| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"JTEM" |
| Date: |
19 Jan 2004 07:12:06 PM |
| Object: |
Iowa Called |
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
.
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
20 Jan 2004 11:25:46 AM |
|
|
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<tZmdna3x24QW4pHdRVn-vA@comcast.com>...
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
Poor Howie... must suck to be him.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
20 Jan 2004 01:42:25 AM |
|
|
In article <tZmdna3x24QW4pHdRVn-vA@comcast.com>,
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
Well, it's over now. Kerry first, Edwards second, and Dean third. It
looks like Gephardt is pulling out. New Hampshire could be *very*
interesting with Clark in it. If Kerry wins big there, I think he's in.
If Dean or someone else wins, it goes down to the wire.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Men become civilized not in their willingness to believe, bit in
proportion to their readiness to doubt." - H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
20 Jan 2004 02:31:33 AM |
|
|
"johac" <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> wrote
Well, it's over now. Kerry first, Edwards second, and Dean
third. It looks like Gephardt is pulling out. New Hampshire
could be *very* interesting with Clark in it. If Kerry wins
big there, I think he's in. If Dean or someone else wins, it
goes down to the wire.
New England is a small place. Taking I-95, you can drive from
Providence Rhode Island to Maine in only a matter of 2 hours
or less. Of course, you'd pass through Massachusetts and parts
of New Hampshire to get there.
Kerry's entire base of support is sitting not more than 90 minutes
drive time from every "major" city in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire doesn't seal jack for Kerry. New Hampshire is
a *Must* *Win* for Kerry.
If Kerry can't win in New Hampshire -- with every single
advantage on his side -- Kerry can't win. Period.
The race will narrow after New Hampshire. A strong second
by Clark or a surprise showing by Edwards could be enough to
propel either candidate to the nomination. But, Kerry has to win
to survive. There is no "Second place" for Kerry. Not in New
Hampshire.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 01:20:14 AM |
|
|
In article <m6OdnYUqo-8Xe5HdRVn-uw@comcast.com>,
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"johac" <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> wrote
Well, it's over now. Kerry first, Edwards second, and Dean
third. It looks like Gephardt is pulling out. New Hampshire
could be *very* interesting with Clark in it. If Kerry wins
big there, I think he's in. If Dean or someone else wins, it
goes down to the wire.
New England is a small place. Taking I-95, you can drive from
Providence Rhode Island to Maine in only a matter of 2 hours
or less. Of course, you'd pass through Massachusetts and parts
of New Hampshire to get there.
I know. I lived in the Boston area for eight years.
Kerry's entire base of support is sitting not more than 90 minutes
drive time from every "major" city in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire doesn't seal jack for Kerry. New Hampshire is
a *Must* *Win* for Kerry.
If he wins big, say 10 percentage points or more, it may cause some of
the other candidates supporters, undecideds, and former Gephardt people
to go with him. It doesn't seal the deal by any means, but it would give
him an advantage. I don't know if it will happen though, I expect Dean,
Clark, and maybe Lieberman to do well in New Hampshire too. I expect
that Edwards will win South Carolina.
If Kerry can't win in New Hampshire -- with every single
advantage on his side -- Kerry can't win. Period.
I would agree. If he makes a poor showing, he's done.
The race will narrow after New Hampshire. A strong second
by Clark or a surprise showing by Edwards could be enough to
propel either candidate to the nomination. But, Kerry has to win
to survive. There is no "Second place" for Kerry. Not in New
Hampshire.
He needs a win, but if say the race is a virtual dead heat between
Kerry and Dean, I think that it may go down to the wire. Iowa really
doesn't mean much, but I've seen enough of these races in which the
candidate that does well in the first few big primaries usually goes the
distance.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Men become civilized not in their willingness to believe, bit in
proportion to their readiness to doubt." - H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 02:18:22 AM |
|
|
"johac" <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> wrote
New Hampshire doesn't seal jack for Kerry. New
Hampshire is a *Must* *Win* for Kerry.
