Why is this getting no play??

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 22:40:31 -0700 (PDT), DaveS
wrote:

On Oct 8, 8:00*pm, Rick wrote:
Un ****in believable.

* AMEN!!!!1 I will second that 100%

Rick- Hide quoted text -


Well Rick, why don't you go back in the archive and see what these
same characters were saying

Yes, let's:

"Right, yeah I get it, any Rebooblican is better than any Demoholigan,
right? What a crock of ****. Im a Demo, life long, and if I have
switched parties and voted absentee for McCain, and will vote for him in
the general (vs Gore) if I have a chance. However . . . Im voting for
the man, DESPITE his flirtations with Conservative goofiness. And its
because of three reasons.

1. He's tough and has shown his personal courage to stand up against the
gamut from physical torture to Senate purile bull****. The man is not
perfect but he is basically honest.

2. He thinks out of the ideological box of the conservative/liberal
framework that lazy people think is politics.

3. He has "on the ground" military experience, and, like many officers
of the Viet era, he is cautious about getting entangled in every tribal
conflict that comes down the pike, while supporting a strong defense at
a reasonable level. We are going to need that quality in the years
ahead."

Any guesses as to what character might have penned the above...?

Lessee:

"From: "David Snedeker" "

HTH,
R

The Swift Boat nonsense never stops . . . . .

On Oct 8, 7:15*am, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:57:23 -0500, Ken Fortenberry

wrote:
JohnKerryis also a genuine hero but that didn't stop the
Swift Boat lies.

Yeah, with a PH from "friendly fire" when he was on coastal patrol,

Sorry, not on coastal patrol, and not . . . not, according to those
known to be with Kerry (two enlisted guys), from friendly fire.

Having said that, friendly fire in no way disqualifies one for a PH in
and of itself -- just ask Bob Dole, and the circumstances of his first
PH.

and a PH from "rice in the buttocks". *

Nice try -- he didn't get a PH for that.

A BS for picking up the Army
officer out of the river after HE,KERRY, knocked the guy overboard
with chicken**** maneuvers to get away from a fight. *

Another nice try.

His boat sped away momentarily out of the kill zone. That's standard
procedure. One of the Swift Boat Veterans for "truth" members present
(Larry Thurlow) refused to say that Kerry "fled", because Kerry did no
such thing.

Oh, and that same guy -- Larry Thurlow -- received a Bronze Star for
doing precisely what Kerry did.

Both Bronze Stars were earned.

And if you think
he deserved a SS for what he did, then every swinging dick grunt in
Nam deserves one. *He did nothing special. *

You apparently have no idea what he did to earn the Silver Star. The
Navy did, and awarded him the medal accordingly.

Doug Reese

And heros get honorable discharges, not ones from a "board of
officers".

McCain is a hero. *Period. *And Obama is a nothing. *Never has been
anything and I pray he never will be anything. *Of course Jo will
retire if he is elected. *We need to cut back on our taxes, being the
unpatriotic Republicans that we are dontchaknow.

Dave

On Oct 9, 7:40*am, DaveS wrote:
On Oct 8, 8:00*pm, Rick wrote:

Un ****in believable.

* AMEN!!!!1 I will second that 100%

Rick- Hide quoted text -

Well Rick, why don't you go back in the archive and see what these
same characters were saying, or go 4 years back and see that they were
spouting the same freaky ideology and some were smearing McCain at
that time! Questioning his heroism, belittling his imprisonment. And
NOW, after these geniuses were wrong at EVERY turn, we on ROFF are
treated to the same crock of barely literate right-wing blather ****,
you say. . .

AMEN!!!!!! 1 i WILL SECOND THAT 100%

I have to say that you must hate this country a great deal. Or perhaps
you were in long-term rehab, drunk, with a truly wonderful woman, or
maybe you are just of low intelligence, and as a result can not be
expected to be a responsible, contributing citizen of a first world
country *If evolution is to be believed your kind will disappear.

Dave
**** like this can spoil a sunny day

Ah, a champion of intellectual government, ( presumably you think you
are an intellectual?). Why aren´t you off painting monkeys shagging
diseased sheep you nasty stupid mother****er?

The day any of you nasty ignorant ****ers had any power at all with
regard to disenfranchising people would be the day to shoot you.

Seems you don´t know anything about evolution either.

Rather amusing that you people claim to be able to diagnose mental
health issues at a range of several thousand miles, but are completely
incapable of realising what nasty stupid ****s you are.

On Oct 9, 8:13*am, wrote:
On Oct 9, 7:40*am, DaveS wrote:



On Oct 8, 8:00*pm, Rick wrote:

Un ****in believable.

