| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
Truer words were never spoken! American apathy is running about 70% so unless we get out the vote of 90% or better (collectively) we have absolute NO ROOM TO BITCH! GET UR ASS OUT THERE IN NOVEMBER AND EFFIN' VOTE!! Demo or Republican, VOTE!!! No. I don't want to encourage people who'd rather not vote to start doing so. If they're too dumb to find the polling place, too impatient to stand in line, too blase' to have an opinion, too uninterested to have followed the pre-election news, too illiterate to read the ticket (or too ashamed to ask the clerks to read it to them); I really don't want them helping to choose who's going to run the local, state, or federal government. It'd be like having blind people choose the pictures to hang on the walls in one's home. -- rbc:vixen,Minnow Goddess,Willow Watcher,and all that sort of thing. Often taunted by trout. Only a fool would refuse to believe in luck. Only a damn fool would rely on it. http://www.visi.com/~cyli |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
No. I don't want to encourage people who'd rather not vote to start
doing so. If they're too dumb to find the polling place, too impatient to stand in line, too blase' to have an opinion, too uninterested to have followed the pre-election news, too illiterate to read the ticket (or too ashamed to ask the clerks to read it to them); I really don't want them helping to choose who's going to run the local, state, or federal government. It'd be like having blind people choose the pictures to hang on the walls in one's home. -- Yes..... I gotta hand it to you... you're right in those reapects. Bill |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Bill P" wrote in message news:HxV%b.2286$h23.1017@fed1read06... Bill P said: "..we get what we deserve..." Then; Well said, Myron, but I'm afraid it's true that we get the government we deserve. SNIP Ken Fortenberry Truer words were never spoken!...... Bull****. People everywhere deserve good government. What they get, all too often, is what they ask for.....or not. Obviously, it's not the same thing. Grin Yes, Wolfgang ~ we do get it, collectively by voting, OR NOT voting. You might be eloquent with words but your recollection of what I said seems to suffer CRS. What the thread implied as well as said "People get what they deserve"... by NOT VOTING! Are you suggesting that we be "given" good government whether or not we vote for it? Erm... this smacks of communism or socialism. Engage your brain before slipping your tongue into gear. This is country is, is what a democracy IS about. Or, perhaps you imply politicians swop sides after election. This is quite true, but they can be voted right out again. That's the beauty of this country and it's constitutional rights. Well, Bill, one is hard pressed to determine whether ignorance or stupidity is your most endearing quality. In either case, one has to wonder if lack of familiarity with the English language (which, after all, appears to be the preference for this news group) makes the matter moot. As for socialism, which particular bugbear seems to be hiding under your bed, one also has to wonder whether you have yet gotten around to informing your local fire department that you will, under no circumstances, accept their services. Yes indeed!!! And I've been bitching for nearly 50 years now at those lazy, apathetic slobs. I especially love it when I, after THEIR ****ing and moaning about the administration in power, ask them if they voted in the last election. When I get a negative answer my comment is, immediate and cynical: "Then you got just who and what you deserved!! I may or may not agree with your politics but I damned well have shown you one of the biggest reasons this country is goin' to hell in a handbasket!" No one has ever give me any crap back about it either!! Jam it up your ass.....sideways. ****Eh, Wolfgang? I said, "Jam it up your ass.....sideways." I'll pass on this as you're being a bit angered by your childish remark. Odd, that. I am not usually angered by my remarks. Or should I say sophomoric. I guess I won't make any suggestion about what you should say? Please get out and VOTE!! No. ****NOW you ARE being childish. Not just "NOW". WE that vote get what we deserve.... again: "collectively." O.k., so, let me see if I follow the logic of this one. "WE" who voted for Bush got what we deserve, right? And, "WE" who voted for Gore also got what we deserve, because "WE" who voted got what we deserve, correct? Yes, correct, for "WE" who voted got what we deserve. Oddly, though, ALL of "WE" who voted got what we deserve regardless of who we voted for.....because that's stipulated. Even MORE odd, all of "WE" who didn't vote got EXACTLY the same thing as all of "WE" who did, whether we deserve it or not. Bottom line then, is that it doesn't really mean **** who "WE" voted for because we all got the same thing, regardless. Moreover, since "WE" who didn't vote also got the same thing (see above) and most certainly would have gotten the same thing irrespective of who "WE" might have voted for (should we have done so), we got