In article .net,
Dan/W4NTI w4nti@get wrote:

No we are not. You see 'Reg' what worldwide folks don't understand about
the USA is that inbetween wars we fight with each other.



-Spellbound.-

In article .net,
Dan/W4NTI w4nti@get wrote:

No we are not. You see 'Reg' what worldwide folks don't understand about
the USA is that inbetween wars we fight with each other.



-Spellbound.-

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 05:43:41 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Matt Osborn wrote:

Bill Turner wrote:
Nonsense. Go check your dictionary. We are a democratic republic.

" 2. a. A state in which the supreme power rests in the people and
their elected representatives or officers, as opposed to one governed
by a king or similar ruler; a commonwealth. Now also applied loosely
to any state which claims this designation."

You left out one of the definitions which can be described as a pure
democracy. From Webster's New Universal Unabridged: "... the supreme
power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them ..."
That is the type of democracy that voted for Socrates to drink
hemlock, which he did.


A democracy is one in which 3 wolves and 1 sheep vote on the evening
meal!

unkadean wrote:

SNIP



A democracy is one in which 3 wolves and 1 sheep vote on the evening
meal!



Reminds me of another democratic vote!!

When President Lincoln, Republican, was planning on releasing the
Emancipation Proclamation he had a meeting of his cabinet. At the
meeting he asked for a vote. He wanted a unanimous vote. The result of
that vote was 13:1.

He asked the cabinet to reflect on the vote overnight. The second vote
was unanimous 0:14 [Note that Lincoln did not change his vote].

unkadean wrote:

SNIP



A democracy is one in which 3 wolves and 1 sheep vote on the evening
meal!



Reminds me of another democratic vote!!

When President Lincoln, Republican, was planning on releasing the
Emancipation Proclamation he had a meeting of his cabinet. At the
meeting he asked for a vote. He wanted a unanimous vote. The result of
that vote was 13:1.

He asked the cabinet to reflect on the vote overnight. The second vote
was unanimous 0:14 [Note that Lincoln did not change his vote].

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 05:43:41 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Matt Osborn wrote:

Bill Turner wrote:
Nonsense. Go check your dictionary. We are a democratic republic.

" 2. a. A state in which the supreme power rests in the people and
their elected representatives or officers, as opposed to one governed
by a king or similar ruler; a commonwealth. Now also applied loosely
to any state which claims this designation."

You left out one of the definitions which can be described as a pure
democracy. From Webster's New Universal Unabridged: "... the supreme
power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them ..."
That is the type of democracy that voted for Socrates to drink
hemlock, which he did.


A democracy is one in which 3 wolves and 1 sheep vote on the evening
meal!

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 09:09:33 -0800, Bill Turner
wrote:

Don't be fooled by whether the name is correct or not; the word
Democratic is just an adjective, as in "The Peoples Democratic Republic
of (fill in the blank). Fools nobody.

I noticed this tendency of the right wing in America to use the word
"Democrat" in place of "Democratic" several months ago on talk radio.
Does anyone know where and how it started?


Members of the Democrat party are democrats. It is not the democratic
party and they are not democratics!

And zoran is a hate filled schmuck!

unkadean wrote:

Members of the Democrat party are democrats. It is not the democratic
party and they are not democratics!

And zoran is a hate filled schmuck!

1. There is no such thing as "Democrat party" - the name of one of the
two major American parties is Democratic Party and its members and
voters are called democrats, which is a noun. "Democratic" is an
adjective and since adjectives are noun modifiers, the party is properly
called Democratic Party.

2. As for your editorializing, please don't project your own feelings to
other people. I am not the one listening to AM, Fox News and CNBC so
that I can be told what my opinion is and who to hate on a given day. I
prefer to use my own brain instead, a novel concept for some people.

3. My name is generally capitalized. However, if this is too liberal for
you, I'll understand. We don't want to get you, as well, addicted to
Oxycontins.



WA7AA

--

Anti-spam measu look me up on qrz.com if you need to reply directly

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 05:47:08 GMT, Zoran Brlecic
wrote:

2. As for your editorializing, please don't project your own feelings to
other people. I am not the one listening to AM, Fox News and CNBC so
that I can be told what my opinion is and who to hate on a given day. I
prefer to use my own brain instead, a novel concept for some people.

You gave some good advice, please follow it.

Matt Osborn wrote:

2. As for your editorializing, please don't project your own feelings to
other people. I am not the one listening to AM, Fox News and CNBC so
that I can be told what my opinion is and who to hate on a given day. I
prefer to use my own brain instead, a novel concept for some people.

You gave some good advice, please follow it.

I'm not the one posting countless messages all over the place blaming
"liberals" for everything, from Janet Jackon's nipples to the increased
swelling of one's rectal polyps. I understand a psychological need for
being able to apply simplistic solutions to imaginary problems, though,
but that hardly justifies the intrusion of the pseudo-political neo-con
vulgarity everywhere, the unrelated Usenet groups included.
Therefore, when the irrational anti-liberal paranoia stops invading the
forums that I read, I'll stop responding. How's that?

WA7AA

--

Anti-spam measu look me up on qrz.com if you need to reply directly