If he wins big, say 10 percentage points or more, it may
cause some of the other candidates supporters,
undecideds, and former Gephardt people to go with him.
Maybe. But if he doesn't win big, really big, it could be
all the reason people need for turning their backs on Kerry.
Like I said, his entire base of support is right across the
border in Massachusetts. New Hampshire should have
been a cake-walk for him. He has the advantage of money
and man-power, and he's a familiar face to the New
Hampshire media market, which overlaps Boston.
It doesn't seal the deal by any means, but it would
give him an advantage.
It's a perceptions game.
Kerry should win New Hampshire by a safe margin, even
if the rest of the country sees him as unelectable.
He has no excuses for losing, but little to gain by winning,
as the state should have been his simply for the asking.
*But*, this is politics. Reality isn't as important as
perceptions. If a Kerry win seems like a big deal, it is
a big deal.
He needs a win, but if say the race is a virtual dead heat
between Kerry and Dean,
I'm writing off Dean.
Kerry's challenge is Clark & Edwards.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
22 Jan 2004 01:12:56 AM |
|
|
In article <_ZCdnQDR3KxsqZPdRVn-hQ@comcast.com>,
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"johac" <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> wrote
New Hampshire doesn't seal jack for Kerry. New
Hampshire is a *Must* *Win* for Kerry.
If he wins big, say 10 percentage points or more, it may
cause some of the other candidates supporters,
undecideds, and former Gephardt people to go with him.
Maybe. But if he doesn't win big, really big, it could be
all the reason people need for turning their backs on Kerry.
Like I said, his entire base of support is right across the
border in Massachusetts. New Hampshire should have
been a cake-walk for him. He has the advantage of money
and man-power, and he's a familiar face to the New
Hampshire media market, which overlaps Boston.
Not everybody in New Hampshire loves Massachusetts. Many resent their
big brash neighbor to the South. Also Kerry has to fend off two other
New Englanders, Dean and Lieberman.
It doesn't seal the deal by any means, but it would
give him an advantage.
It's a perceptions game.
As always.
Kerry should win New Hampshire by a safe margin, even
if the rest of the country sees him as unelectable.
Why is he unelectable? He's a combat veteran which appeals to many. He
did vote for Iraq, but has since come out against Bush. He's not as far
right as Lieberman and not as far left as Kucinich. He's not as much of
a hothead as Dean.
He has no excuses for losing, but little to gain by winning,
as the state should have been his simply for the asking.
*But*, this is politics. Reality isn't as important as
perceptions. If a Kerry win seems like a big deal, it is
a big deal.
Again perceptions. Many people gravitate to the the leader because they
don't want to be seen backing a loser.
He needs a win, but if say the race is a virtual dead heat
between Kerry and Dean,
I'm writing off Dean.
Recently, Dean has gone down in my opinion. He needs to know when to
cool it or stick a sock in his mouth or something. Rove and his buddies
would love to see Dean run against Dubya.
Kerry's challenge is Clark & Edwards.
I agree. Edwards is good and should do well in the South. Clark is the X
factor. No one has seen that much of him or how he will behave in a
prolonged campaign. I will vote in November for the candidate who has
the best chance of beating Bush, which will likely be the Democratic
candidate, whoever he is.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Men become civilized not in their willingness to believe, bit in
proportion to their readiness to doubt." - H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 01:31:22 AM |
|
|
johac <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> writes:
Iowa really doesn't mean much, but I've seen enough of these races
in which the candidate that does well in the first few big primaries
usually goes the distance.
Someone who ran for Congress once told me why this happens. People
making substantial campaign contributions like to back a candidate
they think will win, in the hopes of having some influence. So,
if someone does well early, that candidate starts to get a lot
more campaign funding, which helps his campaign do better later
in the race.
