OT: If Kerry is elected...

[YD]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:28:56 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:41:38 -0300, YD wrote:

On 16 Oct 2004 00:52:59 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote in
newsan.2004.10.15.18.25.05.69414@example.net:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:33:44 -0700, Julie wrote:

Frank Bemelman wrote:

The state of the nation is ruled by other forces than just the
administration.

Why don't more people realize that?

Because most people are programmed not to notice anything. They're
quite comfortable being nice and obedient, in their comfortable
little stock pens.

People don't want freedom, they want Mommy.

Cheers!
Rich




Kerry wants to have the GOVERNMENT run his healthcare.
He wants to "tax the rich" to help the "middle class",IOW;Marxism.

So, would you rather tax the middle class to help the rich?

No, they'd rather tax the middle class to make weapons of mass destruction
to invade other countries with.

Well, there you are. It's making an already profitable business even
more so.

- YD.

--
Remove HAT if replying by mail.

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 23:31:33 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:18:52 -0500, John Fields wrote:

---
Save your mealy-mouthed passive-aggressive bullshit for someone who
gives a shit, Rich.

As far as I'm concerned, if I see a mad dog heading my way and I've
got a gun in my hand, guess what? I'm going to blow that son of a
bitch away before he even gets a _chance_ to bite me.

And you have apparently completely blinded yourself to the fact that
no such attack ever took place. And it's been established ad nauseam
that 9/11 is a red herring.

---
Whether it was or not isn't important. What I was alluding to was the
growing threat brought about by ten years' worth of defiance of the
weakening leash placed around the mad dog's throat.

If you weren't so intent on trying to shove your foolosophy down
everyone's throat while at the same time preaching perfect
understanding you might come to the realization that you've put
yourself in the uncomfortable position of not being able to go to
sleep because you vcant find the light switch.
---

To make the metaphor accurate, you (GWB & gang) have broken into
your neighbor's yard, and are trashing his stuff and killing his
family, never mind the dog.

---
What you mean is that for the metaphor to please you, it has to be
structured in a way which makes those with whom you disagree,
villains. Sad.
---

And you? I
guess you'd just sit there hoping that he wouldn't notice you, and
then, when he had his jaw clamped firmly on your throat, start
thinking about ways to make him quit? Good luck, dog meat!

Well, if you want to know the truth, I have no reason to fear attack
from any dog, for reasons your limited consciousness is apparently
incapable of grasping.

---
Pride comes before a fall...

Be careful.

--
John Fields

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <r6f5n0hieldt80p3nq024oa1rfr2ohptk9@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:
[...]

There are 10,000 people dying a month in Darfur, and the UN isn't
interested. I guess that's because there's not a lot of
friends-and-family money available there, and other, more fundamental,
reasons.

Is there any oil there?

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <6dd076bc.0410170310.61ab5a74@posting.google.com>,
abderrahman_3@hotmail.com (Abd-er-Rahman III) writes:

"Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote in message news:<uBccd.14480$nj.562@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>...
"Abd-er-Rahman III" <abderrahman_3@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6dd076bc.0410160834.7ad6a8d4@posting.google.com...
Probably go get an edjabcation.

snip


http://www.democracymeansyou.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/bush-pissing-in-place-400.jpg


THIS is what you would expect from a DemocRAT!

You talk about Dems like Hitler talked about Jews. Scary.

For sounding like hate speech, refer to the extremist hatred on the

Democrat side. The Dems do sound like the Nazis... Scary...

John

 

[Fred Bloggs]

Tom Seim wrote:

Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<4172BCBE.7030609@nospam.com>...

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
On 17 Oct 2004 11:02:50 -0700, soar2morrow@yahoo.com (Tom Seim)
wrote:


I'll say it again: Kerry is a self-admitted war criminal.


Why haven't you bothered to show this, rather than just inanely
repeat the same disproven claim over and over as though saying it
more often will make it truer?