* AMEN!!!!1 I will second that 100%

Rick- Hide quoted text -

Well Rick, why don't you go back in the archive and see what these
same characters were saying, or go 4 years back and see that they were
spouting the same freaky ideology and some were smearing McCain at
that time! Questioning his heroism, belittling his imprisonment. And
NOW, after these geniuses were wrong at EVERY turn, we on ROFF are
treated to the same crock of barely literate right-wing blather ****,
you say. . .

AMEN!!!!!! 1 i WILL SECOND THAT 100%

I have to say that you must hate this country a great deal. Or perhaps
you were in long-term rehab, drunk, with a truly wonderful woman, or
maybe you are just of low intelligence, and as a result can not be
expected to be a responsible, contributing citizen of a first world
country *If evolution is to be believed your kind will disappear.

Dave
**** like this can spoil a sunny day

Ah, a champion of intellectual government, ( presumably you think you
are an intellectual?). *Why aren´t you off painting monkeys shagging
diseased sheep you nasty stupid mother****er?

The day any of you nasty ignorant ****ers had any power at all with
regard to disenfranchising people would be the day to shoot you.

Seems you don´t know anything about evolution either.

Rather amusing that you people claim to be able to diagnose mental
health issues at a range of several thousand miles, but are completely
incapable of realising what nasty stupid ****s you are.

Furthermore, and even more upsetting, you are unworthy of the freedom
and other advantages you enjoy, and not to be trusted with them, as
you have proven that you neither respect them, nor know how to use
them honourably and sensibly.

Indeed, in view of how some here behave, it is quite obvious that you
would be extremely dangerous unless kept under control, and it is only
the threat of punishment or similar that keeps you under control. As
soon as any real control apart from self control is removed, you
misbehave. That alone proves that you are unworthy of a free
environment, as in such an environment you are a very real danger to
others in it, and indeed compromise the environment itself.

That is exactly what you and others have done here.

On Oct 8, 11:07*pm, wrote:

Any guesses as to what character might have penned the above...?

Lessee:

"From: "David Snedeker" "

HTH,
R

That was me apparently. I hope most of what I said is still true. But
a few things have changed. The first is time and health. A man's time
on earth is limited and health is a fleeting luxury. He is old while
the country needs youth. Obama has the energy edge.

The second is what experience and information provides. Experience has
shown the adventurist Neocon approach to defining and pursuing our
national interests, . . . to have been a failure and an expensive and
hopefully not fatal mistake. McCain is not picking up on the basically
changed world situation fast enough.

Information, more reliable than a while back is revealing changes in
the country's situation, changes which McCain's policies ignore. That
is very troubling in what it says about the competency and stamina of
the man and his national security team. Here are 2 specific examples,
1. Kandahar has fallen to the Taliban. The World media know this, but
US media are punting. McCain Inc ignores it. 2. McCain is ignoring the
negotiations between Iraq and the US, and between Iraq and Iran, and
between Israel and virtually all the enemy threats his speeches say no
one should be talking to. (Example: Israel can talk to Hezbollah,
Syria etc., but the US cannot?)

It comes down to this: McCain is a politician I supported years ago
who has grown old and maybe a little stale in the honorable service of
his country. I have an imperfect, but I think better choice in Obama.
Here's why in a nutshell:

1. Our country is in for some ****. I want a President who is smart,
well educated, knowledgeable of our Constitution, organized,
reasonably moral, politically effective in a diverse constituency,
young and energetic. I think Obama comes closer to these qualities
than McCain does now.

2. I want a President who can draw upon a "deep bench" of experienced
and tested cabinet members who know how to manage large public
bureaucracies. The Ds have that bench right now. The Republicans do
not have a deep bench right now, and in fact internalize a hatred of
government; How can you manage an organization you hate? Only badly,
as we have seen.

3. I want a President who is middle of the road, works for win-win
solutions, an empiricist who compromises his personal ideologies in
favor of solving the country's problems, who respects the art of the
deal and the role of compromise in advancing the interests of the
country and the welfare of its people. I think Obama comes closer to
these qualities than McCain does now.

4. I want a President who resists committing American forces in most
third world instability situations that do not directly threaten the
lives of Americans. There are lots of other countries that can and
should step up to that plate. Our forces need to stay focused on the
roles only we and a few other major powers can preform. I believe
those roles include self defence, nuclear deterrence (the pax nuclei),
de-militarization of space, nuclear non-proliferation, global warming
containment, energy transition, serious science, world population/food
policies, and space exploration. I think Obama is more likely than
McCain to resist more of these kinds of entanglements.

5. I want a President who will curb the recent steps toward State
Socialism. As real Conservatives know, there are serious infringements
on our individual Constitutional rights in the so-called "anti terror"
laws of the last few years, and they need to be corrected. The
government take over of the finance and banking system is also
troubling. Despite what the Republican ideologues SAY, their "bold"
actions have led us toward socialism.