no more or less than we deserve or than anyone else got or deserves. Thus, we find ourselves with a paradox or an irony or one or another despicable bag of **** in the White House.....or something. Yeah, I like that.....it's got a sort of symmetry....or psychosis.....or something. The majority rules What planet did you say you live on? and this is STILL the best country in the world. Why? Cheers to y'all.... Bill P. Phx.Az Die. ****Y'must have been apoplectic by now. Probably, but it's kind of hard to tell......in my condition, you know. Cool down, your lack of control is being exposed. Hardly matters. I'm already famous for it. Wolfgang well.....another perfect record shattered.....so sad. ****So smug.... and self engratiating. Ho, hum........Pity. Ho, hum? Boring you, am I? Well, time will tell. Wolfgang |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Wolfgang" wrote in message ... "Bill P" wrote in message news:HxV%b.2286$h23.1017@fed1read06... Bill P said: "..we get what we deserve..." Then; Well said, Myron, but I'm afraid it's true that we get the government we deserve. SNIP Ken Fortenberry Truer words were never spoken!...... Bull****. People everywhere deserve good government. What they get, all too often, is what they ask for.....or not. Obviously, it's not the same thing. Grin Yes, Wolfgang ~ we do get it, collectively by voting, OR NOT voting. You might be eloquent with words but your recollection of what I said seems to suffer CRS. What the thread implied as well as said "People get what they deserve"... by NOT VOTING! Are you suggesting that we be "given" good government whether or not we vote for it? Erm... this smacks of communism or socialism. Engage your brain before slipping your tongue into gear. This is country is, is what a democracy IS about. Or, perhaps you imply politicians swop sides after election. This is quite true, but they can be voted right out again. That's the beauty of this country and it's constitutional rights. Well, Bill, one is hard pressed to determine whether ignorance or stupidity is your most endearing quality. In either case, one has to wonder if lack of familiarity with the English language (which, after all, appears to be the preference for this news group) makes the matter moot. As for socialism, which particular bugbear seems to be hiding under your bed, one also has to wonder whether you have yet gotten around to informing your local fire department that you will, under no circumstances, accept their services. Yes indeed!!! And I've been bitching for nearly 50 years now at those lazy, apathetic slobs. I especially love it when I, after THEIR ****ing and moaning about the administration in power, ask them if they voted in the last election. When I get a negative answer my comment is, immediate and cynical: "Then you got just who and what you deserved!! I may or may not agree with your politics but I damned well have shown you one of the biggest reasons this country is goin' to hell in a handbasket!" No one has ever give me any crap back about it either!! Jam it up your ass.....sideways. ****Eh, Wolfgang? I said, "Jam it up your ass.....sideways." I'll pass on this as you're being a bit angered by your childish remark. Odd, that. I am not usually angered by my remarks. Or should I say sophomoric. I guess I won't make any suggestion about what you should say? Please get out and VOTE!! No. ****NOW you ARE being childish. Not just "NOW". WE that vote get what we deserve.... again: "collectively." O.k., so, let me see if I follow the logic of this one. "WE" who voted for Bush got what we deserve, right? And, "WE" who voted for Gore also got what we deserve, because "WE" who voted got what we deserve, correct? Yes, correct, for "WE" who voted got what we deserve. Oddly, though, ALL of "WE" who voted got what we deserve regardless of who we voted for.....because that's stipulated. Even MORE odd, all of "WE" who didn't vote got EXACTLY the same thing as all of "WE" who did, whether we deserve it or not. Bottom line then, is that it doesn't really mean **** who "WE" voted for because we all got the same thing, regardless. Moreover, since "WE" who didn't vote also got the same thing (see above) and most certainly would have gotten the same thing irrespective of who "WE" might have voted for (should we have done so), we got no more or less than we deserve or than anyone else got or deserves. Thus, we find ourselves with a paradox or an irony or one or another despicable bag of **** in the White House.....or something. Yeah, I like that.....it's got a sort of symmetry....or psychosis.....or something. **** Numbers can be manipulated statisticaly to proove anything. Similarly, the gibberish above; my English professor had a term for it: Gobbledegook... Much like Richard Nixon, years ago, talking for several minutes, but saying absolutely nothing. The majority rules What planet did you say you live on? **** Same one as you.... And I am obviously much happier with it. and this is STILL the best country in the world. Why? **** Ya don't know? And where are YOU from? I see you're using a .edu addy. Care to tell me your geograhical location as