OT: If Kerry is elected...

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 06:52:13 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

Another smoke curtain. I never said you should not have
freedom of speech. But freedom of speach does not mean you
can say everything you like and get it away with it.

Sorry, Frank, but that's _exactly_ what freedom of speech means.

I think Larkin needs medical attention,

I have a lovely female Chinese doctor who takes good care of me, and I
take my meds regularly.

but I don't try to silence
him -

Oh, thank you for your gracious indulgence.

I'd like to see him choose to educate himself,

By sitting at the knee of older and wiser people, like Barbara
Streisand for example?

John

 

[Fred Bloggs]

John Larkin wrote:

I'd like to see him choose to educate himself,


By sitting at the knee of older and wiser people, like Barbara
Streisand for example?

John

You could learn a thing or two from her.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

Tom Seim wrote:

Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<4171EECC.8000709@nospam.com>...

Tom Seim wrote:

Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<4171A42F.9050705@nospam.com>...


Tom Seim wrote:


kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote in message news:<ckrkgp$vs4$5@blue.rahul.net>...



In article <6c71b322.0410151952.268da496@posting.google.com>,
Tom Seim <soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:
[...]



Kerry has some huge problems (about 2.4 TRILLION worth).

With Kerry, you have a 2.4 Trillion problem and with Bush there is a
8.6[1] Trillion problem so I guess you would suggest a Kerry vote then.

[...]



Kerry lied before Congress, under OATH, about atrocities in Vietnam.
Are you going to trust him to tell you the truth?

How many times does that lie have to be disproven before we stop seeing it
repeated?

--


When Ghengis Khan rises from the dead:

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."

I have *first hand* knowledge that all of those things are TRUE. It was
not a pretty picture there. The overwhelming sentiment of the US
military was that those people were "better off dead."


PUHLEEEASE!! You weren't even in diapers during Vietnam, although you
might have been in diapers during Desert Storm.

Where were you in Vietnam?


Where - or what - were you in Vietnam?

I am a Vietnam veteran. Are you?

 

[Clarence]

"Jonathan Kirwan" <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote in message
news:nf74n0pq06lce8ven2bk5hddbjkvg5l5gs@4ax.com...

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 23:55:10 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

Had nothing to say.

 

[Clarence]

"Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote in message
news:4172379e$0$78772$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...


Has never had anything to say.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

Tom Seim wrote:

Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<4171AACF.2060204@nospam.com>...

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.


Dodging a sticky issue (for Kerry) again. Kerry, among other things,
said that the crimes had "the full awareness of officers at all levels
of command." This was a lie made under oath.

No it wasn't- there was not only awareness but participation. You do
know that the rank of Lieutenant (O-1 or O-2) is that of commissioned
officer don't you?

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:19:58 -0700, Mike Ng
<ude.yelekreb.scee.yroc@gnm.ROTATE> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:17:55 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:


On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:24:14 -0700, Mike Ng
ude.yelekreb.scee.yroc@gnm.ROTATE> wrote:


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 our Executive branch is being helped along by a willing
Legislature. What also worries me is the practice of the Executive
branch's Judicial nominees requiring confirmation from the Legislative
branch. When one party controls two branches of the government, they
can eventually take over the third...

This is an interesting and very thoughtful piece:

http://www.policyreview.org/oct04/lindberg.html


I especially liked his recognition of the servoing, self-centering
nature of the US political system... most political writers are
entirely ignorant of system dynamics. That 'autozero' mechanism will,
for several reasons, keep the Court in pretty good longterm balance.

"A neoconservative is a liberal who has been mugged by reality." Good
line.

John


Afterthought: the US political system has very different dynamics than
a Parliamentary system.

John


Interesting article, but it only talked a little bit about the political
system. His hypothetical "reasonably well-ordered democratic polity"
doesn't quite exist currently, however. Sure there's Compassionate
Conservatism to _appeal_ to the center, but that distracts from the
policies that lean rightward.

Both parties, internally, have sub-loops that compromise the lean
towards their real desires (statism or not) and the need to cozy up to
the middle in order to win elections. The symmetry is impressive.

I don't see the country poised for a
leftward correction either, as voters are split down the middle.

That's the outside servo loop in action. It's interesting that it's a
sampled-data control system, coarsely time-quantized by election
cycles, but seems to me to be very nicely damped. The dynamics of the
loop is more amazing than its basic existance, which is sort of
inherent to the way the US is organized.