I think McCain leans toward bold and brash solutions. He is not a
conservative in any sense. The Democratic party is committed to a well
regulated MARKET based economy, private ownership, private property,
universal private medical care, and a tax system that pays the bills
and balances the budget. There is not one of these areas for which
John McCain has a policy that I see as creditable. Obama is a
Democrat.

Thats enough. Fact is you will vote for who you will, But I think you
will do better personally in a coming Democratic led country than you
would under a Bush/McCain/Cheney/Palin administration.

Dave
If the next Pres was expected to lead the charge out front with a
sword in hand and a dagger in his teeth, I would probably award that
point to McCain. I will concede that the old gent looks tough.

On Oct 9, 9:57*am, DaveS wrote:
On Oct 8, 11:07*pm, wrote:

Any guesses as to what character might have penned the above...?

Lessee:

"From: "David Snedeker" "

HTH,
R

That was me apparently. I hope most of what I said is still true. But
a few things have changed. The first is time and health. A man's time
on earth is limited and health is a fleeting luxury. He is old while
the country needs youth. Obama has the energy edge.

The second is what experience and information provides. Experience has
shown the adventurist Neocon approach to defining and pursuing our
national interests, . . . to have been a failure and an expensive and
hopefully not fatal mistake. McCain is not picking up on the basically
changed world situation fast enough.

Information, more reliable than a while back is revealing changes in
the country's situation, changes which McCain's policies ignore. That
is very troubling in what it says about the competency and stamina of
the man and his national security team. Here are 2 specific examples,
1. Kandahar has fallen to the Taliban. The World media know this, but
US media are punting. McCain Inc ignores it. 2. McCain is ignoring the
negotiations between Iraq and the US, and between Iraq and Iran, *and
between Israel and virtually all the enemy threats his speeches say no
one should be talking to. (Example: Israel can talk to Hezbollah,
Syria etc., but the US cannot?)

It comes down to this: McCain is a politician I supported years ago
who has grown old and maybe a little stale in the honorable service of
his country. I have an imperfect, but I think better choice in Obama.
Here's why in a nutshell:

1. Our country is in for some ****. I want a President who is smart,
well educated, knowledgeable of our Constitution, organized,
reasonably moral, politically effective in a diverse constituency,
young and energetic. I think Obama comes closer to these qualities
than McCain does now.

2. I want a President who can draw upon a "deep bench" of experienced
and tested cabinet members who know how to manage large public
bureaucracies. The Ds have that bench right now. The Republicans do
not have a deep bench right now, and in fact internalize a hatred of
government; How can you manage an organization you hate? Only badly,
as we have seen.

3. I want a President who is middle of the road, works for win-win
solutions, an empiricist who compromises his personal ideologies in
favor of solving the country's problems, who respects the art of the
deal and the role of compromise in advancing the interests of the
country and the welfare of its people. I think Obama comes closer to
these qualities than McCain does now.

4. I want a President who resists committing American forces in most
third world instability situations that do not directly threaten the
lives of Americans. There are lots of other countries that can and
should step up to that plate. Our forces need to stay focused on the
roles only we and a few other major powers can preform. I believe
those roles include self defence, nuclear deterrence (the pax nuclei),
de-militarization of space, nuclear non-proliferation, global warming
containment, energy transition, serious science, world population/food
policies, and space exploration. *I think Obama is more likely than
McCain to resist more of these kinds of entanglements.

5. I want a President who will curb the recent steps toward State
Socialism. As real Conservatives know, there are serious infringements
on our individual Constitutional rights in the so-called "anti terror"
laws of the last few years, and they need to be corrected. The
government take over of the finance and banking system is also
troubling. Despite what the Republican ideologues SAY, their "bold"
actions have led us toward socialism.

I think McCain leans toward bold and brash solutions. He is not a
conservative in any sense. The Democratic party is committed to a well
regulated MARKET based economy, private ownership, private property,
universal private medical care, and a tax system that pays the bills
and balances the budget. There is not one of these areas for which
John McCain has a policy that I see as creditable. Obama is a
Democrat.

Thats enough. Fact is you will vote for who you will, But I think you
will do better personally in a coming Democratic led country than you
would under a Bush/McCain/Cheney/Palin administration.

Dave
If the next Pres was expected to lead the charge out front with a
sword in hand and a dagger in his teeth, I would probably award that
point to McCain. I will concede that the old gent looks tough.

On the surface at least, all very noble, as it was doubtless intended
to appear. It even makes a lot of sense, assuming that one accepts
some of the premises.

