up in your lies, you begin to blame others
for your problems.

Don't embarrass yourself by bringing it up

again.

That's awful nice of you, but I prefer to let you, on occasion, talk
sideways for the entertainment of all,..now tell us once again how it
was legal for you to eavesdrop on private cordless telephone
conversations (when scanners were using crystals) using an electronic
device, when cordless phones were of a frequency which scanners did not
come with.

I am more than willing to post the links to the

ECPA, showing the date that it became

.effective and what it covers.

Try reading what applied to your situation, not what you think gave you
permission to violate the law. Ignorance is no excuse for breaking the
law. If you are going to break the law, you should at least be educated
about the law you break and penalties you face.

David T. Hall Jr.

N3CVJ

"Sandbagger"