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

wrote in message
...

FWIW, gubernatorial experience is at least arguably more practical than
congressional because it is executive rather than legislative or
judicial. Moreover, given the system as it is in the US, a legislator
is has no (direct) duty to those not his (direct) constituents, and
arguably has a duty to put those citizens he/she represents "in front"
of those of colleagues or in other "non-constituent" categories, whereas
the POTUS' (direct) constituents, at least in theory, are all citizens
and he has a more direct duty to visitors and guests of or to the US,
protectorates, etc.

O.k., so McCain isn't qualified to be President of the United States. Well,
I guess I won't take issue with that analysis. However it does leave
unanswered the question of what you think his qualifications are.

Seriously.

Wolfgang
not that it matters, but do you guys EVER think about what you
right.....either before or after?

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

On Feb 18, 9:31*am, Dave LaCourse wrote:
Kerry lied and people died. *Kerry gave comfort to the enemy by
telling those lies simply to pad his own nest. *Kerry gave comfort to
the enemy by surreptitiously meeting with the North Viet Nam
delegation in Paris, *while in uniform*. *That was a traitorous act.

Oh boy, let's play "Update That Quote", the fun game where we
substitute the crimes of George W. Bush into accusations against
others:

Bush lied and people died. Bush gave comfort to the enemy by telling
those lies simply to pad his own nest. Bush gave comfort to the enemy
by meeting with the financiers of the 9/11 attack in Saudi Arabia
"while Commander in Chief". That was a traitorous act.

Say, this game is fun!

Joe F.

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

wrote in message
...
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).

It just keeps on getting funnier and funnier.

Wolfgang
and you guys treat it like and adult. :)

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

"Jim Edmondson" wrote in message
global.net...
Hello Ken,


Jim
mailto: j.g.edmondson at att dot net

Jim Edmondson wrote:

he's been nowhere to be seen except on the campaign trail
if he's been "on the job", I'll ask again what is it that he has he
accomplished?

Obama was on the floor of the Senate during the FISA vote, Hillary
wasn't.

OK, he showed when the cameras were on. According to the Washingtom Post,
he missed 38.8% of votes during the current Congress, a pretty dismal
record.
In fact, he was third in the Senate (McCain was second missing 55.7% and
Hillary was seventh at 27.1%).
His list of legislative accomplishments in the Illinois Senate is long
and
distinguished and includes ethics reform, tax credits for low-income
workers, welfare reform, child care subsidies and legislation
requiring that all interrogations during a homicide investigation be
videotaped among many others.

I'm underwhelmed

In the US Senate he won passage of the Coburn-Obama Transparency Act
over the objections of many senior pork addicted members of his own
party wich led to this http://usaspending.gov/ a website where
any journalist or citizen can see for themselves where the federal
money goes. It is historic.

OK, he shows us the waste, but what would be "historic" is actually doing
something about it. He garnered quite a record for earmark spending for a
junior senator,
something like $400 miliion in 3 years (less than Hillary, but more than
McCain's $0).

He co-sponsored legislation with Feingold and Schumer to clean up
election laws and with John McCain on a climate change bill to reduce
greenhouse gasses.

Actually the reduction is in man-made CO2 emissions which are a very small
amount of the total "greenhouse gasses" and which have has an
insignificant effect on climate.

As an aside, I notice how now it is "cimate change" as opposed to "global
warming". This way it can encompass any change in the climate which, of
course, is continually changing. Great strategy to confuse the masses and
support the ultimate agenda.

It just keeps on getting funnier and funnier!

Wolfgang
who feels like he should be paying for this stuff. :)

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

"Jim Edmondson" wrote in message
. ..


I am keeping an open mind

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Wolfgang
god, i love this place!