I'm a bit new to this place? Cheers to y'all.... Bill P. Phx.Az Die. ****Y'must have been apoplectic by now. Probably, but it's kind of hard to tell......in my condition, you know. **** Yes, I'm learning..... your condition. Cool down, your lack of control is being exposed. Hardly matters. I'm already famous for it. **** Yes, and your hem is really showing now. Wolfgang well.....another perfect record shattered.....so sad. ****So smug.... and self engratiating. Ho, hum........Pity. Ho, hum? Boring you, am I? Well, time will tell. Wolfgang Yup! I have learned that when wrestling with a pig in the mud, that the pig is usually enjoying himself. You seem to be a "master debator" and apparently enjoy casting hate and discontent about with name calling and insults to those you don't agree with.... or sometimes not, for that matter. You're obviously an intelligent person, however misdirected you may be.... and, not really happy or at peace with yourself. You gotta stir the pot whenever possible from the comfort, and more than likely, anonymity of your chair at the keyboard. I'm sure you'll make one last lambasting shot here and I shan't have the last word on this subject. No problem, Wolfgang.... I'm going back to flyfishing! With complete indifference.... Bill |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Wolfgang" wrote... "Tim J." wrote... ...Two of my children aren't registered to vote, and *that* ****es me off. One of them like to talk about political topics, but I refuse to discuss anything with him. If a person isn't voting, I could care less what they have to say about politics..... I'll do you the favor of assuming that you mean you could care less about what anyone has to say about politics if they don't vote AND they live in a place where a vote matters. Man, you're getting soft. :) -- TL, Tim http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Bill P" wrote... snip **** Numbers can be manipulated statisticaly to proove anything. Similarly, the gibberish above; my English professor had a term for it: snip Be sure to separate two sentences like the above a little further apart next time, or name the English professor so others can avoid the same mistake. ;-) -- Just pickin' nits, Tim http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Tim J." wrote in message news:hc00c.139080$jk2.565478@attbi_s53... Man, you're getting soft. :) Just spreadin' a little sunshine. :) Wolfgang feeling much refreshed after a bit of a vacation. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
Bill P wrote:
This is country is, is what a democracy IS about. So, everyone only wanted to make fun of Clinton's bit about the definition of "is", but as a nation we never really came to grips with the issue, and now look at the result. :( JR |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
Wolfgang:
To put it in its simplest terms, you have NEVER heard any of the arguments. Where does one send off to for the cloak of omniscience and invisibility that you wrap so knowingly around yourself? Did it take a lot of boxtops? Perhaps it came in a plain brown wrapper? While I admit my hearing is damaged, I do recall discussing with many people as to why they fail to exercise franchise. If I'd known you were there eavesdropping, I'd have taken notes or recorded the conversations. Most of the time I vote for losing candidates in major elections. And that is a ringing endorsement for your philosophy because......? Actually, I see it as a result of voting against Republicans since Nixon and voting repeatedly against Ashcroft. You are free to read any acane or inane meaning into the statement that pleases your petulant little being. I'm quite certain you will. -- Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69 Drowning flies to Dark Star http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/i...age92kword.htm |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:13:46 +0100, JR wrote:
Bill P wrote: This is country is, is what a democracy IS about. So, everyone only wanted to make fun of Clinton's bit about the definition of "is", but as a nation we never really came to grips with the issue, and now look at the result. :( lol! |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"daytripper" wrote in message ... On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:13:46 +0100, JR wrote: Bill P wrote: This is country is, is what a democracy IS about. So, everyone only wanted to make fun of Clinton's bit about the definition of "is", but as a nation we never really came to grips with the issue, and now look at the result. :( lol! Does anyone know where there is a transcript of his deposition? IIRC, this entire "definition of is" quote is in the "Play it again Sam" category; never really happened the way the public consciousness remembers it. When I saw the deposition tape, I thought I remembered that he used the "is" quote parenthetically: I thought he said something to the effect of "If I wanted to be evasive, I might say something like "what is your definition of 'is'"" (btw, puncutating that was a bitch) in effect, he was specifically not using that as an evasive answer, but underscoring that he could, but he was choosing not to. Do I remember falsely? -riverman |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Tim J." wrote:
If a person isn't voting, I could care less what they have to say about politics. OK, LISTEN UP: All persons who haven't voted in every federal, state, local, school, and civic organization election they've been entitled to vote in are kindly requested to refrain henceforth from discussing politics. JR (who actually agrees with Tim, except that part before the comma) |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"JR" wrote... "Tim J." wrote: If a person isn't voting, I could care less what they have to say about politics. OK, LISTEN UP: All persons who haven't voted in every federal, state, local, school, and civic organization election they've been entitled to vote in are kindly requested to refrain henceforth from discussing politics. YAHOOOOO! Consensus! :) -- TL, Tim http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
riverman wrote:
...... I thought he said something to the effect of "If I wanted to be evasive, I might say something like "what is your definition of 'is'"" (btw, puncutating that was a bitch) in effect, he was specifically not using that as an evasive answer, but underscoring that he could, but he was choosing not to. Do I remember falsely? Yes. BY MR. WISENBERG: Q Mr. President, I want to, before I go into a new subject area, briefly go over something you were talking about with Mr. Bittman. The statement of your attorney, Mr. Bennett, at the Paula Jones deposition, "Counsel is fully aware" -- it's page 54, line 5 – "Counsel is fully aware that Ms. Lewinsky has filed, has an affidavit which they are in possession of saying that there is absolutely no sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form, with President Clinton.." That statement is made by your attorney in front of Judge Susan Webber Wright, correct? A That's correct. Q That statement is a completely false statement. Whether or not Mr. Bennett knew of your relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, the statement that there was "no sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form, with President Clinton," was an utterly false statement. Is that correct? A It depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is. If the –if he – if "is" means is and never has been, that is not--- that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement. http://www.npr.org/news/national/cli...on.part1b.html |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"JR" wrote in message ... riverman wrote: ...... I thought he said something to the effect of "If I wanted to be evasive, I might say something like "what is your definition of 'is'"" (btw, puncutating that was a bitch) in effect, he was specifically not using that as an evasive answer, but underscoring that he could, but he was choosing not to. Do I remember falsely? Yes. BY MR. WISENBERG: Q Mr. President, I want to, before I go into a new subject area, briefly go over something you were talking about with Mr. Bittman. The statement of your attorney, Mr. Bennett, at the Paula Jones deposition, "Counsel is fully aware" -- it's page 54, line 5 - "Counsel is fully aware that Ms. Lewinsky has filed, has an affidavit which they are in possession of saying that there is absolutely no sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form, with President Clinton.." That statement is made by your attorney in front of Judge Susan Webber Wright, correct? A That's correct. Q That statement is a completely false statement. Whether or not Mr. Bennett knew of your relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, the statement that there was "no sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form, with President Clinton," was an utterly false statement. Is that correct? A It depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is. If the -if he - if "is" means is and never has been, that is not--- that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement. Got it, JR, thanks. Now I remember my feeling about that quote: not that it was a hypothetical, but that, (evasive at it was and nestled among a lot of evasiveness), it had a valid point. The question posed was rather tangled: "Your attourney made a statement before, and it IS false. IS that correct?" Clinton's response was: "I could answer one of two ways, depending on what you are asking: At the time of the statement, based on our understanding at the time, it WAS NOT false, so no, your summary is not correct. Or now, under our new agreement of some of the terminology, it IS CURRENTLY false, so yes, that is correct." He was pointing out that the question could be interepreted two ways, and answered differently in each interpretation. He actually never committed to any one answer. Upon closer reading, the interrogator actually used both tenses: "That statement IS a completely false statement" and "that WAS an utterly false statement." By the way, what IS the definition of 'is'? --riverman |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
By the way, what IS the definition of 'is'?