That is the tactic drilled into his head by the Karl Rove memos
distributed to these frauds. I have told you time and again, don't
waste time taking these people seriously- they are not interested
in real facts or debate.


It's a matter of the Congressional Record which I have already
posted. Can you read?

Didn't I already tell you that his testimony was true and factual, pizza
gulper.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 23:36:27 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net
(Ken Smith) wrote:

In article <r6f5n0hieldt80p3nq024oa1rfr2ohptk9@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:
[...]
There are 10,000 people dying a month in Darfur, and the UN isn't
interested. I guess that's because there's not a lot of
friends-and-family money available there, and other, more fundamental,
reasons.

Is there any oil there?

I don't think so; just people dying.

John

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:28:07 -0700, the renowned John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 23:36:27 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net
(Ken Smith) wrote:

In article <r6f5n0hieldt80p3nq024oa1rfr2ohptk9@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:
[...]
There are 10,000 people dying a month in Darfur, and the UN isn't
interested. I guess that's because there's not a lot of
friends-and-family money available there, and other, more fundamental,
reasons.

Is there any oil there?


I don't think so; just people dying.

John

The Sudan does indeed have substantial oil reserves, with production
expected to reach 0.5mln bbp by next year. Unlike many places,
production is increasing, and there are believed to be great
undiscoverd resources.

http://www.afrol.com/articles/13921


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Jim Yanik]

Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote in
news:B8Ccd.409065$Fg5.36432@attbi_s53:

Tom Seim wrote:
Being opposed to something is a good way to get things started. But
it's not going to get you across the finish line. By finish line I
mean actually accomplishing something tangible - not just getting
elected.

I don't see that unanimity of purpose in liberals that exists amongst
conservatives. Liberals would be well advised to tone down the hate
and start thinking about what they want to accomplish. When you listen
to liberals talk about accomplishments they point out civil rights and
voting rights. I'm sorry, but this 25-30 years ago; what have you done
for me lately (like in the current generation). Not much. Bill Clinton
declared that there would be more legislation passed than since FDR
took office. Then Hillary took over.

I've mentioned this before: what the liberals need is the equivalent
of Newt Gingrich's Contract With America. This was explicit, short and
succinct. And it was something by which they could be easily measured.
I am certain, however, that this will not happen: that would require
thought, cooperation and agreement. Not exactly the left's forte.

I'd argue that the liberal agenda is still active and alive; its just
that the "Contract with America" took aim at it, and used the religious
beliefs and greed of much of the populace, along with a vastly improved
machine for disinformation, as their weapon of choice.

Most of the 'majority' of people who vote Republican have been
hoodwinked into thinking that they will be better off with lower taxes,
less government, less control on 'their rights'.

Yes,that's right.A Government's proper duty is to provide a fair playing
field.(after securing the citizens freedom and the country's borders)

The reality,
unfortunately for them, is that they are far better off with a
progressive tax system,

"progressive tax system";another name for socialism or Marxism.


Snip utopian speech.

Thats the liberal ideal. Thats the idea that, unconsiously or
consiously, we all work for, even these capitalists with their
wrong-headed ideas of control. We all know in our hearts and minds that
hunger and poverty and disease can be eliminated. We've seen its
possibility blossom, in our lifetimes. We all know that we can rebuild
the garden. Its almost within reach. We just need to stretch out our
collective hands...

There's another Marxist term;"collective".

Who's this "we" you speak of?


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

 

[Jim Yanik]

Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote in
news:uhe5n0t2ed3javj4saff9vfj779i2e7ebk@4ax.com:

On 17 Oct 2004 11:02:50 -0700, soar2morrow@yahoo.com (Tom Seim) wrote:

I'll say it again: Kerry is a
self-admitted war criminal.

Why haven't you bothered to show this, rather than just inanely repeat
the same disproven claim over and over as though saying it more often
will make it truer?

I have repeatedly posted what I could find on this point and that
evidence isn't at all congruent with your claim. So... let's see your
'logic' laid bare and exposed for all to see. What are your facts,
sources, and your logic?

