"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:110920051223414365%dbarnes@aol.com...

Are you now telling us that your definition
of peace is "freedom from war"?

I'm telling you that is the dictionaries definition.

peace |p?s| |pis| |pi?s|
noun
1 freedom from or the cessation of war or violence : the Straits were
to be open to warships in time of peace.

Is this the definition of peace you meant
when you said that peace is better than
war?

I'm just trying to nail down this moving
target.

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:110920051223414365%dbarnes@aol.com...

Are you now telling us that your definition
of peace is "freedom from war"?

I'm telling you that is the dictionaries definition.

peace |p?s| |pis| |pi?s|
noun
1 freedom from or the cessation of war or violence : the Straits were
to be open to warships in time of peace.

Is this the definition of peace you meant
when you said that peace is better than
war?

I'm just trying to nail down this moving
target.

Bob <no@email.address> wrote:

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:OWdUe.15069$fb.7381@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:eK1Ue.23660$ZL4.17181@bignews4.bellsouth.net...

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:weidnZ2dnZ2m7YXdnZ2dndcZvd6dnZ2dRVn-yJ2dnZ0@comcast.com...

"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:Tb%Te.6645$Du3.3130@bignews1.bellsouth.net...

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:iuqdndgZu7s06L3eRVn-2w@comcast.com...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:_EXTe.7549$k22.4342@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:vuCdnV1qIfAy0oLeRVn-jA@comcast.com...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2vHTe.22143$2n6.17689@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1125987974.124069.41640@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Kel wrote:

"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:431cbd3f$0$32195$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:nknSe.5146$pm2.885@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:4318a021$0$29901$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:T1%Re.2580$hv5.1818@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:4318553c$0$29919$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:kRTRe.2911$bi5.2900@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

"Dana" <whoya@whoya.com> wrote in message
news:11hfmuphndg1110@corp.supernews.com...

"Mitchell Holman" <ta2eeneNoEmail@comcast.com> wrote in
message
news:Xns96C4E6D084A68ta2eene2@216.196.97.131...

"Dana" <whoya@whoya.com> wrote in
news:11hfgq04edqgda3@corp.supernews.com:

"Irie" <Irie@IrieEpistemology.com> wrote in message
news:cgPRe.103817$Ep.35821@lakeread02...

What is happening in the Gulf Cost is a fucking
disgrace.

Why are you calling nature a disgrace.
Hell junior, hurricanes happen, and have been for eons.

All the more inexcusable that we should not be
preparing for them.

But we have to the extent that we are capable of.

Garbage. Bush cut $40 million from New Orleans's budget that
would
have specifically aided such an eventuality.

Why is the federal government giving money to New Orleans in
the
first place?

Because it's under the sea level and needs special protection.

Your point? Why does the whole country have to subsidize the
idiots who
voluntarily live in a danger zone?

Have you offered them somewhere else to live? As you regard the
place
the were born as a "voluntary" residence?

So how does that make every taxpaying American financially
responsible
according to the constitution?

It's not the constitution that should make you feel obliged to
help,
it's
your humanity. If you're a republican I'll understand that this
concept will
be lost on you.

That's very bigoted of you. If you're a liberal, I'll understand
that
is a very natural attitude of you. There, does that sound better?
Why
are you such a bigot?

I know MANY republicans who are VERY generous and feel obliged to
help
based on humanity. I also know MANY democrats who are the same way.
People are people, and more often than not, we help others when they
really need help. It's our nature and has nothing to do with what
political party you belong to.

However, since you wish to make a bigoted statement like that I
would
hope you have some research to support your theory that republican's
don't want to help others based on humanity.

So, the floor is yours.

The Republican party does not believe that it is the function of "big
government" to step in where business and charity could do better.

How about a source please? Your opinion is too biased and you are
showing too much bigotry to just have your word taken for it.

"Almost without fail, when you ask an atypical Republican why he
belongs
to that party, it's because he supports smaller government. Smaller
government is a mantra, a rallying cry, and a Holy Grail for
Republicans."

http://www.wage-slave.org/20000831.smallgov.html

Right away you can see that this is a left wing website. How about
something that is more in the middle and not biased.

I think Kel has a valid point. Republicans
constantly cry "smaller federal government",
but rarely work to accomplish that goal when
they have the power to do so.

I would say that, except I think it goes beyond Republicans. I think both
parties constantly cry for a smaller federal government, but both parties
seem to want to expand government powers.

Agreed, but I have never heard of the
Democrats crying for smaller government
other than our military.

Isn't that because they don't favour it?

Yes, generally. But Clinton was re-elected
mainly because of the economy he inherited
and his "claim" of shrinking federal government.

Which he did do.

It turns out that what he really did was gut our
military so he could make that "claim".

More of the usual right-wing lies.

It's the only way you can justify supporting as corrupt an
organization as the Republican party.

Bob <no@email.address> wrote:

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:OWdUe.15069$fb.7381@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:eK1Ue.23660$ZL4.17181@bignews4.bellsouth.net...

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:weidnZ2dnZ2m7YXdnZ2dndcZvd6dnZ2dRVn-yJ2dnZ0@comcast.com...

"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:Tb%Te.6645$Du3.3130@bignews1.bellsouth.net...