There was a newspaper article that I was just trying to find; it said
that if the Democratic party wins this election, they'll emulate the
Republican party in their policies, except leftward of course. The
argument was that the Right riled up the Left so much that the Left
feels a need to do the same, to retake and conquer more ideological
territory. This would support "autozeroing."

The irony is that the apparent polarization masks decreasing
substantive differences. There *is* an emerging polity, surrounded by
a lot of sport.

However at this point the Court is rather aged (speaking empirically)
with members possibly poised for retirement. The 4-4-1 split would give
way to a clear majority, which would definitely change things here in
the USA.

Supreme Court justices have a historical trend of moving to
left-center after acquiring their lifetime seats. I doubt there have
been many justices who didn't truly revere the Constitution.

Really, for all the shouting, things are converging nicely.

John

 

[Fred Bloggs]

Clarence wrote:

Moral, NOT religious! NOTE the difference, it is important!

I am not interested in your idea of moral. Please go to hell.

 

[normanstrong]

It's a well known fact that Kim Jon Ill MUCH prefers Kerry over
Bush.

How would anyone know? Even if he SAID he prefers Kerry over Bush, it
doesn't mean he really does.

Norm Strong

 

[Clarence]

"Rich Grise" <rich@example.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.10.17.09.34.56.671758@example.net...

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 02:38:12 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:

In article <vk_bd.31092$QJ3.889@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
Clarence <no@No.com> wrote:

"Ken Smith" <kensmith@green.rahul.net> wrote in message
news:ckpke9$hq2$2@blue.rahul.net...
[...]
Ok, it isn't so. How does Justice Jane Fonda strike you?

You mean "Barberella?" I would stay out of her reach.

That was her best movie wasn't it.

She made other movies?

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000404/

 

[Jonathan Kirwan]

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

 

[Fred Bloggs]

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.

 

[Clarence]

"Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote in message
news:4172b209$0$48933$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...

Which can all be flushed trough the toilet, right?

Drop dead, dipshit.
--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)

Another insightful commentary form Frank(ly) Bemelman to contribute to the
betterment of the world!

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:59:45 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:



I'd like to see him choose to educate himself,


By sitting at the knee of older and wiser people, like Barbara
Streisand for example?

John



You could learn a thing or two from her.

Like arrogance? [1]

John

[1] free and obvious shot graciously supplied.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:59:45 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:



John Larkin wrote:



I'd like to see him choose to educate himself,


By sitting at the knee of older and wiser people, like Barbara
Streisand for example?

John



You could learn a thing or two from her.



Like arrogance? [1]

John

[1] free and obvious shot graciously supplied.

Arrogance would be a common reaction of any normal person upon meeting
the likes of you.

 

[Clarence]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:lrc5n01ll51taabto7ghg0hqpse379ce6o@4ax.com...

<snip>

Supreme Court justices have a historical trend of moving to
left-center after acquiring their lifetime seats. I doubt there have
been many justices who didn't truly revere the Constitution.

Really, for all the shouting, things are converging nicely.

John

Like John Jay?

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:43:11 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

"Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote in message
news:4172b209$0$48933$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...

Which can all be flushed trough the toilet, right?

Drop dead, dipshit.
--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)


Another insightful commentary form Frank(ly) Bemelman to contribute to the
betterment of the world!

Yeah, Frank's composition style has really developed of late. Who do
you think he's been getting lessons from?

John

 

[Fred Bloggs]

John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:43:11 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:


"Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote in message
news:4172b209$0$48933$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...

Which can all be flushed trough the toilet, right?

Drop dead, dipshit.
--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)


Another insightful commentary form Frank(ly) Bemelman to contribute to the
betterment of the world!




Yeah, Frank's composition style has really developed of late. Who do
you think he's been getting lessons from?

John

You are asking Clarence? Pathetic- what a mercenary whore of
self-aggrandizement you are!

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:55:10 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:59:45 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:



John Larkin wrote:



I'd like to see him choose to educate himself,


By sitting at the knee of older and wiser people, like Barbara
Streisand for example?

John



You could learn a thing or two from her.



Like arrogance? [1]

John

[1] free and obvious shot graciously supplied.


Arrogance would be a common reaction of any normal person upon meeting
the likes of you.

The thing I like so much about you, Fred, is your absolute
predictability.

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:58:15 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:lrc5n01ll51taabto7ghg0hqpse379ce6o@4ax.com...

snip

Supreme Court justices have a historical trend of moving to
left-center after acquiring their lifetime seats. I doubt there have
been many justices who didn't truly revere the Constitution.

Really, for all the shouting, things are converging nicely.

John

Like John Jay?

Well, one guy isn't "many."

John