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

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 06:26:14 -0800 (PST), rb608
wrote:

On Feb 18, 8:55*am, Scott Seidman wrote:
I don't know why you'd sentence poor Bob to read pages and pages of Kerry
testimony. *

:-)

When this came up a while back, I looked up the Kerry testimony as
part of my usual fact-check whenever I get a "send this to everyone
you know" message. Apparently it was "common knowledge", or at least
often repeated that Kerry had lied in his testimony, so I checked. He
didn't.

Not only that, I thought it was a pretty good read and a relevant
lesson for what we're now doing in Iraq. He was spot on in most of
his analysis, and without the benefit of the 20-20 hindsight we now
enjoy almost four decades years later.

Joe F.

You might wish to do a little more research. Whether Kerry lied or not
I'll leave to the reader, but the whole "Winter Soldier Investigation"
stuff that supposedly took place in Detroit and which he claimed to have
been a part simply didn't happen as he described, and there is pretty
clear evidence that he knew at least some and most likely a large part
of what was being said and what was attributed to those involved in the
"investigation" were not only lies about the alleged "war crimes" and
atrocities, but some were lying about having ever been in Viet Nam. IAC,
I'd offer that if any GOP figure, um, pushed the envelope (at the least)
in such a fashion, you, Ken, 'tripper, etc. would be the first to call
them liars.

That said, Kerry did make some excellent points about the stupidity and
futility of wasting one more life (US or otherwise) in Viet Nam, but
that does not excuse his behavior while a Commissioned Officer in the
United States Navy. His actual service seems to nothing special - he
was neither a hero or a coward, but rather, a political opportunist who
tried to have his cake and eat it, too, in that he signed up to protect
his political viability, but signed up with a unit he was betting on
never saw the slightest bit of action. Ooops. When he found out he
screwed up, he then proceeded to milk it for all it might ever be worth.
And when he got out of the fighting, he then realized he had his "issue"
and so, and being as generous as possible, grandstanded his way into the
national spotlight with misrepresentations. Granted, it isn't _certain_
that he misrepresented his own wartime experiences, but he certainly
turned a blind eye to representations he knew to be false being
disseminated.

Bottom line for me? Is there enough evidence to secure a certain
conviction of him for perjury? Very iffy. Did he lie? Almost
certainly. Did he suborn perjury, did that subornation injure the US in
direct violation of his oath, and is there enough evidence to support a
conviction of that/those violation(s)? Unquestionably (and personally,
I believe such a conviction would be an accurate reflection of the
facts).

HTH,
R

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

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
On 16 Feb 2008 01:04:07 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

Dave LaCourse wrote in
m:

I said that once about a commanding officer. Boy, was I wrong. It
*can* be worse.

Dave


During the Clinton years, you probably said that about the Commander in
Chief, and Boy, were you wrong.

--
Scott

Ever since I said that about my commanding officer way back in 1958
while in Japan, I have never uttered those words again.

I feel safer and am better off now than I did/was in 1990. You can
not take that away from me.

You're also a self-loathing idiot, a champion hater, and a liar. And nobody
can take any of that away from you either.

Wolfgang
who reflects that after all it's nice that some things never change.
:)

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

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 06:18:12 -0800 (PST), rb608
wrote:

On Feb 17, 9:48*pm, wrote:
Yes, I knew exactly what I was writing,

Yes, I knew that.

but you're flat wrong about the
meaning and what I meant. *

No. I'm not.

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 your context, it's a racist red flag highlighting Obama's African
ancestry and trivializing the respect he deserves for his
accomplishments, and in particular, his acceptance and endorsement by
a white woman. But you knew that.


In fact,
there would not even need to be an actual black person involved. *

Well, that's just laughable.


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),

Yeah, I hear the n-word used when good-naturedly gigging folks too.
Why don't you just cut the obfuscation and go right to how you feel.

I've never heard a black person say they were offended by it,
and it was popularized by a black guy -

A movie was made by Spike Lee that examined the racial conflicts
inherent in the phrase. That's a big difference from popularizing of
the racist use of the phrase itself.


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). *

So you've spoken with them and understand their feelings as black
professionals on the derogatory use of the phrase, or are you just
assuming that their appearance as actors in a social critique are all
the insight you require?