You want the Webster or Liberal defenition? Lou T |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Bill P" wrote in message news:igY%b.2553$h23.1869@fed1read06... "Wolfgang" wrote in message ... "Bill P" wrote in message news:HxV%b.2286$h23.1017@fed1read06... Bill P said: "..we get what we deserve..." and this is STILL the best country in the world. Why? **** Ya don't know? And where are YOU from? I see you're using a .edu addy. Care to tell me your geograhical location as I'm a bit new to this place? Wolfgang posted a question that was quite to the point. You're of course entitled to your opinion but when you feel the need to make your ignorance public knowledge you could at least have the decency explain yourself. It is OK to have an opinion, but in my book there should at least be some thought behind it. /Roger Who is from Sweden, probably not the best country in the world but then again I've never said so. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Roger Öhlund" wrote in message ... Wolfgang posted a question that was quite to the point. Well, actually, it was kind of a rhetorical question. "WE" are the best country in the world cuz "WE" say so and "WE" can nuke anybody's ass into its constituent atoms. Hey, "WE" have done it before.....and you KNOW that "WE" will do it again if you **** us off. You're of course entitled to your opinion A common enough sentiment, but I've yet to hear a good defense for it. but when you feel the need to make your ignorance public knowledge you could at least have the decency explain yourself. It is OK to have an opinion, but in my book there should at least be some thought behind it. There are a couple of problems with this. In the first place, if they gave the matter much thought most people would discover (much to their chagrin, no doubt) that they don't actually HAVE any opinions and that the ones they have been using are of unknown provenance and pretty much silly and useless to boot. As a consequence, they would find themselves in the awkward position of having absolutely nothing to say about anything, as opposed to the current situation in which they merely have absolutely nothing worthwhile to say about anything. Think of the ramifications! The end of civilization as we know it would only be the beginning. /Roger Who is from Sweden, probably not the best country in the world but then again I've never said so. The problem is that you don't have enough nukes. Remind me at Penn's......we'll send you home with a boatload. :) Wolfgang um......but don't tell the norwegians, o.k.? :( |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Bill P" wrote in message news:igY%b.2553$h23.1869@fed1read06... ...I have learned that when wrestling with a pig in the mud, that the pig is usually enjoying himself. You're a liar. The pigs NEVER enjoy it. :) You seem to be a "master debator" Ask Willi about how things seem. and apparently enjoy casting hate and discontent about with name calling and insults to those you don't agree with Odd sort of statement coming from one who hasn't got a clue who I might or might not agree with or about what. Actually, it's quite possible (really, it IS!) that you and I agree on many things. Unfortunately, you are an abject fool, so the point is moot. .... or sometimes not, for that matter. Um.....yeah. that's clever. Wish I'd thought of it. You're obviously an intelligent person, Well, I'm not as smart as I THINK I am. however misdirected you may be.... Entirely undirected, unfortunately. I've been waiting a long time for someone like you to come along......and here you are at last! :) and, not really happy or at peace with yourself. Happiness is, at best, an ill defined concept. That said, I guess I'm no more miserable than most......most of the time. As for peace, well, that comes at the end of the road, ainna? You gotta stir the pot whenever possible from the comfort, and more than likely, anonymity of your chair at the keyboard. It's not a particularly comfortable chair. It's a more or less straight backed wooden kitchen chair of uncertain but low lineage. A couple of the stretchers are loose, thus making the whole thing rather precarious as well as moderately uncomfortable. Still, every moment is an adventure. You're right about the anonymity, though; it has never revealed so much as a hint of its true identity......for all I know, it's a long lost Russian princess. I'm sure you'll make one last lambasting shot here and I shan't have the last word on this subject. Ah, the old "last word" gambit. Damned if I do and damned if I don't. Fiendishly clever! No problem, Wolfgang.... Not yet. Stick around for a while. I'm going back to flyfishing! With complete indifference.... Bill Again, sir, you are a liar, as you will have ample opportunity to demonstrate and we will, from time to time (as the situation warrants), point out. :) Wolfgang somewhere in the land that beer forgot. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Willi" wrote in message ... Wolfgang wrote: Ask Willi about how things seem. This is how it "seems: to me: "whether ignorance or stupidity is your most endearing quality" "you are stupid" "you luminously ignorant twerp" "you are stupid" "you are an abject fool" "****ing putz" Well, that's a vast improvement. All of the above seems to be exactly as it seems to you! and all in the last two days! Nice job!!! Thank you. I try. and no, somebody doesn't need to do it Do what? Wolfgang |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
In article igY%b.2553$h23.1869@fed1read06, "Bill P"