Unfortunately, your actions belie your words. You are not noble, and
you don´t give a **** about anybody else´s welfare. You are a nasty
stupid ****, who misuses an incidental freedom to insult, denigrate,
and upset others simply because he feels like it.

As pointed out elsewhere, completely unworthy of the freedom you
already enjoy, and on no account to be trusted with more, as you would
almost certainly misuse it in the same cavalier fashion you misuse
this one.

On Oct 9, 1:17*am, wrote:

As pointed out elsewhere, completely unworthy of the freedom you
already enjoy, and on no account to be trusted with more, as you would
almost certainly misuse it in the same cavalier fashion you misuse
this one.- Hide quoted text -


Well Michael my lad, don't be skulken back there in the Chapel, come
forward and share us a good fishen story. Do your bloody heart good
boy.

Dave
(Father Flanagan)
Snedeker

On Oct 9, 10:40*am, DaveS wrote:
On Oct 9, 1:17*am, wrote:

As pointed out elsewhere, completely unworthy of the freedom you
already enjoy, and on no account to be trusted with more, as you would
almost certainly misuse it in the same cavalier fashion you misuse
this one.- Hide quoted text -

Well Michael my lad, don't be skulken back there in the Chapel, come
forward and share us a good fishen story. Do your bloody heart good
boy.

Dave
(Father Flanagan)
Snedeker

You really are a most remarkably stupid **** aren´t you? As a direct
result of your and other´s machinations I will never again write
anything about fishing on the internet, and nowhere else either. I
simply do not need the hassle from nasty evil ****s like you who
pervert anything they touch.

Many many people have sent me e-mails, and some have even phoned from
other countries, thanking me for my efforts to date, or asking me why
my stuff is simply no longer available, or why I have ceased
contributing to various boards and lists, and telling me to simply
ignore really nasty dumb ****ers like you, LaCourse and Fortenberry,
to name just a couple, but I am apparently quite unable to do so. The
very thought of you makes me sick. The thought that you might ever
damage anybody else in the same way also makes me sick.

I have erased all the computer data on fishing I had, I don´t need it,
I have it in my head, and I have also erased all stories and notes.
The thought that anything I did might possibly give one of you nasty
****s pleasure, or even the means or excuse to write more lies and
**** is anathema to me.

If it were possible to seriously and permanently damage you in some
way I would do it without a second thought. All I can do is keep on
telling the truth here, and hope that suffices to prevent anybody else
being misused.

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 17:28:04 -0700 (PDT), DaveS
wrote:

On Oct 8, 8:58*am, Dave LaCourse wrote:

Worry about Israel, Scott. *You will hear more of them in the future
if Obama wins. *And it ain't gonna be good news.

Dave

David, Im just wondering if you are aware that the Israeli nuclear
stockpile is estimated to be at least 100 weapons, up to 400 weapons,
with way over 1000 delivery systems. Israel probably has more nukes
than all of Western Europe. Israel definitely has more Nukes than
China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea combined.

Do you really think that the Israelis are incapable of defending
themselves? I think you know or should know that they are armed to the
teeth and have much more capability than even most Israelis are aware
of. So why should Scott worry about Israel "if Obama wins" ? It is
very clear from experience that the Israelis would strike first if
they were seriously threatened. It is known that they alerted and
loaded for sure on at least one occasion.

Please, I know that if you were half awake during your sojourn in the
Navy, you already knew what I have just said. Just stick to the normal
slander please.

Dave

Israel is afraid (make that "concerned") with Iran. She is VERY
capable of defending herself, but she is not going to sit by and wait
for Iran to lob a missle or ten her way, especially nuclear tipped
ones. She *will* strike first and that could lead to a third world
war, a nuclear one to boot. Something to consider, eh?

Now back to your regular idealogy spamming.....

Dave

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 15:35:18 -0500, "Wolfgang"
wrote:


"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 14:22:18 -0500, "Wolfgang"
wrote:

And you indescribably evil thugs, butchers, murderers, idiots, thieves,
liars, rapists, back stabbers, adulterers, money worshippers and all
around
filth dare to trumpet yourselves as the champions of freedom, valor, honor
and decency?

Ah, yes, humankind. The only animal besides the ant that wages war on
its species. Good old humankind. Been waging war for what..... six
thousand years now? And you and Obama are going to change it, right?
You, Fortenberry, and Neville Chamberland. The unholy trinity.

Diminutive idiot.

Davey
(all gather 'round, "All we are saaaaaayyyying, is give peace a
chance. All we are saaaaaayyyyyyikes.." boom-Iran gotcha there
Neville!)

And many of you STILL call this thing "friend."

What do you all see when you look in a mirror?

A realist.

Impotent imbecile.

Davey