It's a bit unstable of course, since everyone is just guessing and
can panic if they think they might have made a bad guess - kind of
like the stock market.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
22 Jan 2004 01:14:14 AM |
|
|
In article <m3d69d92sc.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>,
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
johac <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> writes:
Iowa really doesn't mean much, but I've seen enough of these races
in which the candidate that does well in the first few big primaries
usually goes the distance.
Someone who ran for Congress once told me why this happens. People
making substantial campaign contributions like to back a candidate
they think will win, in the hopes of having some influence. So,
if someone does well early, that candidate starts to get a lot
more campaign funding, which helps his campaign do better later
in the race.
It's a bit unstable of course, since everyone is just guessing and
can panic if they think they might have made a bad guess - kind of
like the stock market.
A lot of it have to do wsith perception. Everybody wants to back a
winner/
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Men become civilized not in their willingness to believe, bit in
proportion to their readiness to doubt." - H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Charles R Ward" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 08:29:32 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
In a little while I be posting more, under the subject
"Politics, Iowa, Monday evening"
Charles R Ward
--
"I do live among my fellow atheists. I also happen to live
among Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Pagans, Satanists
and followers of various other religions -- all of which
have a perfect right to live in the United States without
interference because of their religion or lack thereof no
matter how much it irks you." Liz
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 08:54:24 PM |
|
|
"Charles R Ward" <crward@netins.net> wrote in message
news:BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
In a little while I be posting more, under the subject
"Politics, Iowa, Monday evening"
I have to say that the folks of Iowa showed surprisingly good sense tonight.
Gephardt has been consigned to his rightful place in the scrapheap of
political history. Dean's bluster has been recognized for what it is.
Edwards got by on being Ms Congeniality, complete with lack of ideas. And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top. I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy. Well, I intend to
relax my preconceptions and give him a fair look. I like Bush, but am not
blind to his faults in office. Kerry's a good man who deserves an
unprejudiced hearing. Who knows, I may even vote for him, if I like what I
hear.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 10:13:05 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote
I have to say that the folks of Iowa showed surprisingly
good sense tonight.
You would, being a Bushbot & considering the fact that
the Republicans have wanted to run against Kerry since
at least 2000.
Here's McCain on that very subject:
http://edition.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/07/26/mccain.kerry/
And, no, McCain wasn't "anti-Bush." In fact, by this stage of
the game he was on a bus tour promoting Bush.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
20 Jan 2004 08:25:14 AM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<AL0Pb.245723$Vu5.18116693@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Charles R Ward" <crward@netins.net> wrote in message
news:BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
In a little while I be posting more, under the subject
"Politics, Iowa, Monday evening"
I have to say that the folks of Iowa showed surprisingly good sense tonight.
Gephardt has been consigned to his rightful place in the scrapheap of
political history. Dean's bluster has been recognized for what it is.
Edwards got by on being Ms Congeniality, complete with lack of ideas. And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top. I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy. Well, I intend to
relax my preconceptions and give him a fair look. I like Bush, but am not
blind to his faults in office. Kerry's a good man who deserves an
unprejudiced hearing. Who knows, I may even vote for him, if I like what I
hear.
So Kerry will tax and spend us into the ground, huh? Did you ever
look at one of boy George's budgets? I can never understand why
Republicans are fooled by his rhetoric. He spends more than any other
president before him. Spends wildly, frivolously, and you guys think
of him as fiscally conservative. What can of mentality *is that?
OK, when you fell for a rich-boy, prep-school, New Englander putting
on a cowboy hat and a fake Texan accent, I guess that should have been
a clue.
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
20 Jan 2004 05:23:31 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c6f5ba32.0401200625.46b564a6@posting.google.com...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:<AL0Pb.245723$Vu5.18116693@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Charles R Ward" <crward@netins.net> wrote in message
news:BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
In a little while I be posting more, under the subject
"Politics, Iowa, Monday evening"
I have to say that the folks of Iowa showed surprisingly good sense
tonight.
