OT Harmful Books

wrote

Do I agree with them on many issues? Depending on the issue, of course,
but on average, probably 40-60% - probably 20% as to economic issues and
80% as to "social" issues,

fascinating. i would expect those percentages would not be very distant
from mine.




And FWIW, it's always surprised me that you (and jeff) don't seem to
have a strong dislike, even contempt, for Clinton given what he did
the courts.

actually, it's what he *didn't* do with the courts that burned my ass.
he had an opportunity to put life back into the bill of rights by
aggressively pursuing the appointment of federal judges who are strong on
individual rights, and failed miserably. my bet is that jeffie would tend
to agree.

but i stray too far from my isolationist position in re talking politics
on roff--time to go. thanks for the civil communication.

yfitons
wayno

TC,
R

Wayne Harrison wrote:
wrote
And FWIW, it's always surprised me that you (and jeff) don't seem to
have a strong dislike, even contempt, for Clinton given what he did
the courts.

actually, it's what he *didn't* do with the courts that burned my ass.
he had an opportunity to put life back into the bill of rights by
aggressively pursuing the appointment of federal judges who are strong on
individual rights, and failed miserably.

Orrin Hatch had a lot to do with that. Dozens of Clinton appointees
to the federal bench never received so much as a hearing before
Hatch's judiciary committee much less a vote on the floor of the
Senate.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote

Orrin Hatch had a lot to do with that. Dozens of Clinton appointees
to the federal bench never received so much as a hearing before
Hatch's judiciary committee much less a vote on the floor of the
Senate.

good point, forty. but much more pressure could have been brought to
bear.

wayno

sandy wrote:
Someone wrote:

Yes, as did George Bush


When I was 19, in 1967, I looked into the National Guard.
Everybody knew the guard was the easiest way to avoid combat duty
in Viet Nam (was then, anyway).

The older brother of a good friend of mine was in the National Guard. He
was killed in Viet Nam.

Russell

"Russell D." wrote in message
...
sandy wrote:
Someone wrote:

Yes, as did George Bush


When I was 19, in 1967, I looked into the National Guard.
Everybody knew the guard was the easiest way to avoid combat duty
in Viet Nam (was then, anyway).

The older brother of a good friend of mine was in the National Guard. He
was killed in Viet Nam.

Unfortunate.

Actually, the best way to avoid combat duty in Viet Nam would have been to
be a Swedish lesbian.

Wolfgang
who, sad to say, didn't think of that at the time.

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 18:10:06 -0500, "Wolfgang" wrote:

Actually, the best way to avoid combat duty in Viet Nam would have been to
be a Swedish lesbian.

Wolfgang
who, sad to say, didn't think of that at the time.

Hmm.
Thought you did.
Once a guy declared himself to be a Swede AND a lesbian back then weren't the
knee deep sailors the only infrequent combat group interested?

Kiyu

"Kiyu" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 18:10:06 -0500, "Wolfgang" wrote:

Actually, the best way to avoid combat duty in Viet Nam would have been to
be a Swedish lesbian.

Wolfgang
who, sad to say, didn't think of that at the time.

Hmm.
Thought you did.

Well, your memory is probably better than mine. Hell, I don't even recall
that we met back in those days.

Once a guy declared himself to be a Swede AND a lesbian back then weren't
the
knee deep sailors the only infrequent combat group interested?

Ah, slander hundreds of thousands of veterans of the oldest continuing
maritime service in the U.S., including tens of thousands of combat
veterans....and thousands of combat casualties....and maybe you'll get me
with the shrapnel, huh?

Maybe.

Wolfgang

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 19:18:59 -0500, "Wolfgang" wrote:

Wolfgang
who, sad to say, didn't think of that at the time.

Hmm.
Thought you did.

Well, your memory is probably better than mine. Hell, I don't even recall
that we met back in those days.
I was in the other line.

Once a guy declared himself to be a Swede AND a lesbian back then weren't
the
knee deep sailors the only infrequent combat group interested?

Ah, slander hundreds of thousands of veterans of the oldest continuing
maritime service in the U.S., including tens of thousands of combat
veterans....and thousands of combat casualties....and maybe you'll get me
with the shrapnel, huh?
Slander? Reread. Note the back then part.
I'm fully aware of the history.
By the by. How many guys did you serve with who joined to get out of combat in
Nam?
Excluding self declared Swedes.

And lesbians.

Kiyu

"Kiyu" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 19:18:59 -0500, "Wolfgang" wrote:

Wolfgang
who, sad to say, didn't think of that at the time.

Hmm.
Thought you did.

Well, your memory is probably better than mine. Hell, I don't even recall
that we met back in those days.
I was in the other line.

What line was that?

Once a guy declared himself to be a Swede AND a lesbian back then
weren't
the
knee deep sailors the only infrequent combat group interested?

Ah, slander hundreds of thousands of veterans of the oldest continuing
maritime service in the U.S., including tens of thousands of combat
veterans....and thousands of combat casualties....and maybe you'll get me
with the shrapnel, huh?
Slander?

Yep.

Reread.

Done.

Note the back then part.

Noted. So? Is there a point here?

I'm fully aware of the history.

Well......gosh.

By the by. How many guys did you serve with who joined to get out of
combat in
Nam?
Excluding self declared Swedes.

And lesbians.

I have no idea. Was I supposed to take a poll, and nobody told me?

Wolfgang
who, mere mortal, knows only a part of the history.

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 21:08:11 -0500, "Wolfgang" wrote:

Once a guy declared himself to be a Swede AND a lesbian back then
weren't
the
knee deep sailors the only infrequent combat group interested?

Ah, slander hundreds of thousands of veterans of the oldest continuing
maritime service in the U.S., including tens of thousands of combat
veterans....and thousands of combat casualties....and maybe you'll get me
with the shrapnel, huh?
Slander?

Yep.
A defamatory statement? Nope. A question.
And the question was in writing, not spoken.

Reread.

Done.
Note the back then part.

Noted. So? Is there a point here?
Back then - as the previous comments framed things in the Viet Nam War era,
not the entire history of the Guard, but a clever ploy no?; bringing up the
"hundreds of thousands of veterans of the oldest continuing
maritime service in the U.S., including tens of thousands of combat
veterans....and thousands of combat casualties."

I'm fully aware of the history.

Well......gosh.

By the by. How many guys did you serve with who joined to get out of
combat in
Nam?
Excluding self declared Swedes.

And lesbians.

I have no idea. Was I supposed to take a poll, and nobody told me?
You could have, or been aware In Sandy's and Russells posts ahead of you in
this string they commented on National Guard service in Viet Nam. The Coast
Guard was similarly viewed as a safe way out of the shooting war. To my
knowledge all the Guardsmen who served in Nam were volunteers so there was no
danger of being sent there unless one wanted to go.


Wolfgang
who, mere mortal, knows only a part of the history.

Kiyu