Jon

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-
review/opinion/columnists/datelinedc/s_262038.html

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

 

[Julie]

Ken Smith wrote:

In article <ckrspb$1oq0$4@news.iquest.net>,
John S. Dyson <toor@iquest.net> wrote:
[...]
N Korea problem, hoodwinked by a crazy dictator.

N. Korea was only a slight problem at the end of the Clinton era. It is
only in the last 2 years that they have turned into a major problem, but
I'll let you have that one.

The declining economy starting in early yr2000, associated mismanagement
of the big economic bubble.

This is not correct. the economy started to decrease its rate of growth
only in the summer of 2000. The stock market underwent what could be best
described as a mild correction at that time. The stock market tanked
after the election.

A better theory is that business people said "Oh gawd someone from Texas
is the republican candidate, I'm selling out and moving to the rockies.
When Bush got elected they said "Someone who can't even say nuclear and
thinks grits is food got elected, I out of here".

Wake up.

The 90's (business) economy had *nothing* to do w/ the Clinton administration.

The 00+ (business) economy had *nothing* to do w/ the Bush administration.

If you want to know what/why regarding the economy, take an economics class and
take a long hard look at the SEC.

 

[Julie]

Fred Bloggs wrote:

Tom Seim wrote:


John Kerry's lies about the activities of the Swift boats were part of
a larger pattern of deception. As a leader of the Vietnam Veterans
Against the War (VVAW), Kerry testified before the Senate Committee on
Foreign Relations on April 22, 1971, telling the Senators and a
national audience that American troops "...had personally raped, cut
off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human
genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies,
randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of
Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and
generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam..." and accused the
U.S. military of committing war crimes "on a day-to-day basis with the
full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

Now it's all coming back to me- Kerry omitted the public castrations ,
usually performed by South Vietnamese interrogators, to get the other
detainees and/or villagers to give up the goods. Then there were the
infamous helicopter rides- climb to several hundred feet and throw
prisoner #1 out the door, then move onto to prisoner #2, etc...And don't
forget about the Agent Orange fiasco- are you so dumb you think American
GIs were the only ones affected by that stuff- hell we washed the
Vietnamese in it.

Fred -- I estimate that you spent 2-3 hrs. in this thread alone today, is that
about right?

 

[Jonathan Kirwan]

On 18 Oct 2004 00:50:20 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/columnists/datelinedc/s_262038.html

I tried, "cannot find server" is the result. From the HTML link, it looks like
an opinion piece, which may or may not be supported by references. I'm looking
for __primary information__ AND the __logic__ used.

In any case, I cannot access the link or even the primary site.

Jon

 

[Clarence]

"Jonathan Kirwan" <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote in message
news:t2v5n0hions86tc43bskkkufnu7akfcfgp@4ax.com...

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 19:18:20 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

A Kerry supporter will never see or hear anything which will convince them.
"Dense" is the best description I can use.

That's simply insulting bigotry. Nothing more or less.

Jon

Why think you, truth is always hard to set aside, isn't it?
However, I can not insult them by saying what I perceive is true.

 

[Jonathan Kirwan]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 02:20:34 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

"Jonathan Kirwan" <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote in message
news:t2v5n0hions86tc43bskkkufnu7akfcfgp@4ax.com...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 19:18:20 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

A Kerry supporter will never see or hear anything which will convince them.
"Dense" is the best description I can use.

That's simply insulting bigotry. Nothing more or less.

Jon

Why think you, truth is always hard to set aside, isn't it?

Bigots tend to imagine such things are true. But it's still painting with a
broad brush, like it or not. And that's bigotry, no matter how you look at it.
Each person should be taken on their terms and your comment doesn't do that in
the least.

However, I can not insult them by saying what I perceive is true.

Spoken like a real bigot, indeed.