Gephardt has been consigned to his rightful place in the scrapheap of
political history. Dean's bluster has been recognized for what it is.
Edwards got by on being Ms Congeniality, complete with lack of ideas.
And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top.
I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy. Well, I intend to
relax my preconceptions and give him a fair look. I like Bush, but am
not
blind to his faults in office. Kerry's a good man who deserves an
unprejudiced hearing. Who knows, I may even vote for him, if I like
what I
hear.
So Kerry will tax and spend us into the ground, huh? Did you ever
look at one of boy George's budgets? I can never understand why
Republicans are fooled by his rhetoric. He spends more than any other
president before him. Spends wildly, frivolously, and you guys think
of him as fiscally conservative. What can of mentality *is that?
I haven't said so. What the flying ***** is with you assholes? A person
expresses a favorable view of Kerry, and a desire to give him a fresh look
you accuse him of being an evil ideologue?
OK, when you fell for a rich-boy, prep-school, New Englander putting
on a cowboy hat and a fake Texan accent, I guess that should have been
a clue.
If you want to argue against what I didn't say then all I can tell you is to
***** off, you sniveling little nut sack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 05:20:31 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<TLiPb.265072$dl.14044853@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c6f5ba32.0401200625.46b564a6@posting.google.com...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:<AL0Pb.245723$Vu5.18116693@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Charles R Ward" <crward@netins.net> wrote in message
news:BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
In a little while I be posting more, under the subject
"Politics, Iowa, Monday evening"
I have to say that the folks of Iowa showed surprisingly good sense
tonight.
Gephardt has been consigned to his rightful place in the scrapheap of
political history. Dean's bluster has been recognized for what it is.
Edwards got by on being Ms Congeniality, complete with lack of ideas.
And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top.
I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy. Well, I intend to
relax my preconceptions and give him a fair look. I like Bush, but am
not
blind to his faults in office. Kerry's a good man who deserves an
unprejudiced hearing. Who knows, I may even vote for him, if I like
what I
hear.
So Kerry will tax and spend us into the ground, huh? Did you ever
look at one of boy George's budgets? I can never understand why
Republicans are fooled by his rhetoric. He spends more than any other
president before him. Spends wildly, frivolously, and you guys think
of him as fiscally conservative. What can of mentality *is that?
I haven't said so. What the flying ***** is with you assholes? A person
expresses a favorable view of Kerry, and a desire to give him a fresh look
you accuse him of being an evil ideologue?
OK, when you fell for a rich-boy, prep-school, New Englander putting
on a cowboy hat and a fake Texan accent, I guess that should have been
a clue.
If you want to argue against what I didn't say then all I can tell you is to
***** off, you sniveling little nut sack.
Yeah but you did state that you thought he was "a typical Ma lib,
who'll tax and spend us common folk into the ground, along with the
economy." To me that means you equate W with the common folk and
think the word Liberal should be prefaced with "tax-and-spend". If I
misread it I apologize. But all the right-wing buzz words were there.
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 09:06:04 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c6f5ba32.0401211520.2aede054@posting.google.com...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:<TLiPb.265072$dl.14044853@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c6f5ba32.0401200625.46b564a6@posting.google.com...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:<AL0Pb.245723$Vu5.18116693@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Charles R Ward" <crward@netins.net> wrote in message
news:BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
In a little while I be posting more, under the subject
"Politics, Iowa, Monday evening"
I have to say that the folks of Iowa showed surprisingly good sense
tonight.
Gephardt has been consigned to his rightful place in the scrapheap
of
political history. Dean's bluster has been recognized for what it
is.
Edwards got by on being Ms Congeniality, complete with lack of
ideas.
And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top.
I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and
spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy. Well, I intend
to
relax my preconceptions and give him a fair look. I like Bush, but
am
not
blind to his faults in office. Kerry's a good man who deserves an
unprejudiced hearing. Who knows, I may even vote for him, if I like
what I
hear.