As a matter of fact, kinda-sorta-yes - I've actually had a pretty close
conversation with Davis (mainly over the use of "nigga" in "music" - it
also included Dizzy Gillespie, one of the Marsalis boys, Flonzy Burrell,
either Art or Cyril Neville, and some other folks of various races). As
to Snipes and Jackson, nope, and no offense to 'em, but I'd give Davis
or Dee 4 votes each to their 2 total, so they'd be overruled, IMO.

HTH,
R

Joe F.

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

On Feb 18, 7:31*pm, "rb608" wrote:
"Bob Weinberger" wrote in message
OK lets ignore the knowledge of Naval Officers who were in Viet Nam at the
same time as Kerry and who were familiar withSwift boatoperations (this
include me), and lets assume that Kerry didn't lie when he testified under
oath that he had witnessed all those atrocities.

I've been avoiding most of this latest round of Kerry-hate and rebuttal; but
I am a bit uninformed as to when these supposed lies took place. *Are you
talking about the better-known Fulbright hearing on 4/22/71, or was there
another time he testified under oath about this stuff?

I'm guessing that's what he's talking about, Joe.

And, as is frequently the case, he's putting words into Kerry's
mouth . . . . . . . words he never said.

Doug Reese

PS. I'd be curious to know if the poster (the original poster, Bob) is
familiar with the very unique circumstances in which Kerry operated
when he worked out of An Thoi. I'm guessing . . . not.

Joe F.

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

On Feb 18, 6:01*am, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:05:31 GMT, Ken Fortenberry

wrote:
Dave LaCourse wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
To borrow your argument, if Kerry did indeed lie under oath
before Congress why wasn't he ever prosecuted for perjury ?

*EXACTLY*

Huh ? Exactly what ?

Exactly why hasn't he been prosecuted? *Why hasn't Clinton been
prosecuted.



snip
Kerry did not receive an honorable discharge from the Navy. *His
discharge read "committee of officers" and was dated during the Carter
administration (all on Kerry's website when running for potus). *Does
not that make you just a little curious about his character. *

The fact that he was in the Navy would be reason enough for me
to question his character but if he was eventually kicked out
of the Navy that would be a mitigating factor in his favor.

Har, har, har. *Just let the Communist Hordes come knockin' on your
door and you'd be callin' for the U.S.Na...........uh, no, maybe you
wouldn't at that. *Feel right at home then, eh? *d;o)



(By the way, what are we to think about all those medals the
Navy gave to Kerry ? ;-)

As Zoomwalt said, "Get that loose cannon out of my command!"

He didn't say that about Kerry.

He won the Silver Star for action that normally wouldn't even win the
Bronze Star. *

Well, then I suggest you take it up with his superiors, as they knew
EXACTLY what happened that day.

And he won the Bronze Star for saving a Green Beret
officer the HE (Kerry) knocked overboard fleeing from a fight.

He did not "knock" him overboard. I mean, if you are a typical Kerry-
hater, I suppose you could color it that way, but the Green Beret guy
himself doesn't, so . . . . .

*All of
his PHs are in question.

Again, in the mind of the anti-Kerry crowd they are, but not in the
minds of the overwhelming majority of those who were present for those
incidents. Then, of course, there's the Navy . . . . .

*Rice in the buttocks? *Only one way to get
that one - not knowing how to throw a grenade into a native vessel's
hold full of ........ wait for it..... wait..... *ta da, *rice*. *d;o)

Sorry to once again burst your bubble, but he didn't get a PH for the
alleged rice wound. That PH was for a wound suffered later in the day.
And it wasn't vessel that had the rice . . . . . . and did you know
there was guy killed then -- moments before this rice incident?

You would make the Swift Boat Veterans for "truth" proud -- following
their talking points as well as you do . . . .

Doug Reese

Yer hero is like all of yer heroes, Ken -- another phony.

Dave