Jon

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <417194AF.5040604@nospam.com>,
Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> writes:

John S. Dyson wrote:
In article <41715BF6.4070907@nospam.com>,
Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> writes:


Abd-er-Rahman III wrote:

http://www.mypetgoat.com/goatquotes.htm

I do not care much for Bush, but nonetheless must disagree with the
popular analysis of his demeanor in that classroom. His mind was
anything but vacant and he was not looking for guidance. He was clearly
stunned and his mind was racing. The 9/11 attacks were against him as
well as the US.


Note that the timescale for Al Queda attacks shows that the plans were
formulated during the Clinton administration. The attacks weren't really
against any one president, but indeed against the US.

One thing that Bush didn't do is to panic. When the Secret Service
and intelligence agencies got involved, then his flight "all over the nation"
took place. What happened on that day seems to make sense from the
standpoint of cold war strategy, and apparently the plans hadn't
changed during Clinton's regime.

John


I think it runs deeper than that. You might recall that several
terrorist organizations attempted to donate to Bush's 2000 campaign
through front men.

(For the humor impaired -- don't read this if you really do believe

Kerry's implication that France and Germany will immediately join the
US in helping Iraq during his presidency...)

Actually, the successful donations to the Democrats (Al Gore/BJ Clinton)
by the Chinese Red Army were much more consistent with the
foreign policy behavior of the Clinton administration (supplying
previously secret information about missiles to China, for example) instead
of the rather unfriendly takeover of Islamist regimes and attempted
destruction of Islamist organizations by the Bush administration. There
were certainly some pictures taken of terrorist supporters along with
Bush, but there were many pictures of the true (and large scale) terrorist
murderer Arafat and Clinton... Bush just doesn't have quite the collegial
relationship with known international terrorists like Arafat like Clinton.

Actually, when comparing the relative amounts of support and toleration
of Usama, it is VERY CLEAR that Bush wouldn't decline the delivery of
Usama to the US (or Gitmo), while Clinton certainly had preferred to
leave Usama alone to do his business. The Dems seem quite happy with
the results of the Clinton inaction until the current GOP president
had decided to recognize that we cannot accept that attitude any longer.
In reality, the Dems were apparently envious that the WTC-II attacks
happened during the Bush presidency, and were resentful of the lost
potential for Democrat glory. Given the Clinton involvement with the
Red Army funding, then maybe the ongoing relationships would have allowed
Kerry/Gore to avoid the liberation of Afghanistan or Saddam, and simply
indict the 'bad guys' and even give them an absent conviction!!! That
would DEFINITELY modified Usama's power base, and scare him enough to
avoid destroying any more buildings (or even using a nuke.)

(Of course, the fact is that the typical democrat response of
legal action against Usama will NOT have scared him into ceasing
his attacks!!!)

It was imperative that the WTC attack occur at the
earliest possible time into the Bush administration to maximize the
ensuing chaos.

Any new administration would have been weakest before the necessary

post-Clinton changes and improvements would be made. It was indeed
critical to attack the US early in the Bush administration, well before
they mitigate the incompetency and start to mitigate the extreme weakening
of the CIA. The planning of the 9/11 attacks were 100% motivated
and completed during the Clinton administration, when it was obvious
that the worst Clintonesque response would be to request international
police help and perhaps even incompetently send and waste some of the
converted O($1M) cruise missiles to accurately destroy some O($10K) camels.

Usama didn't get his expected results, both when considering the Arab
world and the expected Clintonesque US government response. Actually,
the Kerryesque response would likely have been to apologize for the
terrorists life lost in the four planes and the errant location of the
Pentagon and the WTC buildings. It is very wrong to accept the apparent
Democrat attitude that Saddam and/or Usama would be the peer of Kerry.
There might be more truth to that in the matter of damage against America,
but it sets a very bad precident, just because Kerry/Gore type people
would effectively be the peer of the enemy-despots, that doesn't mean that
Bush/McCain/Arnold would so low as to effectively be a peer of the
despots.