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:iuqdndgZu7s06L3eRVn-2w@comcast.com...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:_EXTe.7549$k22.4342@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:vuCdnV1qIfAy0oLeRVn-jA@comcast.com...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2vHTe.22143$2n6.17689@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1125987974.124069.41640@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Kel wrote:

"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:431cbd3f$0$32195$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:nknSe.5146$pm2.885@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:4318a021$0$29901$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:T1%Re.2580$hv5.1818@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message

news:4318553c$0$29919$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

"Kel" <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:kRTRe.2911$bi5.2900@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

"Dana" <whoya@whoya.com> wrote in message
news:11hfmuphndg1110@corp.supernews.com...

"Mitchell Holman" <ta2eeneNoEmail@comcast.com> wrote in
message
news:Xns96C4E6D084A68ta2eene2@216.196.97.131...

"Dana" <whoya@whoya.com> wrote in
news:11hfgq04edqgda3@corp.supernews.com:

"Irie" <Irie@IrieEpistemology.com> wrote in message
news:cgPRe.103817$Ep.35821@lakeread02...

What is happening in the Gulf Cost is a fucking

disgrace.

Why are you calling nature a disgrace.
Hell junior, hurricanes happen, and have been for eons.

All the more inexcusable that we should not be
preparing for them.

But we have to the extent that we are capable of.

Garbage. Bush cut $40 million from New Orleans's budget

that

would
have specifically aided such an eventuality.

Why is the federal government giving money to New Orleans

in

the
first place?

Because it's under the sea level and needs special

protection.

Your point? Why does the whole country have to subsidize the
idiots who
voluntarily live in a danger zone?

Have you offered them somewhere else to live? As you regard

the

place
the were born as a "voluntary" residence?

So how does that make every taxpaying American financially
responsible
according to the constitution?

It's not the constitution that should make you feel obliged to
help,
it's
your humanity. If you're a republican I'll understand that this
concept will
be lost on you.

That's very bigoted of you. If you're a liberal, I'll understand
that
is a very natural attitude of you. There, does that sound better?
Why
are you such a bigot?

I know MANY republicans who are VERY generous and feel obliged to
help
based on humanity. I also know MANY democrats who are the same way.
People are people, and more often than not, we help others when
they
really need help. It's our nature and has nothing to do with what
political party you belong to.

However, since you wish to make a bigoted statement like that I
would
hope you have some research to support your theory that
republican's
don't want to help others based on humanity.

So, the floor is yours.

The Republican party does not believe that it is the function of
"big
government" to step in where business and charity could do better.

How about a source please? Your opinion is too biased and you are
showing too much bigotry to just have your word taken for it.

"Almost without fail, when you ask an atypical Republican why he
belongs
to that party, it's because he supports smaller government. Smaller
government is a mantra, a rallying cry, and a Holy Grail for
Republicans."

http://www.wage-slave.org/20000831.smallgov.html

Right away you can see that this is a left wing website. How about
something that is more in the middle and not biased.

I think Kel has a valid point. Republicans
constantly cry "smaller federal government",
but rarely work to accomplish that goal when
they have the power to do so.

I would say that, except I think it goes beyond Republicans. I think
both
parties constantly cry for a smaller federal government, but both
parties
seem to want to expand government powers.

Agreed, but I have never heard of the
Democrats crying for smaller government
other than our military.

Isn't that because they don't favour it?

Yes, generally. But Clinton was re-elected
mainly because of the economy he inherited
and his "claim" of shrinking federal government.

Which he did do.

It turns out that what he really did was gut our
military so he could make that "claim".

More of the usual right-wing lies.

It's the only way you can justify supporting as corrupt an
organization as the Republican party.

Kel <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message

Agreed, but I have never heard of the
Democrats crying for smaller government
other than our military.

Isn't that because they don't favour it? The Republican Party have been
very
successful in pushing the notion that "big government" is automatically
bad

While greatly expanding the size of government.

and I agree that the democrats are now being hypocritical and pretending
to
want "smaller goverment" when the truth is they don't.

And who among the Democrats has been pretending to want smaller
government? Cite some specifics. With quotes.

I think you're just resorting to the usual right-wing tactic of lying
about people in order to justify your own support of government
corruption.

Kel <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message

Agreed, but I have never heard of the
Democrats crying for smaller government
other than our military.

Isn't that because they don't favour it? The Republican Party have been very
successful in pushing the notion that "big government" is automatically bad

While greatly expanding the size of government.

and I agree that the democrats are now being hypocritical and pretending to
want "smaller goverment" when the truth is they don't.

And who among the Democrats has been pretending to want smaller
government? Cite some specifics. With quotes.

I think you're just resorting to the usual right-wing tactic of lying
about people in order to justify your own support of government
corruption.

Kel <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message

Agreed, but I have never heard of the
Democrats crying for smaller government
other than our military.

Isn't that because they don't favour it? The Republican Party have been very
successful in pushing the notion that "big government" is automatically bad

While greatly expanding the size of government.

and I agree that the democrats are now being hypocritical and pretending to
want "smaller goverment" when the truth is they don't.

And who among the Democrats has been pretending to want smaller
government? Cite some specifics. With quotes.

I think you're just resorting to the usual right-wing tactic of lying
about people in order to justify your own support of government
corruption.

Bob wrote:

Right away you can see that this is a left wing website. How about
something that is more in the middle and not biased.
<