wrote: **** Ya don't know? And where are YOU from? I see you're using a .edu addy. Care to tell me your geograhical location as I'm a bit new to this place? well, you could easily enough go to www.mcw.edu, well you would where it is located. Gives the state, city, and even the zip on the home page. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
riverman wrote:
He was pointing out that the question could be interepreted two ways, and answered differently in each interpretation. He actually never committed to any one answer. Yes. He answered the question precisely, offering nothing more. The view of the lawyers here will be more valuable than mine, of course, but my view has always been that Clinton was playing with the prosecutor, showing he was smarter, saying in effect, "you ask an imprecise, poorly phrased question, here's what you get." Speaking of famous quotations misremembered, for some time now I have recalled the recent epistemological musings of our Secretary of Defense as Rumsfeld: "Reports that say that something has not happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of fly fishing in our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones." Even without my little memory lapse (g), it is not entirely OT here. JR |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"JR" wrote in message ... riverman wrote: He was pointing out that the question could be interepreted two ways, and answered differently in each interpretation. He actually never committed to any one answer. Yes. He answered the question precisely, offering nothing more. The view of the lawyers here will be more valuable than mine, of course, but my view has always been that Clinton was playing with the prosecutor, showing he was smarter, saying in effect, "you ask an imprecise, poorly phrased question, here's what you get." Hmm, I felt something similar, but it was more like he was instructing the questioner on how his questions were unanswerable. More like "Heck, I can't answer that. It's close to meaningless." The question was a broadside across the bow asking him to self-incriminate, which was doomed to fail in any case. Strange how his answer has entered the realms of History, but not the bizarre uselessness of the question. --riverman |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"riverman" wrote in message ... ...Strange how his answer has entered the realms of History, but not the bizarre uselessness of the question. Not to mention the monumental stupidity and colossal cynicism of the whole exercise.......or the self-serving hypocrisy of efforts to justify it then or now. Then too, there's the expense. Just THINK how many more children could have been murdered in far flung countries around the world with another forty million dollars. Wolfgang |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
riverman wrote:
Hmm, I felt something similar, but it was more like he was instructing the questioner on how his questions were unanswerable. More like "Heck, I can't answer that. It's close to meaningless." The question was a broadside across the bow asking him to self-incriminate, which was doomed to fail in any case. Strange how his answer has entered the realms of History, but not the bizarre uselessness of the question. Once something reaches the "meme" level, after being repeated over and over in the media, its truth or falsity becomes irrelevant. Another example is that Al Gore claimed to have "invented" the Internet. He did no such thing. He took appropriate credit for the very important governmental role he played in its success. He was defended by people who actually DID invent the Internet, but they were ignored. Another example was Howard Dean's famous scream after the New Hampshire primary. It looked stupid on TV, but many people who were there, including nonpartisan journalists, didn't see anything wrong with it at the time, in the context of a "locker-room" speech to his supporters. Politicians are a real bind when they get caught up in these things. They can't deny it without looking defensive and ridiculous. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"rw" wrote in message . .. riverman wrote: Hmm, I felt something similar, but it was more like he was instructing the questioner on how his questions were unanswerable. More like "Heck, I can't answer that. It's close to meaningless." The question was a broadside across the bow asking him to self-incriminate, which was doomed to fail in any case. Strange how his answer has entered the realms of History, but not the bizarre uselessness of the question. Once something reaches the "meme" level, after being repeated over and over in the media, its truth or falsity becomes irrelevant. ............ Politicians are a real bind when they get caught up in these things. They can't deny it without looking defensive and ridiculous. Excellent point, but how do you avoid getting caught up in these things? The media's ability to create such indefensible situations is exactly what people mean when they 'blame the media', and knowing how well the media wizards understand their craft, its impossible that its accidental, or some artifact of crowd mentality. Whatever happened to 'report the news, don't create it'? The old Prime Directive. --riverman |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
In article ,