Bush's measured responses, and his showing of respect for Islam without
showing respect to the Islamists has been masterful. People like Kerry
tend to show too much respect to his peers in other, as he apparently
perceives, "political" movements like AlQueda. One difference between
Bush and Kerry is that people like Kerry and Gore appear to see
'political movements' when Bush (and even the UN) sees 'terrorists.'
People like Kerry and Al Gore see the need for a court action or police
response after para-military attacks, while Bush appropriately sees the
need for a miltary action. It is ONLY precedent, set by the Bush
administration, that AlQueda is fully recognized to be more than
a club like the young democrats. Well, actually, it might actually
be that they are closer to the listed organizations than even the
GOP might realize .

Of course, this default attitude that has accepted the dealings with
Al Queda (e.g. the WTC-I attacks) as police issues has been forced to
change in the Kerryites and the Algorites brand of 'reality', and they'll
accept the 'military' in rhetorical discussion, but the more likely response
is to deal with them like the WTC-I police response. No matter how much
that one might try to wake Kerry up to the fact that Al Queda (Usama) and
Saddam (both different parts of the similar problem) cannot be treated as
political peers, Kerry-Gore continue to act like that is a potentially
effective action. The idea that the military responses are indeed effective
(however messy) continues to anger Kerry/Gore that their peers (who
are at hot-war against the US) have been so incredibly damaged.
It is SO VERY interesting that the lefties will complain about previous
formal pictures of 'involvement' between any GOPer and any criminal
are much much weaker than the actual INTIMATE support and interaction
occuring WRT the Democrat party and supporters.

The various declarations of war against the US seem to be so very
ignored by the left. Even though, in the US, some kind of ack has
to be given by the congress (or funding will disappear), the Dems
seem to forget that Usama/Saddam/etc don't have the same process... When
Kerry's perceived peers (Usama/Saddam) do make war talk, that is all
that is needed to manifest the declaration.


John

 

[Fred Bloggs]

Tom Seim wrote:

I am a Vietnam veteran. Are you?


Yeah, you and John Edwards.

You use a phony name. Now you claim phony Vietnam service.

You are a disgrace.

Why are you evading the question? Were you or were you not in military
service? Or are you a loudmouthed armchair adventurer and draft dodger
like most of the other hawks?

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 02:45:39 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

From a master that is a high complement indeed!
^^^^^^^^^^

Look it up, bonehead.

--
John Fields

 

[Jim Yanik]

Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote in
news:lj96n0pjhako1euf4cfamphd3tnlrvap9v@4ax.com:

On 18 Oct 2004 00:50:20 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/columnists/datel
inedc/s_262038.html

I tried, "cannot find server" is the result. From the HTML link, it
looks like an opinion piece, which may or may not be supported by
references. I'm looking for __primary information__ AND the __logic__
used.

In any case, I cannot access the link or even the primary site.

Jon

Try

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/

select "Answer this question,Mr.Kerry"



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:05:06 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 16:14:28 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:

Why haven't you made your company bigger?


Probably because I'm not a businessman, and I certainly couldn't
manage a big company. I spend most of my time designing things, and
don't really know how to play the corporation and stock games to get
big. My figure of merit for a company is dollars revenue per employee,
which I place no upper limit on, and not just dollars, which requires
wheeling and dealing and squeezing all you can out of the troops.

I know a couple of technologists who have got swept up in the
business/VC/go-for-IPO thing, and I think they've lost their souls
over it. They certainly lost their companies, and now just shill for
the Sand Hill Road Toads who have the money and the power.

John


Okay- so I will not approach you with my new idea for a product with
guaranteed billion dollar market....totally untapped BTW.

Oh, I get lots of those.

John

 

[Rich Grise]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:02:54 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

Try

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/

select "Answer this question,Mr.Kerry"

"If John Kerry wins, whose instructions will guide him?"

I dunno - maybe the voters? Whoever it is, it's gotta be better than
whoever's sitting at the Bush control panel.

Cheers!
Rich