So Kerry will tax and spend us into the ground, huh? Did you ever
look at one of boy George's budgets? I can never understand why
Republicans are fooled by his rhetoric. He spends more than any other
president before him. Spends wildly, frivolously, and you guys think
of him as fiscally conservative. What can of mentality *is that?
I haven't said so. What the flying ***** is with you assholes? A
person
expresses a favorable view of Kerry, and a desire to give him a fresh
look
you accuse him of being an evil ideologue?
OK, when you fell for a rich-boy, prep-school, New Englander putting
on a cowboy hat and a fake Texan accent, I guess that should have been
a clue.
If you want to argue against what I didn't say then all I can tell you
is to
***** off, you sniveling little nut sack.
Yeah but you did state that you thought he was "a typical Ma lib,
who'll tax and spend us common folk into the ground, along with the
economy."
I stated that as an opinon which I intend to rethink.
To me that means you equate W with the common folk
I don't follow you here.
and
think the word Liberal should be prefaced with "tax-and-spend".
The word Liberal does imply that to me. Kerry has stated that he wants to
preserve the essential Bush tax cuts and cut som non-essential discretionary
gov programs without weakening defense. I don't know enough about he
intends to do that, but perhaps he's not as liberal as I imagined. I don't
know, so I'll reserve judgment until I know where he stands.
If I
misread it I apologize. But all the right-wing buzz words were there.
Buzzzzzzzzzzz.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 10:39:22 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote
and think the word Liberal should be prefaced
with "tax-and-spend".
The word Liberal does imply that to me.
Then you're a fucking moron.
Ronald Reagan was the single biggest spender this
country knew, right up until Dubya stole the 2000
election. After that, Reagan fell to a distant second.
There's no way of overstating this here: You have to
be completely disconnected from reality in order to
associate over-spending with "Liberals."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
20 Jan 2004 04:14:50 PM |
|
|
Fester wrote:
And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top. I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy.
*Ahem* Which of the two national parties reduced taxes for all Americans while
ending up with a record surplus? Which of the two national parties turned that
record surplus to a record deficit in record time, all while increasing the tax
burden of the very poor, greatly reducing the tax burden of the very rich and
now promising billions to put a man on Mars and billions more to "support"
marriage?
In short, who represents the nanny state? Who is has the record for "tax and
spend?"
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
20 Jan 2004 05:20:25 PM |
|
|
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:400DA85A.6D7963BF@serv.net...
Fester wrote:
And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top.
I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy.
*Ahem* Which of the two national parties reduced taxes for all Americans
while
ending up with a record surplus? Which of the two national parties turned
that
record surplus to a record deficit in record time, all while increasing
the tax
burden of the very poor, greatly reducing the tax burden of the very rich
and
now promising billions to put a man on Mars and billions more to "support"
marriage?
The deficit arose from 3 factors. Firstly from the irresponsible spending
that the Repubs have conducted in office, without a single veto from Bush.
Second, it is a result of lost revenues fromt he Clinton crash of 2000.
Third, if you remember, we had wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now please
take put your paleo-lib beer goggles away for a while and reread what I
said - All of it! The Repubs bad record on spending does not negate the
fact that they *did* lower taxes and not just for the rich. Even if it
were, I haven't met a tax cut I didn't like, but it isn't. I have more
money in pocket due to them, and my investments are doing great over the
last year as well, thank you.
In short, who represents the nanny state? Who is has the record for "tax
and
spend?"
The Repubs have shown themselves to be the party of spend and spend of late,
The Dems, tax and spend. Now I said that I was going to give Kerry a fresh
look with an open mind. Pity you can't have an open mind, except in the
most literal sense of course.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
20 Jan 2004 10:04:48 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote
The deficit arose from 3 factors.
