So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:05:25 -0500, jeff miller
wrote:

it was an incorrect statement...

Well, I stand corrected, counselor.

but one heard frequently as part of
republican sloganeering...usually in conjunction with the pejorative use
of "liberal" in reference to a judge's or judicial nominee's
decision-making.

and...uh...you do know that the supremes were "making" law just as much
as, if not more than, the florida court, don't you? it was a political
act as much as a judicial act, and reconfirmed the insightful comment
that "No matter whether th' Constitution follows th' flag or not, th'
Supreme Coort follows th' illection returns."

The Florida law stated that election returns had to be counted by such
and such a date. Where not the Florida Supremes "making" law by
saying, "That doesn't count. We will allow the recount to continue?"
(In essence that is what they did.) I belive THAT is making law and
has NOTHING to do with Common Law. Hell, the most liberal of the
Florida Supremes, the Chief Justic himself, did not go along with it
knowing that it was against the Florida law.

When should the recount have stopped? When Gore was *finally* ahead?
They tried that, over and over and over, pregnant chads and all, but
Bush still came up the winner every time. In a futile attempt to hang
on to a possible win by Algore, the Supremes *attempted* to change the
law. There was all kinds of conspiracy stories, but bottom line is
that Bush won after many, many recounts, both electronic and manual.

Now, ask ME a question about laser/fiber optics - or at least
laser/fiber optics of 17 years ago when I retired. d;o)

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
Then why, pray tell, has no one been impeached? Why?



I wondered why those impeachment happy GOP members in the House suddenly got
cold feet myself.....
Tom
p.s. I'm guess blind ideologically driven cowardice, but that's just my
guess.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:16:45 -0600, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:


Yeah, there's that but perhaps he wasn't lying in the first place.
One thing we do know for a fact is that the Swiftboating of Kerry
was a pack of despicable lies so you'll have to excuse me if I don't
place a whole lot of credence in your Swiftboat redux.


You keep on going back to the Swiftboat thingy. Neither Bob nor I
have mentioned it. That had nothing to do with his perjury before
Congress. HE LIED UNDER OATH BEFORE CONGRESS! Throwing his medals
over the fence had NOTHING TO DO WITH SWIFTBOATS. Going to Paris
while in uniform had NOTHING TO DO WITH SWIFTBOATS. Kapeesh?
Comprendre? Comprendee?

Such an angry, angry man you are. All those caps! Chill out. Take an
extra blood pressure pill.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote in
:

HE LIED UNDER OATH BEFORE CONGRESS! Throwing his medals
over the fence had NOTHING TO DO WITH SWIFTBOATS. Going to Paris
while in uniform had NOTHING TO DO WITH SWIFTBOATS. Kapeesh?
Comprendre? Comprendee?




I heard he used to hang out in German train stations ;)

I figured you need a laugh, Dave!


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Bob Weinberger wrote:
"Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
Well Bob, I'm afraid you're just gonna have to accept that I
find you less credible than John Kerry (and all the living
members of his crew).

That's about as vile a statement as you could make, knowing my evaluation of
Kerry's credibility.

Kerry was never a no show after I spent almost an hour
twiddling my thumbs and watching the fish rise just upstream
of where I was waiting next to a Minnesota trout stream, ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphis leg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:04:01 GMT, "rb608"
wrote:

wrote in message
Oooo-kay....how is that "racist?" It's a pretty well accepted term,

Accepted by you and your ilk, perhaps; but that speaks volumes in itself.
In that you've now used this "jungle" reference twice recently in clear
reference to a well educated and respected black candidate for the
Presidency cannot be interpreted as anything other than an intentional
disparagement of his race and himself personally. You knew exactly what you
were writing, you know exactly what it implies, and you know damned well
it's racist. Spare me the bull**** spin.

Yes, I knew exactly what I was writing, but you're flat wrong about the
meaning and what I meant. The term "jungle fever" has nothing to do
with the character, education, or amount of respect shown the black guy
in question, it's a comment directed solely at white folks. In fact,
there would not even need to be an actual black person involved. I have
no idea what race the person who coined the term was, but I've heard it
more from black folks than white (usually good-naturedly gigging white
folks), I've never heard a black person say they were offended by it,
and it was popularized by a black guy - Spike Lee (Ossie Davis and Ruby
Dee, not to mention Sam Jackson and Wesley Snipes, seemingly didn't take
offense, either, and if Davis and Mrs. Dee didn't have a problem with
it, that's good enough for me).

HTH,
R

Joe F.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphis leg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:59:47 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
I'd bet big he's still a
scheming POS who doesn't do jack **** unless it benefits him and the
Kennedy machine.
I'm not too sure there really is a "Kennedy machine", in any real sense, at
this point in time. Their time has come and gone.
Given the landscape right now this minute:

I suspect McCain/just about anyone except Obama beats
Hillary/_anyone_, including Bill about as bad as is possible, say,
57%-43%-ish, the unlikely McCain/Obama beats _anybody_ else _at least_
75%-25%, and the likely McCain/whoever vs Obama/anyone but Hillary
goes 51%-49% or closer, flip a coin but _probably_ McCain. If Obama
screws the pooch and picks (or gets saddled with) Hillary, it's McCain
by 5 or so and Obama can get tips on dealing with ****ing away national
aspirations from Lieberman. Hillary's done - it looks like Barack van
Helsing put a stake right through her undead heart about December and
Teddy knew it before he got anywhere near that stage...and I'm pretty
sure this one ain't gonna have a sequel where the monster wasn't really
dead...
I think you are saying what I was trying to here. Teddy can do the math, and
was more jumping on the safest ship rather than extracting much in the way
of future favors.
Tom
p.s. Given the numbers Dems are turning out to primary elections, and that
most polled seem to be happy with either Hillary or Obama, my handicapping
of the fall race would put any Dem in front of McCain by a good 5 percent.
Obama could use McCain's weaknesses to stretch that to 15. And remember, who
told you Hillary was in more trouble than people thought several months
ago......g?

FWIW, the numbers I've seen show Obama peeked 2-4 weeks ago at about
plus-5 on McCain, and steadily slipped to about dead even, headed back
to slightly behind him (but probably within a slim margin of error, it's
flip a coin), and unless Obama really screws the pooch or if the
Clintonistas manage to cheat and steal the nomination and Hillary is the
nominee, McCain would have to go on the Sundays, **** on the Bible and
wipe his ass with the American flag while claiming his idea of a good
time was Britney Spears with a strap-on and an eight-ball of meth to
lose to her

As to Teddy, I don't see him needing to simply jump to a safe ship, or
jump at all, really. He could just stayed neutral until after the
convention and pimped whoever he wanted to pimp IF all he was doing was
stumping for the party. My guess is that he knows that Hillary is iffy,
at best, and if he didn't his hand in Obama's cookie jar now, before he
was nominated, he knew he wouldn't get as much.

TC,
R

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

wrote in message
...
...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

wrote in message
...
...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R


hell, give the porch monkey a chance.couldnt do no worse than hellary.
that stuck up bitch be worse than ****for brains we got. hell, if bama
wins I'll buy all yaul a new cane pole..................

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Dave LaCourse:
wrote questionable statements about Kerry

....Dave also seems to lose perspective on Bush, who
was a cocaine sniffing draft dodger during this period.