Mark, I wasn't trying to say that Jane Fonda
was more or less evil than RMN, just that the
era of her notoriety was as far back in the distant
past as Nixon's. Maybe if Nixon had come out with some
exercise videos he would have remained a target
for left-wing bashers.By the way, while Fonda did apologize,
Nixon never did.

Mark S. Holden wrote:
Larry Ozarow wrote:


Nixon has been dead since 1994, and while he did some stupid things, he was never photographed at an anti aircraft gun with a bunch of friends who happened to be trying to kill members of our military, and he never held a press conference to say the folks
we were fighting were a swell bunch of guys.

When our POW's came back and said they'd been mistreated, she called them liars.

Ultimately, in 1988 she apologized, but many people had already made up their minds.

"David" wrote in message
...
''Classical liberalism'' is an oxymoron.

It's hard ot respond to this since I'm not sure if you don't know what
an oxymoron is or don't know what liberalism is in the classic sense.

Al Franken is a New Yorker.

This comment alone should give you pause the next time you're tempted
to state anything as fact.


Today's ''liberals'' are truer to their heritage than the nutjobs
running around today falsely claiming to be ''conservatives''.

See above.

On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 12:07:51 -0500, "T. Early"
wrote:


"David" wrote in message
.. .
I said ''Liberal''

The word has been turned into a put-down by the neofascists. Mr.
Franken intends to reclaim it. He uses it himself without
hesitation.



Nice try, Franken-phile. Hollywood Al isn't reclaiming
anything--he
is your standard left-wing, one-note, Bush-bashing -modern day-
liberal who has no clue what classical "liberalism" used to be
about.
He may use the term "without hesitation," but, like most things he
says without hesitation, he's wrong. The word has been turned into
a
put-down very justifiably because so many of today's liberals are
so
clueless about the heritage of their alleged political philosophy,
as
they are about the history of pretty much everything.

"Larry Ozarow" wrote in message
...



I think Fonda's wartime activities became an issue when the revisionist
view of the Vietnam war began to gain ground during Reagan's
administration.

The breaking point for alot of people was the list of top 100 women of the
century which included Jane Fonda..

I can't prove it, but I think all the money Jane Fonda throws at all sorts
of Liberal/Progressive causes keeps her at the top of several "enemies
lists". I'm sure she would still be widely disliked without her activism
and fundraising, but her activism and fundraising energizes her opponents.
And, to my ear anyway, alot of political talk show talking points sound like
they come straight from pressure groups and one or the other political
parties.


And while it's true perhaps that Nixon was a non-factor
politically as you say, this is not to his credit. If anything it
emphasizes the peculiar nature of the right-wing obsession with Hanoi
Jane.

Ironically, the Nixon administration could have prosecuted Jane Fonda for
treason.

Frank Dresser

= = = "T. Early" wrote in message
= = = ...
"RHF" wrote in message
m...
FW,

"a female interviewer was talking to Ralph Nadar and trying to
get him to admit he'd thrown the election to Bush in 2000,"

ONE MORE DEMOCRAT LIE:

Ralph Nader was NOT the difference (Numerically) in any state
between Bush and Gore when you subtract out Pat Buchanan.
[ The Negatives (RN) balanced out the Pluses (PB). ]

However, Pat Buchanan DID 'make' the "Difference Numerically"
in three states.
[ To put them in the Gore (Won) Column and the Bush (Lost) Box. ]

Just the Facts ~ RHF

Sorry RHF--Nader got about 97,000 votes in Florida, Buchanan about
17,000. Gotta be fair.

TE,

I was not talking about Florida

Bush = 2,912,790
Gore = 2,912,253
DELTA = 537
Buchanan = 17,484
Had Pat Buchanan not been in
the 2000 Presidential Election
Florida would have went for BUSH - Big Time !
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/2000presge.htm


I was talking about these four states where Pat Buchanan
did in-fact cost GW Bush "The WIN" in those States:

* IOWA = Seven (7) Electoral Votes
Gore = 638,517
Bush = 634,373
DELTA = 4,144
Buchanan = 5,731
Had Pat Buchanan not been in
the 2000 Presidential Election
IOWA would have went for BUSH.