1) Bush
2) The Republican controlled congress
3) Dickless Bushbots like you, all too eager to rubber stamp
anything Bush says.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 09:03:07 AM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote
The deficit arose from 3 factors.
1) Bush
2) The Republican controlled congress
3) Dickless Bushbots like you, all too eager to rubber stamp
anything Bush says.
Your post is more succinct than I could have managed :-P
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 05:30:13 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<ZIiPb.265071$dl.14047104@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:400DA85A.6D7963BF@serv.net...
Fester wrote:
And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top.
I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy.
*Ahem* Which of the two national parties reduced taxes for all Americans
while
ending up with a record surplus? Which of the two national parties turned
that
record surplus to a record deficit in record time, all while increasing
the tax
burden of the very poor, greatly reducing the tax burden of the very rich
and
now promising billions to put a man on Mars and billions more to "support"
marriage?
The deficit arose from 3 factors. Firstly from the irresponsible spending
that the Repubs have conducted in office, without a single veto from Bush.
Second, it is a result of lost revenues fromt he Clinton crash of 2000.
Third, if you remember, we had wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now please
take put your paleo-lib beer goggles away for a while and reread what I
said - All of it! The Repubs bad record on spending does not negate the
fact that they *did* lower taxes and not just for the rich. Even if it
were, I haven't met a tax cut I didn't like, but it isn't. I have more
money in pocket due to them, and my investments are doing great over the
last year as well, thank you.
Actually Bush had us on the road to record deficits *before 9/11. The
Afghan and Iraqi wars only made matters a hell of a lot worse.
The only money you got (unless you are rich) is the rebates that the
Dems in Congress insisted go into the bills W proposed. His proposals
did not include anything for the common man. Of course he took credit
for them after they were passed.
Did you see his address last night? He made a big thing out of his
cut to "windfall" and "inheritance" taxes. That is what he is proud
of, tax relief for the rich. Unless you make a fortune when you cash
in your stocks, or you inherit a fortune, these tax cuts don't affect
you. He is only interested in giving relief to his own social set.
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 09:09:15 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c6f5ba32.0401211530.3d4d338@posting.google.com...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:<ZIiPb.265071$dl.14047104@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:400DA85A.6D7963BF@serv.net...
Fester wrote:
And
Kerry, the lone respectable contender in attendance came out on top.
I've
expressed my opinion that he's a typical Ma lib, who'll tax and
spend us
common folk into the ground, along with the economy.
*Ahem* Which of the two national parties reduced taxes for all
Americans
while
ending up with a record surplus? Which of the two national parties
turned
that
record surplus to a record deficit in record time, all while
increasing
the tax
burden of the very poor, greatly reducing the tax burden of the very
rich
and
now promising billions to put a man on Mars and billions more to
"support"
marriage?
The deficit arose from 3 factors. Firstly from the irresponsible
spending
that the Repubs have conducted in office, without a single veto from
Bush.
Second, it is a result of lost revenues fromt he Clinton crash of 2000.
Third, if you remember, we had wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now please
take put your paleo-lib beer goggles away for a while and reread what I
said - All of it! The Repubs bad record on spending does not negate the
fact that they *did* lower taxes and not just for the rich. Even if it
were, I haven't met a tax cut I didn't like, but it isn't. I have more
money in pocket due to them, and my investments are doing great over the
last year as well, thank you.
Actually Bush had us on the road to record deficits *before 9/11. The
Afghan and Iraqi wars only made matters a hell of a lot worse.
The only money you got (unless you are rich) is the rebates that the
Dems in Congress insisted go into the bills W proposed. His proposals
did not include anything for the common man. Of course he took credit
for them after they were passed.
Did you see his address last night? He made a big thing out of his
cut to "windfall" and "inheritance" taxes. That is what he is proud
of, tax relief for the rich. Unless you make a fortune when you cash
in your stocks, or you inherit a fortune, these tax cuts don't affect
you. He is only interested in giving relief to his own social set.