rw wrote: Another example is that Al Gore claimed to have "invented" the Internet. He did no such thing. He took appropriate credit for the very important governmental role he played in its success. He was defended by people who actually DID invent the Internet, but they were ignored. The internet's beginning was Darpanet, created around 1970'ish. When did Gore do the things he did? |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"steve sullivan" wrote in message
... In article , rw wrote: Another example is that Al Gore claimed to have "invented" the Internet. He did no such thing. He took appropriate credit for the very important governmental role he played in its success. He was defended by people who actually DID invent the Internet, but they were ignored. The internet's beginning was Darpanet, created around 1970'ish. When did Gore do the things he did? The article to which rw refers is at http://www.interesting-people.org/ar.../msg00052.html. An excerpt from that article by Vinton Cerf & Robert Kahn (a couple guys who would certainly know) states, "As a Senator in the 1980s Gore urged government agencies to consolidate what at the time were several dozen different and unconnected networks into an "Interagency Network." Working in a bi-partisan manner with officials in Ronald Reagan and George Bush's administrations, Gore secured the passage of the High Performance Computing and Communications Act in 1991. This "Gore Act" supported the National Research and Education Network (NREN) initiative that became one of the major vehicles for the spread of the Internet beyond the field of computer science." Gore is also given credit for being "the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development." Of course, the Bush campaign and the conservative media mouthpieces didn't give a **** about the truth (any more then than now). HTH, Joe F. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
Greg Pavlov wrote:
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 17:04:45 -0700, rw wrote: Once something reaches the "meme" level, after being repeated over and over in the media, its truth or falsity becomes irrelevant. Another example is that Al Gore claimed to have "invented" the Internet. He did no such thing. .... Do you think that this was simply a media phenomenon ? I don't think so. I'd put it in the same category of politically-based misdirection as fantasies about Kerry & Fonda (that one fueled by a faked photograph) and rants that Cleland was not on "the battlefield" when he lost his limbs. I think the media are to a degree manipulated by political forces, and in some cases, such as right-wing talk radio, act as surrogates. However, there's also an undeniable tendency for journalists to attempt to humiliate politicians and other public figures. Sometimes they deserve it and sometimes they don't. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
Thanks for the info. I will switch to the Coor's brand labels.
Richard "David Snedeker" wrote in message ... "rw" wrote in message . .. Greg Pavlov wrote: On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 17:04:45 -0700, rw wrote: I think the media are to a degree manipulated by political forces, and in some cases, such as right-wing talk radio, act as surrogates. However, there's also an undeniable tendency for journalists to attempt to humiliate politicians and other public figures. Sometimes they deserve it and sometimes they don't. Actually its even more directed than this. Long before the "dirty tricks" squads, and the "rat-****er" squad of the Nixon era, organized dis-information groups have been funded, directed and controlled by the anti-democracy elements within the American "conservative" movement. In recent years these same elements have morphed into respectable-sounding groups more closely associated with electoral Republicanism. An example of this is the Heritage Foundation, which uses the tax code loop holes on non-profit educational efforts, as a cover for it's promotion of primarily Coors' family oligarchic political ideology. For example, the Coors' have fought every American social and economic reform for the last 50 years including minority voting rights. But the real action, and money, is still in the dirty tricks area. Examples of this are the front-organizations funded by the various Coors' family trusts, and the Sciafi (sp$) constellation of paid attack dogs. Their activities range from the overtly illegal (break-ins/burglary, vote tampering, forgery etc.), to facilitating semi-legal influence peddling and bribery (Cheney campaign 2000 fundraising with energy cronies like Enron, Haliburton etc..) and simple funding/subsidization of wingnut nasties like Coulter, and harassment operations like the Sciafi funded "get-Clinton" ops. There is some basis for thinking that these groups and their activities will generate a negative reaction. Flush with victory, these groups have become less covert and more outrageous. Some of the connections to foreign interests and money are becoming more common knowledge. For example, the Australian control of FOX, the imposition of Canadian wingnut (Ex: David Fromm) "consultants," Rev. Moon's funding of key Neo-con media and personalities, the Israeli Defense industry shills who have set up shop INSIDE the Pentagon, the attempted sale of a US defense company to the Red Chinese by the arch neo-con R. Pearle, etc.. I believe that most Americans, and even most conservatives will eventually be so outraged by this assault on our country, and at some point say enough is enough Im going to vote democrat or at least work to take back the Republican Party from the neo-cons. Dave |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
You must be a complete idiot!