* NEW MEXICO = Five (5) Electoral Votes
Gore = 286,783
Bush = 286,417
DELTA = 366
Buchanan = 1,392
Had Pat Buchanan not been in
the 2000 Presidential Election
New Mexico would have went for BUSH.

* OREGON = Seven (7) Electoral Votes
Gore = 720,342
Bush = 713,577
DELTA = 6,765
Buchanan = 7,063
Had Pat Buchanan not been in
the 2000 Presidential Election
Oregon would have went for BUSH.

* WISCONSIN = Eleven (11) Electoral Votes
Gore = 1,242,987
Bush = 1,237,279
DELTA = 5,708
Buchanan 11,471
Had Pat Buchanan not been in
the 2000 Presidential Election
Oregon would have went for BUSH.


A "Total" of Thirty (30) Electoral Votes for GW Bush )


jtf ~ RHF

..

"RHF" wrote in message
om...
= = = "T. Early" wrote in message
= = = ...
"RHF" wrote in message
m...
FW,

"a female interviewer was talking to Ralph Nadar and trying to
get him to admit he'd thrown the election to Bush in 2000,"

ONE MORE DEMOCRAT LIE:

Ralph Nader was NOT the difference (Numerically) in any state
between Bush and Gore when you subtract out Pat Buchanan.
[ The Negatives (RN) balanced out the Pluses (PB). ]

However, Pat Buchanan DID 'make' the "Difference Numerically"
in three states.
[ To put them in the Gore (Won) Column and the Bush (Lost)
Box. ]

Just the Facts ~ RHF

Sorry RHF--Nader got about 97,000 votes in Florida, Buchanan about
17,000. Gotta be fair.

TE,

I was not talking about Florida

Bush = 2,912,790
Gore = 2,912,253
DELTA = 537
Buchanan = 17,484
Had Pat Buchanan not been in
the 2000 Presidential Election
Florida would have went for BUSH - Big Time !
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/2000presge.htm


OK, then I don't understand what you mean by this I guess: "Ralph
Nadir was NOT the difference (Numerically) in any state between Bush
and Gore when you subtract out Pat Buchanan."

When you take Buchanan out of the mix (or even give his votes to Bush)
Nader was the difference in Florida and New Hampshire. If you assume
most Nader votes go to Gore, Gore wins Florida and New Hampshire.

T. Early wrote:


OK, then I don't understand what you mean by this I guess: "Ralph
Nadir was NOT the difference (Numerically) in any state between Bush
and Gore when you subtract out Pat Buchanan."

When you take Buchanan out of the mix (or even give his votes to Bush)
Nader was the difference in Florida and New Hampshire. If you assume
most Nader votes go to Gore, Gore wins Florida and New Hampshire.



There was also some evidence or at least a reasonable
argument that some of the Buchanan vote in Florida
was intended for Gore, but got diverted by a messy
ballot layout.

AirAmerica Radio will also be on Sirius Satellite radio beginning April
19.

--
Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH

In article ,
Larry Weil wrote:

AirAmerica Radio will also be on Sirius Satellite radio beginning April
19.

That's it. I'm signing up!

Leonard

--
"Everything that rises must converge"
--Flannery O'Connor

"Leonard Martin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Larry Weil wrote:

AirAmerica Radio will also be on Sirius Satellite radio beginning
April
19.

That's it. I'm signing up!


Absolutely. Imagine the collected wisdom of the ages as interpreted
by the country's best and brightest broadcast on a single channel.
I'm surprised Sirius feels they need all of those flakey music
channels when they have Franken and Garafalo. Who cares about tunes
when you can listen to loons?

"T. Early" wrote in message
...

"Leonard Martin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Larry Weil wrote:

AirAmerica Radio will also be on Sirius Satellite radio beginning
April
19.

That's it. I'm signing up!


Absolutely. Imagine the collected wisdom of the ages as interpreted
by the country's best and brightest broadcast on a single channel.
I'm surprised Sirius feels they need all of those flakey music
channels when they have Franken and Garafalo. Who cares about tunes
when you can listen to loons?



You're on a roll today.. but let's not forget.. the loons are not kept
strictly on the left wing..