I would certainly prefer tax relief for lower-income people than he's
provided. That said, IMHO any tax cuts are good tax cuts. I side with the
monetarist school of econmics. Bush's prinicapl economic flaws are, as we
both have noted, his irresponsible spending.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
21 Jan 2004 10:41:37 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote
I would certainly prefer tax relief for lower-income
people than he's provided.
Not Bush.
If he had wanted it he would have included it.
Seriously.
It wasn't a mistake at the printers. The "Tax give-away"
went to the wealthy because that's who Bush wanted it
to go to.
Of course, you being a moron, Bush could place the words
"I DON'T GIVE A ***** ABOUT WORKING PEOPLE"
in bright orange neon, and you still wouldn't get it.
Nope, not you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Liz" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 09:19:31 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 02:29:32 +0000 (UTC), "Charles R Ward"
<crward@netins.net> in news message
<BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost> wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
Good work. Congratulations!
Überwench #658 Now a *real* atheist!
Dame Liz the Undaunted BAAWA
Charter Member of SMASH
and Queen of the known universe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 09:28:20 PM |
|
|
"Liz" <ehuth1@donotspam.com> wrote in message
news:m87p00lbrq922tpj4sjggse0tpdpe3ht1r@4ax.com...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 02:29:32 +0000 (UTC), "Charles R Ward"
<crward@netins.net> in news message
<BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost> wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
Good work. Congratulations!
"I was going to propose that Iowa move to recognise same
sex marriage from other states."
Er .. perhaps you haven't noticed, but the Constitution already requires
"full faith and credit" for recognition of other states' contracts.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Charles R Ward" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 10:35:09 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 03:28:20 UTC, "Fester" <not@home.com> wrote:
"Liz" <ehuth1@donotspam.com> wrote in message
news:m87p00lbrq922tpj4sjggse0tpdpe3ht1r@4ax.com...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 02:29:32 +0000 (UTC), "Charles R Ward"
<crward@netins.net> in news message
<BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost> wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
Good work. Congratulations!
"I was going to propose that Iowa move to recognise same
sex marriage from other states."
Er .. perhaps you haven't noticed, but the Constitution already requires
"full faith and credit" for recognition of other states' contracts.
Perhaps you haven't noticed that the "Defence of Marriage
Act" exempts same sex marriage from recognition across state
lines. Since Iowa already has a DOMA I felt preventing
a change of the Constitution to make DOMA legal was more
important. If I set my sights to low I'll remeber that
in 2006, I'm thinking I may go over to the dark side with
a better resolution.
Charles R Ward
temporary deplonk
--
"I do live among my fellow atheists. I also happen to live
among Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Pagans, Satanists
and followers of various other religions -- all of which
have a perfect right to live in the United States without
interference because of their religion or lack thereof no
matter how much it irks you." Liz
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Charles R Ward" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 09:34:07 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 03:19:31 UTC, Liz <ehuth1@donotspam.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 02:29:32 +0000 (UTC), "Charles R Ward"
<crward@netins.net> in news message
<BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost> wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
Good work. Congratulations!
And I volunteered to work on the platform comittee.
Do you remember the SDO's inspiring me 4 years ago to
start using this sig?
Charles R Ward
--
"I do live among my fellow atheists. I also happen to live
among Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Pagans, Satanists
and followers of various other religions -- all of which
have a perfect right to live in the United States without
interference because of their religion or lack thereof no
matter how much it irks you." Liz
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Whitesen" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 10:21:49 PM |
|
|
Charles R Ward wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 03:19:31 UTC, Liz <ehuth1@donotspam.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 02:29:32 +0000 (UTC), "Charles R Ward"
<crward@netins.net> in news message
<BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost> wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
Good work. Congratulations!
And I volunteered to work on the platform comittee.
Do you remember the SDO's inspiring me 4 years ago to
start using this sig?
Charles R Ward
--
"I do live among my fellow atheists. I also happen to live
among Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Pagans, Satanists
and followers of various other religions -- all of which
have a perfect right to live in the United States without
interference because of their religion or lack thereof no
matter how much it irks you." Liz
Let's remember just how much of a bigot Georgia Bush is:
Sherman: What will you do to win the votes
of the Americans who are Atheists?
Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the Atheist
community. Faith in god is important to me.
Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship
and patriotism of Americans who are Atheists?
Bush: No, I don't know that Atheists should be
considered as citizens, nor should they be
considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a
sound constitutional principle the separation
of state and church?
Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church
and state. I'm just not very high on Atheists.
Sherman: American Atheists filed the Pledge
of Allegiance lawsuit yesterday. Does the Bush
campaign have an official response to this filing?
Murnane: It's *****.
Sherman: What is *****?
Murnane: Everything that American Atheists does, Rob,
is *****.
Sherman: Thank you for telling me what the official
position of the Bush campaign is on this issue.
Murnane: You're welcome.
Yes, that "All Inclusive Party" is sure looking a lot like a
"All Are Welcomed" sign at a KKK rally.
It's a matter of choice, stupid, who will choose,
Redneck Republican Georgia Bush or the individual.
Hey hey 2004, old King George must be no more.
Vote that sucker out!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 10:43:09 PM |
|
|
"David Whitesen" <Whitesen@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:400C9161.567CC45F@nospam.com...
Charles R Ward wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 03:19:31 UTC, Liz <ehuth1@donotspam.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 02:29:32 +0000 (UTC), "Charles R Ward"
<crward@netins.net> in news message
<BJdXYSLdRyH7-pn2-UuFgYP0JPrgX@localhost> wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:12:06 UTC, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Both CNN & Fox "news" are calling Iowa
for John Kerry, based on "Entrance Polls."
The caucus itself won't be over for a few
hours, so it remains to be seen...
I just got home. Rome Hale precinct selected 10 delegates.
Gephardt 3, Edwards 3, Kerry 2, and Dean 1.
My proposal opposing amending the Constitution to
define marriagge passed 11 to 4. <insert smiley>
Maybe I set my sights to low.
Good work. Congratulations!
And I volunteered to work on the platform comittee.
Do you remember the SDO's inspiring me 4 years ago to
start using this sig?
Charles R Ward
--
"I do live among my fellow atheists. I also happen to live
among Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Pagans, Satanists
and followers of various other religions -- all of which
have a perfect right to live in the United States without
interference because of their religion or lack thereof no
matter how much it irks you." Liz
Let's remember just how much of a bigot Georgia Bush is:
Sherman: What will you do to win the votes
of the Americans who are Atheists?
Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the Atheist
community. Faith in god is important to me.
Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship
and patriotism of Americans who are Atheists?
Bush: No, I don't know that Atheists should be
considered as citizens, nor should they be
considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a
sound constitutional principle the separation
of state and church?
Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church
and state. I'm just not very high on Atheists.
Sherman: American Atheists filed the Pledge
of Allegiance lawsuit yesterday. Does the Bush
campaign have an official response to this filing?
Murnane: It's *****.
Sherman: What is *****?
Murnane: Everything that American Atheists does, Rob,
is *****.
Sherman: Thank you for telling me what the official
position of the Bush campaign is on this issue.
Murnane: You're welcome.
You conveniently forgot to mention which Bush. Daddy was an *****. W is
rather fair-minded towards atheists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Iowa Called |
19 Jan 2004 10:52:28 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote
You conveniently forgot to mention which Bush.
As if Dubya hasn't tried to pick up where Poppy left
off... Sheesh!
Daddy was an *****.
Still is. And, what's more, he's a *Huge* influence on
Dubya and that clean slate that substitutes for a brain.
W is rather fair-minded towards atheists.
He says they can pray to Jesus, too.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