I served two tours in Viet Nam 65-67, came home and started a business, done well, and am ready to retire. I don't hate America, I love and respect my country. I fought for it, and bled for it., What about you? You see, I'm not some left wing screwy fascist that finds fault in all America does. I'm not a movie star, who gets on screen and tells the world how evil the U.S. is, and wouldn't raise their children there. I'm not a political hack who gets in front of a TV camera, and yells out to the world that what we are doing is "Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, And Wrong" like your good old ex KKK Senator member does. And, I could care less what France, or Germany thinks about us. How about you taking a hike instead? Makes sense to me! Richard "Greg Pavlov" wrote in message ... On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 00:01:51 GMT, "RDL" wrote: Thanks for the info. I will switch to the Coor's brand labels. Hey, if you hate America so much, why don't you leave ? |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Wolfgang" wrote in message
... Wolfgang Since you're posting in a time zone one hour behind mine but my newserver says you posted this tomorrow, could you run out and check the Wednesday powerball numbers for me and email them to me? I'll give you a cut, I promise :) |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"RDL" wrote in message m... You must be a complete idiot! Chill dude, the old "why do you hate America so much" or it's variant wordings are an old ROFF joke. I forget the exact origins but Mr. Pavlov did not mean anything sinister other than a probable implied disagreement with your politics. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"Wayne Knight" wrote in message ... "Wolfgang" wrote in message ... Wolfgang Since you're posting in a time zone one hour behind mine but my newserver says you posted this tomorrow, O.k., it's a little complicated, but here goes........ The computer knows what year it is, but the microwave, my watch, the VCR, and various other bits of the impedimenta with which we encumber ourselves don't. So, Outlook Express does is semi-daily (or is that bi-daily......I never can remember the difference) ****up and tells me.....after crashing and restarting.....that there are 5000+ new messages and downloads 500 of them, leaving the rest (for iscrutable reasons of its own) somewhere out there in limbo. Just to be sure that I'm reading the right messages (the ones I haven't looked at yet) and marking the rest as read, I checks my watch to be sure of the date and time. The watch, ignorant puss bag that it is, tells me today is 3-3-04. Right, says I, but all of the latest messages are marked 3-2-04. O.k., so the computer has experienced some sort of cyber hiccup and forgotten the date. I checks the clock. Sure enough, Dell, Intel, Microsoft, and God only knows who else, thinks today is the second. So, I reset the date. Then, I shut down OE and restart, thinking this will solve the problem and the correct date will appear on all the messages in ROFF. but, no, I distinctly remember some of these messages and they were most certainly posted today and OE STILL insists they arrived on the second. Hm...... "Hey, Becky," sez I, "what the hell is today's date?". She says, "It's the third, no wait, it's the second". I reply, "Well, why does my watch say it's the third?" Becky: "It's leap year.....you didn't reset your watch, did you?" "Shut up!", I rejoin, cheerfully. So, anyway, like I don't already have enough to do at work, now I have to go back and doctor all of today's records....find the stupid instructions for this stupid watch....and somehow try to put my whole life back in some semblance of order. :( could you run out and check the Wednesday powerball numbers for me and email them to me? I'll give you a cut, I promise :) 11-19-26-27-44....and the powerball is 33. Wolfgang who, if setting a watch or operating a t.v. remote were as easy as picking winning lottery numbers, who be eternally blissful. |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"RDL" wrote in message m... Thanks for the info. I will switch to the Coor's brand labels. Richard Hey, no problem. We all are entitled to our preferences. But Im curious about one thing: What info bit about the Coors' campaign against the people of the United States attracted you most? Was it their opposition to voting rights, their assault on free public education, or their funding of efforts to sell off the National Parks? And here's a bonus idea for you: why not send your beer money directly to the Heritage Foundation (or Reverend Moon for that matter); that way you could hasten the destruction of the country, and give your bladder and liver a break to boot. Dave |
OT, political: Move on, Bush.
"RDL" wrote in message m... You must be a complete idiot! I served two tours in Viet Nam 65-67, came home and started a business, done well, and am ready to retire. I don't hate America, I love and respect my country. I fought for it, and bled for it., What about you? You see, I'm not some left wing screwy fascist that finds fault in all America does. I'm not a movie star, who gets on screen and tells the world how evil the U.S. is, and wouldn't raise their children there. I'm not a political hack who gets in front of a TV camera, and yells out to the world that what we are doing is "Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, And Wrong" like your good old ex KKK Senator member does. And, I could care less what France, or Germany thinks about us. How about you taking a hike instead? Makes sense to me! Richard Dang, Duke, they told me you was dead, but I knowed it warn't true! I knowed all along you an' ole Elvis was holed up somewheres doin' the nasty. So, how ya been? Wolfgang silver wings upon their chests...... :) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:50 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter