Religions > Atheism > John Kerry’s stupid hypocrite wife says “SHOVE IT!” LIBERALS HATE AMERICA!!
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Michael Marxist Moore" |
| Date: |
19 Aug 2004 11:09:28 AM |
| Object: |
John Kerry’s stupid hypocrite wife says “SHOVE IT!” LIBERALS HATE AMERICA!! |
John Kerry’s stupid hypocrite wife says “SHOVE IT!” LIBERALS HATE
AMERICA!!
So Kerry married Theresa for the money she took from her ex-husband's
estate, and she married him for the power of being a Senator's wife?
Was John messing around with Theresa while he was still married to his
first wife?
Teresa's Ted K tirade
Boston Herald | Monday, July 26, 2004 | David R. Guarino
Posted on 07/26/2004 6:54:02 PM PDT by mykdsmom
Teresa Heinz Kerry, years before becoming a Democrat, railed against
the party's ``putrid'' politics, said she didn't trust Sen. Edward M.
Kennedy and angrily called the liberal lion a ``perfect *****.'' In
comments published in a little-known 1975 book about political wives
called ``The Power Lovers: An Intimate Look at Politicians and Their
Marriages,'' Heinz Kerry lashed out at the senator she'll share the
primetime convention stage with tonight. ``I know some couples who
stay together only for politics,'' Heinz Kerry said at the time. ``If
Ted Kennedy holds on to that marriage (to ex-wife Joan) just for the
Catholic vote, as some people say he does, then I think he's a perfect
*****.'' Heinz Kerry, then married to Republican Sen. H. John Heinz
III of Pennsylvania, said she ``didn't trust'' President Richard M.
Nixon but added, ``Ted Kennedy I don't trust either.'' The combustible
and ever-quotable Heinz Kerry said of Democrats, ``The
Democratic machine in this country is putrid.'' Excerpts of the
comments appeared in The Boston Herald American in January 1976.
Coming a day after Heinz Kerry was caught on camera telling a reporter
to
``shove it'' when the reporter questioned her on statements made in a
Boston speech, the remarks could undercut Democrats' ability to
showcase a positive message at the convention. Kennedy's office
dismissed the comments as water under the bridge and said the two get
along famously now _ regardless of what Heinz Kerry has said in the
past. ``Over the years, Sen. and Mrs. Kennedy and John Kerry [related,
bio] and Teresa Heinz Kerry have developed a deep friendship and
strong mutual respect,'' Kennedy spokesman David Smith said in a
statement to the Herald. ``A 30-year-old quote dug up by the
Republican attack machine made long before they became friends is
irrelevant.'' Heinz Kerry's spokeswoman also said the quotes' age
makes them irrelevant. ``You are talking about statements that are
more than 30 years old. A lot
has changed since then,'' said Marla Romash, a senior adviser to Heinz
Kerry. But it isn't the first time quotes have emerged in which Heinz
Kerry targets the legendary Bay State senator. In an interview with
The Washington Post in 1971, Heinz Kerry declared, ``Ted Kennedy I
don't trust, like I don't trust Nixon, although I think Nixon's done a
helluva lot better than I thought he would.'' Just last year, Heinz
Kerry said she regretted the comments she had made to the Post
regarding Kennedy. Romash noted the number of times Heinz Kerry has
campaigned with Kennedy and said Victoria Reggie Kennedy will host a
luncheon for Heinz Kerry this afternoon at the Museum of Fine Arts.
``There's a very good relationship now,'' Romash said. She said Heinz
Kerry stood by her comments about the Democratic machine, saying state
Democratic parties in New Jersey and Pennsylvania at the time were ``a
big problem,'' Romash said.
``I think there are a lot of people who would say there were problems
in state parties in Pennslyvania and New Jersey,'' Romash said.
``Those problems don't exist anymore.''
-----------
Liberals Hate America!
.
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
19 Aug 2004 03:43:23 PM |
|
|
"Michael Marxist Moore" <mmmoore@N0TSPAM.0RG> wrote in message
news:64k9i0h1sheopjee2uk62nk45dqtn5897g@4ax.com...
John Kerry's stupid hypocrite wife says "SHOVE IT!" LIBERALS HATE
AMERICA!!
You can tell when a candidate is really terrific; the losers have to try to
focus on his wife.
And all when they have such filthy skeletons in their own closets....
Susan
(PS: I want to be scrupulously fair: it was ***** Cheney who chased James
Baker down the hall in a fury after that statement)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vash The Stampede" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
25 Aug 2004 10:08:14 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:43:23 +0000, Susan Cohen wrote:
"Michael Marxist Moore" <mmmoore@N0TSPAM.0RG> wrote in message
news:64k9i0h1sheopjee2uk62nk45dqtn5897g@4ax.com...
John Kerry's stupid hypocrite wife says "SHOVE IT!" LIBERALS HATE
AMERICA!!
You can tell when a candidate is really terrific; the losers have to try to
focus on his wife.
And all when they have such filthy skeletons in their own closets....
Susan
(PS: I want to be scrupulously fair: it was ***** Cheney who chased James
Baker down the hall in a fury after that statement)
HAHAHA Kerry, 'terrific'! You spelled it wrong. It's:
T-E-R-R-I-F-Y-I-N-G
spell checkers (like the one Shannon is so fond of) don't pick up errors
like that.
And you weren't living in Massachusetts when he was Lt. Gov, were you? I
can tell.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
26 Aug 2004 01:41:58 AM |
|
|
"Vash The Stampede" <trigun@2am.cn> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.08.26.01.04.22.685912@2am.cn...
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:43:23 +0000, Susan Cohen wrote:
"Michael Marxist Moore" <mmmoore@N0TSPAM.0RG> wrote in message
news:64k9i0h1sheopjee2uk62nk45dqtn5897g@4ax.com...
John Kerry's stupid hypocrite wife says "SHOVE IT!" LIBERALS HATE
AMERICA!!
You can tell when a candidate is really terrific; the losers have to try
to
focus on his wife.
And all when they have such filthy skeletons in their own closets....
Susan
(PS: I want to be scrupulously fair: it was ***** Cheney who chased James
Baker down the hall in a fury after that statement)
HAHAHA Kerry, 'terrific'! You spelled it wrong. It's:
T-E-R-R-I-F-Y-I-N-G
Oh, my. I guess I am convinced, huh?
spell checkers (like the one Shannon is so fond of) don't pick up errors
like that.
yawn.
And you weren't living in Massachusetts when he was Lt. Gov, were you? I
can tell.
I'm living under Bush, now, & can;t think of anything worse.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
26 Aug 2004 07:50:52 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:WCfXc.3882$HY.3292@trnddc03...
"Vash The Stampede" <trigun@2am.cn> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.08.26.01.04.22.685912@2am.cn...
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:43:23 +0000, Susan Cohen wrote:
"Michael Marxist Moore" <mmmoore@N0TSPAM.0RG> wrote in message
news:64k9i0h1sheopjee2uk62nk45dqtn5897g@4ax.com...
John Kerry's stupid hypocrite wife says "SHOVE IT!" LIBERALS HATE
AMERICA!!
You can tell when a candidate is really terrific; the losers have to
try
to
focus on his wife.
And all when they have such filthy skeletons in their own closets....
Susan
(PS: I want to be scrupulously fair: it was ***** Cheney who chased
James
Baker down the hall in a fury after that statement)
HAHAHA Kerry, 'terrific'! You spelled it wrong. It's:
T-E-R-R-I-F-Y-I-N-G
Oh, my. I guess I am convinced, huh?
spell checkers (like the one Shannon is so fond of) don't pick up errors
like that.
yawn.
And you weren't living in Massachusetts when he was Lt. Gov, were you? I
can tell.
I'm living under Bush, now, & can;t think of anything worse.
I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my senator.
Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead of his
20 years in office? He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
26 Aug 2004 09:19:08 AM |
|
|
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:M0lXc.5732$2B4.399@trnddc06...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:WCfXc.3882$HY.3292@trnddc03...
I'm living under Bush, now, & can't think of anything worse.
I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my senator.
Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead of
his
20 years in office?
He is? His record is an open book & is easily obtainable
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want to draw
attention.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
27 Aug 2004 05:53:22 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:wjmXc.5767$2B4.2399@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:M0lXc.5732$2B4.399@trnddc06...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:WCfXc.3882$HY.3292@trnddc03...
I'm living under Bush, now, & can't think of anything worse.
I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my
senator.
Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead of
his
20 years in office?
He is? His record is an open book & is easily obtainable
It sure is. Why do you think Kerry made the four months he spent in Vietnam
over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the last 20
years as a public servant?
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want to
draw
attention.
He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of, he always targets
Kerry's record in the senate. Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
war record.
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
| User: "Riain Y. Barton" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
27 Aug 2004 01:41:51 PM |
|
|
"If Republicans were prevented from ever again calling Democrats dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"traitor," "pinko," "commie," "un-American," and a few other highly nuance
type of arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Riain Barton
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CoEXc.3161$RQ4.332@trnddc09...
| "Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
| news:wjmXc.5767$2B4.2399@trnddc06...
| >
| > "Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:M0lXc.5732$2B4.399@trnddc06...
| > > "Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
| > > news:WCfXc.3882$HY.3292@trnddc03...
| > >>
| > >> I'm living under Bush, now, & can't think of anything worse.
| > >
| > > I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my
| senator.
| > > Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead
of
| > > his
| > > 20 years in office?
| >
| > He is? His record is an open book & is easily obtainable
|
| It sure is. Why do you think Kerry made the four months he spent in
Vietnam
| over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the last 20
| years as a public servant?
|
| > > He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
| >
| > Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
| > terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
| > If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want to
| draw
| > attention.
|
| He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of, he always targets
| Kerry's record in the senate. Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
| war record.
|
|
| --
| "The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its
just
| that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
|
| "If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
| would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
| "racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
| arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
| them." - Ann Coulter
|
|
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
28 Aug 2004 09:54:35 AM |
|
|
"Riain Y. Barton" <riain@riain.us> wrote in message
news:PfLXc.82$B91.57@trndny08...
"If Republicans were prevented from ever again calling Democrats dumb,
they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"traitor," "pinko," "commie," "un-American," and a few other highly nuance
type of arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly
cripple
them." - Riain Barton
Kudos Mr. Barton! You didn't use caps, insults, or call me vile names for
once.
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BTov" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
30 Aug 2004 01:08:10 AM |
|
|
"Riain Y. Barton" <riain@riain.us> wrote in message news:<PfLXc.82$B91.57@trndny08>...
"If Republicans were prevented from ever again calling Democrats dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"traitor," "pinko," "commie," "un-American," and a few other highly nuance
type of arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Riain Barton
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CoEXc.3161$RQ4.332@trnddc09...
| "Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
| news:wjmXc.5767$2B4.2399@trnddc06...
| >
| > "Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:M0lXc.5732$2B4.399@trnddc06...
| > > "Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
| > > news:WCfXc.3882$HY.3292@trnddc03...
| > >>
| > >> I'm living under Bush, now, & can't think of anything worse.
| > >
| > > I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my
senator.
| > > Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead
of
| > > his
| > > 20 years in office?
| >
| > He is? His record is an open book & is easily obtainable
|
| It sure is. Why do you think Kerry made the four months he spent in
Vietnam
| over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the last 20
| years as a public servant?
|
| > > He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
| >
| > Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
| > terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
| > If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want to
draw
| > attention.
|
| He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of, he always targets
| Kerry's record in the senate. Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
| war record.
|
|
| --
| "The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its
just
| that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
|
| "If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
| would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
| "racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
| arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
| them." - Ann Coulter
|
|
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
30 Aug 2004 06:05:38 AM |
|
|
"BTov" <dkastor6@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bd24d00f.0408292208.78f43edd@posting.google.com...
"Riain Y. Barton" <riain@riain.us> wrote in message
news:<PfLXc.82$B91.57@trndny08>...
"If Republicans were prevented from ever again calling Democrats dumb,
they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still
have
"traitor," "pinko," "commie," "un-American," and a few other highly
nuance
type of arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly
cripple
them." - Riain Barton
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
Typical liberal. If you say something they disagree with out pop the insults
and name calling. Thank you for not disappointing me.
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
30 Aug 2004 10:23:35 AM |
|
|
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6SDYc.3091$4m2.828@trnddc01...
"BTov" <dkastor6@hotmail.com> wrote in message
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
Typical liberal.
No, he isn't.
He's just a foul-mouthed bigot & forger.
Just watch....
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
30 Aug 2004 04:02:46 PM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XDHYc.2389$Gr2.702@trnddc07...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6SDYc.3091$4m2.828@trnddc01...
"BTov" <dkastor6@hotmail.com> wrote in message
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
Typical liberal.
No, he isn't.
He's just a foul-mouthed bigot & forger.
Just watch....
That's true. I consider you the exception to the vast majority of liberals
posting here who do nothing but insult and name call whenever anyone
disagrees with them. To your credit, you don't do that.
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vash The Stampede" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
30 Aug 2004 09:25:59 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:02:46 +0000, Phil Trevorrow wrote:
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XDHYc.2389$Gr2.702@trnddc07...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6SDYc.3091$4m2.828@trnddc01...
"BTov" <dkastor6@hotmail.com> wrote in message
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
Typical liberal.
No, he isn't.
He's just a foul-mouthed bigot & forger.
Just watch....
That's true. I consider you the exception to the vast majority of liberals
posting here who do nothing but insult and name call whenever anyone
disagrees with them. To your credit, you don't do that.
I could argue that point...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
31 Aug 2004 06:16:29 AM |
|
|
"Vash The Stampede" <trigun@2am.cn> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.08.31.00.21.36.587136@2am.cn...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:02:46 +0000, Phil Trevorrow wrote:
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XDHYc.2389$Gr2.702@trnddc07...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6SDYc.3091$4m2.828@trnddc01...
"BTov" <dkastor6@hotmail.com> wrote in message
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
Typical liberal.
No, he isn't.
He's just a foul-mouthed bigot & forger.
Just watch....
That's true. I consider you the exception to the vast majority of
liberals
posting here who do nothing but insult and name call whenever anyone
disagrees with them. To your credit, you don't do that.
I could argue that point...
To be fair, her first response to me was to insult and name call but once I
brought it to her attention I haven't done that to her she stopped the name
game and commenced debating. Most other liberals wouldn't have done that.
They'd just keep on insulting you as if that was vindication for their
argument..
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
31 Aug 2004 08:26:22 AM |
|
|
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:h6ZYc.3841$XK5.3094@trnddc02...
"Vash The Stampede" <trigun@2am.cn> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.08.31.00.21.36.587136@2am.cn...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:02:46 +0000, Phil Trevorrow wrote:
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XDHYc.2389$Gr2.702@trnddc07...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6SDYc.3091$4m2.828@trnddc01...
"BTov" <dkastor6@hotmail.com> wrote in message
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
Typical liberal.
No, he isn't.
He's just a foul-mouthed bigot & forger.
Just watch....
That's true. I consider you the exception to the vast majority of
liberals
posting here who do nothing but insult and name call whenever anyone
disagrees with them. To your credit, you don't do that.
I could argue that point...
To be fair, her first response to me was to insult and name call but once
I
brought it to her attention I haven't done that to her she stopped the
name
game and commenced debating. Most other liberals wouldn't have done that.
They'd just keep on insulting you as if that was vindication for their
argument..
Based on my own experience, I could say the same of conservatives. However,
if I did so, I'd be just as guilty of tarring with a very broad brush as you
are. *Some* liberals do behave that way. So do *some* conservatives. Neither
side has a monopoly on idiots, and blanket condemnations from either side
accomplish nothing other than to convince those on the other side that their
generally negative view of the opposition is largely correct.
For the record, I'm not what you'd call a "liberal." I'm more of a MOR type.
I feel that both sides have their good and bad points, but from where I'm
sitting, the left seems to have at least a few more good points than the
right. That's just my opinion. Your mileage may vary. But if you honestly
think that childish ad hom rants are a "debating technique" employed only by
the left, try lurking in alt.atheism (or any other "liberal" newsgroup) for
a few days and see for yourself just how rude, obnoxious, dishonest and just
plain *****-stupid some of the folks on your side of the fence can be. I'll
guarantee you'll leave here with a much less idealistic view of some of your
fellow conservatives than you may hold at present.
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its
just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
Sorry, Phil, but I just have to comment on your sig. <G>
I often disagreed with Reagan, but I don't dispute that he was basically a
decent man whose intentions were good. But Ann Coulter? I don't see how any
intelligent person, liberal or conservative, could possibly take that woman
seriously.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vash The Stampede" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
31 Aug 2004 08:57:24 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:26:22 +0000, John Baker wrote:
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:h6ZYc.3841$XK5.3094@trnddc02...
"Vash The Stampede" <trigun@2am.cn> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.08.31.00.21.36.587136@2am.cn...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:02:46 +0000, Phil Trevorrow wrote:
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XDHYc.2389$Gr2.702@trnddc07...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6SDYc.3091$4m2.828@trnddc01...
"BTov" <dkastor6@hotmail.com> wrote in message
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
Typical liberal.
No, he isn't.
He's just a foul-mouthed bigot & forger.
Just watch....
That's true. I consider you the exception to the vast majority of
liberals
posting here who do nothing but insult and name call whenever anyone
disagrees with them. To your credit, you don't do that.
I could argue that point...
To be fair, her first response to me was to insult and name call but once
I
brought it to her attention I haven't done that to her she stopped the
name
game and commenced debating. Most other liberals wouldn't have done that.
They'd just keep on insulting you as if that was vindication for their
argument..
Based on my own experience, I could say the same of conservatives. However,
if I did so, I'd be just as guilty of tarring with a very broad brush as you
are. *Some* liberals do behave that way. So do *some* conservatives. Neither
side has a monopoly on idiots, and blanket condemnations from either side
accomplish nothing other than to convince those on the other side that their
generally negative view of the opposition is largely correct.
For the record, I'm not what you'd call a "liberal." I'm more of a MOR type.
I feel that both sides have their good and bad points, but from where I'm
sitting, the left seems to have at least a few more good points than the
right. That's just my opinion. Your mileage may vary. But if you honestly
think that childish ad hom rants are a "debating technique" employed only by
the left, try lurking in alt.atheism (or any other "liberal" newsgroup) for
a few days and see for yourself just how rude, obnoxious, dishonest and just
plain *****-stupid some of the folks on your side of the fence can be. I'll
guarantee you'll leave here with a much less idealistic view of some of your
fellow conservatives than you may hold at present.
LOL (and not *at* you, but *with* you!)
Yeah, I often say the same things. Like the *real* Shannon Jacobs, you and
I are on opposite sides of the fence, withing viewing range...
And shooting range... ;)
My biggest conservative issues are getting back to *teaching* in the
schools, and a laissez-faire approach to business (not *TOO*
Laissez-Faire, mind you...corporations *will* do shitty things...)
With the exception of the health-care industry. Health care used to be
affordable when it was basically not-for-profit, and people got what they
needed. Now, health care is Big Business, with More Profits the driving
factor.
My Mom's friend (actually, 2 of them) may have quite possibly been let to
die because performing the tests were just too expensive for people their
age! I'd be suing the SNOT out of them!!!
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its
just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
Sorry, Phil, but I just have to comment on your sig. <G>
I often disagreed with Reagan, but I don't dispute that he was basically a
decent man whose intentions were good. But Ann Coulter? I don't see how any
intelligent person, liberal or conservative, could possibly take that woman
seriously.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vash The Stampede" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
31 Aug 2004 08:50:41 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:16:29 +0000, Phil Trevorrow wrote:
"Vash The Stampede" <trigun@2am.cn> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.08.31.00.21.36.587136@2am.cn...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:02:46 +0000, Phil Trevorrow wrote:
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XDHYc.2389$Gr2.702@trnddc07...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6SDYc.3091$4m2.828@trnddc01...
"BTov" <dkastor6@hotmail.com> wrote in message
wow are you dumb f'arton
b'wahahahahaha
Typical liberal.
No, he isn't.
He's just a foul-mouthed bigot & forger.
Just watch....
That's true. I consider you the exception to the vast majority of
liberals
posting here who do nothing but insult and name call whenever anyone
disagrees with them. To your credit, you don't do that.
I could argue that point...
To be fair, her first response to me was to insult and name call but once I
brought it to her attention I haven't done that to her she stopped the name
game and commenced debating. Most other liberals wouldn't have done that.
They'd just keep on insulting you as if that was vindication for their
argument..
I'm still waiting for a response to the sentient points I have brought up
and provided a modicum of proof for (or, as I said, at least Logic)
I won't be holding my breath...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
27 Aug 2004 11:40:23 AM |
|
|
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CoEXc.3161$RQ4.332@trnddc09...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:wjmXc.5767$2B4.2399@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:M0lXc.5732$2B4.399@trnddc06...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:WCfXc.3882$HY.3292@trnddc03...
I'm living under Bush, now, & can't think of anything worse.
I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my
senator.
Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead of
his
20 years in office?
He is? His record is an open book & is easily obtainable
It sure is. Why do you think Kerry made the four months he spent in
Vietnam
You *do* know that it was actually 16 months right?
over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the last 20
years as a public servant?
Perhaps it was because of the MILITARY MESS in which we find ourselves -
which *also* has something to do with the AWOL coward he's running against.
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want to
draw
attention.
He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of,
You mean the one he openly approves of.
If he didn't approve of the other ones, his friends wouldn't be fnding them,
and it wouldn't have taken this long for him to condemn them - however
*weakly*.
he always targets
Kerry's record in the senate.
Gee, I must be missing those ads.
Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
war record.
And they've been proven to be liars.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
28 Aug 2004 09:53:13 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XtJXc.21$bD5.0@trnddc03...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CoEXc.3161$RQ4.332@trnddc09...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:wjmXc.5767$2B4.2399@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:M0lXc.5732$2B4.399@trnddc06...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:WCfXc.3882$HY.3292@trnddc03...
I'm living under Bush, now, & can't think of anything worse.
I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my
senator.
Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead
of
his
20 years in office?
He is? His record is an open book & is easily obtainable
It sure is. Why do you think Kerry made the four months he spent in
Vietnam
You *do* know that it was actually 16 months right?
I said "in" Vietnam, not stationed on a ship outside of Vietnam. Yes, he
spent a year on a ship but never saw any combat. If you really want to get
technical, his first month in Vietnam was spent being indoctrinated where he
saw no combat whatsoever but I wasn't being nit-picky.
over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the last 20
years as a public servant?
Perhaps it was because of the MILITARY MESS in which we find ourselves -
which *also* has something to do with the AWOL coward he's running
against.
You can cling to the AWOL propoganda as long as you like but all you're
doing is skirting the real issues which is Kerry's record in the senate.
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want to
draw
attention.
He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of,
You mean the one he openly approves of.
If he didn't approve of the other ones, his friends wouldn't be fnding
them,
and it wouldn't have taken this long for him to condemn them - however
*weakly*.
Which Kerry has yet to do over the smears moveon.org has been perpetrating
against Bush and all things Republican for the last three years.
he always targets
Kerry's record in the senate.
Gee, I must be missing those ads.
They're only being run in states that are contentious. No point in running
them in states that will vote democratic no matter what. But they're easy
enough to find if you really wanted to.
Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
war record.
And they've been proven to be liars.
Which is irrelevant to our discussion which is why hasn't Kerry denounced
all 527 groups when 87% of the money they raise go to attack ads against
Republicans.
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
28 Aug 2004 10:36:30 PM |
|
|
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:t%0Yc.2481$wk1.2279@trndny07...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XtJXc.21$bD5.0@trnddc03...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CoEXc.3161$RQ4.332@trnddc09...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:wjmXc.5767$2B4.2399@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:M0lXc.5732$2B4.399@trnddc06...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:WCfXc.3882$HY.3292@trnddc03...
I'm living under Bush, now, & can't think of anything worse.
I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my
senator.
Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead
of
his
20 years in office?
He is? His record is an open book & is easily obtainable
It sure is. Why do you think Kerry made the four months he spent in
Vietnam
You *do* know that it was actually 16 months right?
I said "in" Vietnam, not stationed on a ship outside of Vietnam.
But closer to 'Nam than Bush & the other deferment crowd who serve him.
Yes, he
spent a year on a ship but never saw any combat. If you really want to get
technical, his first month in Vietnam was spent being indoctrinated where
he
saw no combat whatsoever but I wasn't being nit-picky.
So, at the very least, it's 3 months more than Bush saw in Vietname, and 4
months more that he served in toto, *&* he never went AWOL.
over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the last
20
years as a public servant?
Perhaps it was because of the MILITARY MESS in which we find ourselves -
which *also* has something to do with the AWOL coward he's running
against.
You can cling to the AWOL propoganda as long as you like but
it's all public record.
all you're
doing is skirting the real issues which is Kerry's record in the senate.
IOW, you are the one skirting the issue, because if Kerry's record is so
bad, why is Bush trying to lie about Kerry's record?
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want
to
draw
attention.
He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of,
You mean the one he openly approves of.
If he didn't approve of the other ones, his friends wouldn't be fnding
them,
and it wouldn't have taken this long for him to condemn them - however
*weakly*.
Which Kerry has yet to do over the smears moveon.org has been perpetrating
against Bush and all things Republican for the last three years.
I have seen no smears from them since their inception.
But it's nice that you admit that what I said is true.
he always targets
Kerry's record in the senate.
Gee, I must be missing those ads.
They're only being run in states that are contentious. No point in running
them in states that will vote democratic no matter what.
Then why is it that, even tho' I live in one of those states, that all I'm
hearing is the crap about Kerry's war record?
But they're easy
enough to find if you really wanted to.
Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
war record.
And they've been proven to be liars.
Which is irrelevant to our discussion which is why hasn't Kerry denounced
all 527 groups when 87% of the money they raise go to attack ads against
Republicans.
He has made a blanket denunciation AFAIK, and has gone after the worst group
legally.
And how do the money that anti-Kerry groups raise attack Republicans???
Susan
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its
just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
29 Aug 2004 08:16:36 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:2bcYc.426$6q.187@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:t%0Yc.2481$wk1.2279@trndny07...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XtJXc.21$bD5.0@trnddc03...
You *do* know that it was actually 16 months right?
I said "in" Vietnam, not stationed on a ship outside of Vietnam.
But closer to 'Nam than Bush & the other deferment crowd who serve him.
Are we playing horse shoes now?
Yes, he
spent a year on a ship but never saw any combat. If you really want to
get
technical, his first month in Vietnam was spent being indoctrinated
where
he
saw no combat whatsoever but I wasn't being nit-picky.
So, at the very least, it's 3 months more than Bush saw in Vietname, and 4
months more that he served in toto, *&* he never went AWOL.
Same old tripe. Kerry spent millions in trying to prove Bush went AWOL. He
couldn't. Why do you think he's not using that tactic now?
over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the last
20
years as a public servant?
Perhaps it was because of the MILITARY MESS in which we find
ourselves -
which *also* has something to do with the AWOL coward he's running
against.
You can cling to the AWOL propoganda as long as you like but
it's all public record.
Tripe. If it were true Kerry would be all over it to divert attention away
from him.
all you're
doing is skirting the real issues which is Kerry's record in the senate.
IOW, you are the one skirting the issue, because if Kerry's record is so
bad, why is Bush trying to lie about Kerry's record?
He's not lying. He's pointing out his record over the last 20 years in
public office. Why don't you do the same and try defending that? Support
your candidate and show me Kerry's sterling record in public office.
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want
to
draw
attention.
He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of,
You mean the one he openly approves of.
If he didn't approve of the other ones, his friends wouldn't be fnding
them,
and it wouldn't have taken this long for him to condemn them - however
*weakly*.
Which Kerry has yet to do over the smears moveon.org has been
perpetrating
against Bush and all things Republican for the last three years.
I have seen no smears from them since their inception.
But it's nice that you admit that what I said is true.
Here's a little help: www.moveon.org All you have to do is click on it.
he always targets
Kerry's record in the senate.
Gee, I must be missing those ads.
They're only being run in states that are contentious. No point in
running
them in states that will vote democratic no matter what.
Then why is it that, even tho' I live in one of those states, that all I'm
hearing is the crap about Kerry's war record?
I doubt that very much.
But they're easy
enough to find if you really wanted to.
Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
war record.
And they've been proven to be liars.
Which is irrelevant to our discussion which is why hasn't Kerry
denounced
all 527 groups when 87% of the money they raise go to attack ads against
Republicans.
He has made a blanket denunciation AFAIK, and has gone after the worst
group
legally.
And how do the money that anti-Kerry groups raise attack Republicans???
It's called censorship. The Nazi's did it in 1933 remember? I may not like
moveon.org but I believe they have a right to free speech, just as the swift
boat guys have. I think Bush was wrong to try to stop 527 groups and so is
Kerry. That's about as liberal as I'll ever be.
Are you honestly telling me that moveon.org and like Democratic 527 groups
which raised over 64 million dollars (only which $2000 can be contributed to
Kerry), are using that money for picnics and conservation? Are you that
blind or do just refuse to see anything Democratic in a bad light? Only the
bad, bad Republicans do that right? Come on, no one is THAT naive.
--
"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; its just
that they know so much that isn't so". - Ronald Reagan
"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they
would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have
"racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced
arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple
them." - Ann Coulter
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
29 Aug 2004 10:10:02 PM |
|
|
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UGkYc.664$O85.407@trnddc05...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:2bcYc.426$6q.187@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:t%0Yc.2481$wk1.2279@trndny07...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XtJXc.21$bD5.0@trnddc03...
You *do* know that it was actually 16 months right?
I said "in" Vietnam, not stationed on a ship outside of Vietnam.
But closer to 'Nam than Bush & the other deferment crowd who serve him.
Are we playing horse shoes now?
You seem to be; I thought I'd be friendly & join in.
Yes, he
spent a year on a ship but never saw any combat. If you really want to
get
technical, his first month in Vietnam was spent being indoctrinated
where
he
saw no combat whatsoever but I wasn't being nit-picky.
So, at the very least, it's 3 months more than Bush saw in Vietname, and
4
months more that he served in toto, *&* he never went AWOL.
Same old tripe. Kerry spent millions in trying to prove Bush went AWOL. He
couldn't.
a) if so, he spent his own money
b) the records were "mysteriously destroyed"
Uh-huh.
Why do you think he's not using that tactic now?
See above.
over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the
last
20
years as a public servant?
Perhaps it was because of the MILITARY MESS in which we find
ourselves -
which *also* has something to do with the AWOL coward he's running
against.
You can cling to the AWOL propoganda as long as you like but
it's all public record.
Tripe. If it were true Kerry would be all over it to divert attention away
from him.
See above.
But it was common knowledge that Bush had 2 years to serve & only did one.
all you're
doing is skirting the real issues which is Kerry's record in the
senate.
IOW, you are the one skirting the issue, because if Kerry's record is so
bad, why is Bush trying to lie about Kerry's record?
He's not lying.
Of course heis.
He's pointing out his record over the last 20 years in
public office.
I wasn't discussing that.
I've never heard a single word Bush has had to say about Kerry's POLITICAL
record.
Why don't you do the same and try defending that?
I don't need to.
His record is fine.
Support
your candidate and show me Kerry's sterling record in public office.
Oh, please!
You can find it on his website.
You don't need me to hold your hand & you know it.
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on
telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd
want
to
draw
attention.
He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of,
You mean the one he openly approves of.
If he didn't approve of the other ones, his friends wouldn't be fnding
them,
and it wouldn't have taken this long for him to condemn them - however
*weakly*.
Which Kerry has yet to do over the smears moveon.org has been
perpetrating
against Bush and all things Republican for the last three years.
I have seen no smears from them since their inception.
But it's nice that you admit that what I said is true.
Here's a little help: www.moveon.org All you have to do is click on it.
As I said, I have seen no smears from them since their inception.
I am a subscriber to their newsletter.
he always targets
Kerry's record in the senate.
Gee, I must be missing those ads.
They're only being run in states that are contentious. No point in
running
them in states that will vote democratic no matter what.
Then why is it that, even tho' I live in one of those states, that all
I'm
hearing is the crap about Kerry's war record?
I doubt that very much.
Doubt away, but I leave lying to those who need to do it.
But they're easy
enough to find if you really wanted to.
Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
war record.
And they've been proven to be liars.
Which is irrelevant to our discussion which is why hasn't Kerry
denounced
all 527 groups when 87% of the money they raise go to attack ads
against
Republicans.
He has made a blanket denunciation AFAIK, and has gone after the worst
group
legally.
And how do the money that anti-Kerry groups raise attack Republicans???
It's called censorship.
Oh, so now if peope are kept from lying it's "censorship"???
You wish!!
The Nazi's did it in 1933 remember?
Godwin's Law: you lose.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
30 Aug 2004 06:03:57 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eUwYc.3606$UI6.394@trnddc08...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UGkYc.664$O85.407@trnddc05...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:2bcYc.426$6q.187@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:t%0Yc.2481$wk1.2279@trndny07...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XtJXc.21$bD5.0@trnddc03...
You *do* know that it was actually 16 months right?
I said "in" Vietnam, not stationed on a ship outside of Vietnam.
But closer to 'Nam than Bush & the other deferment crowd who serve him.
Are we playing horse shoes now?
You seem to be; I thought I'd be friendly & join in.
I seem to be? Seems to me you're the one who started it. But this is sort of
pointless so I think we can drop this particular subject and debate
something substantive.
Yes, he
spent a year on a ship but never saw any combat. If you really want
to
get
technical, his first month in Vietnam was spent being indoctrinated
where
he
saw no combat whatsoever but I wasn't being nit-picky.
So, at the very least, it's 3 months more than Bush saw in Vietname,
and
4
months more that he served in toto, *&* he never went AWOL.
Same old tripe. Kerry spent millions in trying to prove Bush went AWOL.
He
couldn't.
a) if so, he spent his own money
b) the records were "mysteriously destroyed"
Uh-huh.
Where have you been Sue? Those records were mysteriously found by the
military a couple months ago. You're just like a canine chasing it's tail
here. Or of you prefer another anecdote, how about beating a dead horse?
Again, this is a pointless topic. We should debate something substantive
like Kerry's senate record.
Why do you think he's not using that tactic now?
See above.
over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the
last
20
years as a public servant?
Perhaps it was because of the MILITARY MESS in which we find
ourselves -
which *also* has something to do with the AWOL coward he's running
against.
You can cling to the AWOL propoganda as long as you like but
it's all public record.
Tripe. If it were true Kerry would be all over it to divert attention
away
from him.
See above.
But it was common knowledge that Bush had 2 years to serve & only did one.
He left early to work on political campaigns. Kerry, by the way did the same
thing to get out of Vietnam. So what? You're still beating that dead horse
Sue.
all you're
doing is skirting the real issues which is Kerry's record in the
senate.
IOW, you are the one skirting the issue, because if Kerry's record is
so
bad, why is Bush trying to lie about Kerry's record?
He's not lying.
Of course heis.
Give me an example.
He's pointing out his record over the last 20 years in
public office.
I wasn't discussing that.
I've never heard a single word Bush has had to say about Kerry's POLITICAL
record.
Try watching TV.
Why don't you do the same and try defending that?
I don't need to.
His record is fine.
For a liberal it sure is. Missed almost 70% of his committe meetings, vote
100% of the time to raise taxes, vote 100% of the time against the military
budet, then yell and scream because we're using reserves without body armor
and armored hummers that would protect them from roadside bombings. Yes, I
agree. His record is fine for a liberal.
Support
your candidate and show me Kerry's sterling record in public office.
Oh, please!
You can find it on his website.
You don't need me to hold your hand & you know it.
LOL, yes I'm sure his website paints him in a glowing picture. Try looking
at other sources like the senate voting records or the senate's website.
Nice spin attempt though.
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on
telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd
want
to
draw
attention.
He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of,
You mean the one he openly approves of.
If he didn't approve of the other ones, his friends wouldn't be
fnding
them,
and it wouldn't have taken this long for him to condemn them -
however
*weakly*.
Which Kerry has yet to do over the smears moveon.org has been
perpetrating
against Bush and all things Republican for the last three years.
I have seen no smears from them since their inception.
But it's nice that you admit that what I said is true.
Here's a little help: www.moveon.org All you have to do is click on it.
As I said, I have seen no smears from them since their inception.
I am a subscriber to their newsletter.
Here you go my dear.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-24-moveon-ads_x.htm
he always targets
Kerry's record in the senate.
Gee, I must be missing those ads.
They're only being run in states that are contentious. No point in
running
them in states that will vote democratic no matter what.
Then why is it that, even tho' I live in one of those states, that all
I'm
hearing is the crap about Kerry's war record?
I doubt that very much.
Doubt away, but I leave lying to those who need to do it.
Like the liberals.
But they're easy
enough to find if you really wanted to.
Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
war record.
And they've been proven to be liars.
Which is irrelevant to our discussion which is why hasn't Kerry
denounced
all 527 groups when 87% of the money they raise go to attack ads
against
Republicans.
He has made a blanket denunciation AFAIK, and has gone after the worst
group
legally.
And how do the money that anti-Kerry groups raise attack Republicans???
It's called censorship.
Oh, so now if peope are kept from lying it's "censorship"???
You wish!!
If they lied, it's called libel. Since they're not being sued for libel it's
called censorship. Nice try again.
The Nazi's did it in 1933 remember?
Godwin's Law: you lose.
Nice try again. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Calling in
Goodwin's obscure notion that the first person to use the word "Nazi" or
"Hitler" loses the argument is nothing more than apocryphal. I think the
analogy of the Nazi's using censorship by burning all books they felt were
unpatriotic has a clear connection with trying to censor free speech. Which
by the way I'm in disagreement with Bush about since he wants to end them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
30 Aug 2004 10:22:21 AM |
|
|
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xQDYc.3086$4m2.3052@trnddc01...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eUwYc.3606$UI6.394@trnddc08...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UGkYc.664$O85.407@trnddc05...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:2bcYc.426$6q.187@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:t%0Yc.2481$wk1.2279@trndny07...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XtJXc.21$bD5.0@trnddc03...
You *do* know that it was actually 16 months right?
I said "in" Vietnam, not stationed on a ship outside of Vietnam.
But closer to 'Nam than Bush & the other deferment crowd who serve
him.
Are we playing horse shoes now?
You seem to be; I thought I'd be friendly & join in.
I seem to be? Seems to me you're the one who started it.
No, not at all.
You started chipping away at Kerry's service.
But this is sort of
pointless so I think we can drop this particular subject and debate
something substantive.
Yes, he
spent a year on a ship but never saw any combat. If you really want
to
get
technical, his first month in Vietnam was spent being indoctrinated
where
he
saw no combat whatsoever but I wasn't being nit-picky.
So, at the very least, it's 3 months more than Bush saw in Vietname,
and
4
months more that he served in toto, *&* he never went AWOL.
Same old tripe. Kerry spent millions in trying to prove Bush went AWOL.
He
couldn't.
a) if so, he spent his own money
b) the records were "mysteriously destroyed"
Uh-huh.
Where have you been Sue?
Susan.
Those records were mysteriously found by the
military a couple months ago.
Uh, where have YOU been?
The Bush administration *themselves* said that the records were destroyed,
and that they had no idea how - but that *they* had wanted them.
You're just like a canine chasing it's tail
here. Or of you prefer another anecdote, how about beating a dead horse?
Again, this is a pointless topic. We should debate something substantive
like Kerry's senate record.
Yes, I can see why you are eager to get away from this.
Why do you think he's not using that tactic now?
See above.
over 30 years ago the centerpiece of his campaign instead of the
last
20
years as a public servant?
Perhaps it was because of the MILITARY MESS in which we find
ourselves -
which *also* has something to do with the AWOL coward he's running
against.
You can cling to the AWOL propoganda as long as you like but
it's all public record.
Tripe. If it were true Kerry would be all over it to divert attention
away
from him.
See above.
But it was common knowledge that Bush had 2 years to serve & only did
one.
He left early to work on political campaigns.
So you *admit* that he left. without finishing his tour of duty.
Why did you deny it before?
Kerry, by the way did the same
thing to get out of Vietnam.
No, not true.
He had actually done his duty.
So what? You're still beating that dead horse
Sue.
And you're still trying to make it true by repeating it.
all you're
doing is skirting the real issues which is Kerry's record in the
senate.
IOW, you are the one skirting the issue, because if Kerry's record is
so
bad, why is Bush trying to lie about Kerry's record?
He's not lying.
Of course he is.
Give me an example.
Everything the "Swfit Boat Veterans" have been putting forth has been
debunked, & they were done with the knowledge of George Bush, as proven by
the fact that thy were paid for by close friends of his & he refused to
condemn them.
I suppose I could get some specifics - off the top of my head, the crap
they've been saying about his not really earning the Star & actually being a
*coward* is the worst one I can think of. Disgusting.
He's pointing out his record over the last 20 years in
public office.
I wasn't discussing that.
I've never heard a single word Bush has had to say about Kerry's
POLITICAL
record.
Try watching TV.
Where do you think I've been hearing the *other* crap?
Why don't you do the same and try defending that?
I don't need to.
His record is fine.
For a liberal it sure is. Missed almost 70% of his committe meetings, vote
100% of the time to raise taxes, vote 100% of the time against the
military
budet,
You have proof of this?
then yell and scream because we're using reserves without body armor
and armored hummers that would protect them from roadside bombings. Yes, I
agree. His record is fine for a liberal.
Support
your candidate and show me Kerry's sterling record in public office.
Oh, please!
You can find it on his website.
You don't need me to hold your hand & you know it.
LOL, yes I'm sure his website paints him in a glowing picture.
I'm sure they aren;t stupid enough to lie when it's easily fouind out.
It's not like they're an anonymous group of citizens who can say what they
like without having to worry that they have to answer for anything.
Try looking
at other sources like the senate voting records or the senate's website.
Nice spin attempt though.
Considering the numbers you were throwing out there, I'd like to know whose
spin *you're* giving.
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on
telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd
want
to
draw
attention.
He's not. If you see any of the ads Bush approves of,
You mean the one he openly approves of.
If he didn't approve of the other ones, his friends wouldn't be
fnding
them,
and it wouldn't have taken this long for him to condemn them -
however
*weakly*.
Which Kerry has yet to do over the smears moveon.org has been
perpetrating
against Bush and all things Republican for the last three years.
I have seen no smears from them since their inception.
But it's nice that you admit that what I said is true.
Here's a little help: www.moveon.org All you have to do is click on it.
As I said, I have seen no smears from them since their inception.
I am a subscriber to their newsletter.
Here you go my dear.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-24-moveon-ads_x.htm
I already know about these, sweetie. How can they be "smears" when they
represent legitimate opinions based on facts?
Bush's tax cuts only help the rich, Blacks *were* kept from voting - oh, and
did you know that while the Republicans have been *publicly* touting the
Florida voting machines, theyhave *mailed* all *their* supporters to use
*paper* ballots, to make sure there's a traceable trail?
It's not like the "Swift Boat Veterans", none of whom actually served *with*
Kerry, and whose ads have been shown to be fraudulent.
he always targets
Kerry's record in the senate.
Gee, I must be missing those ads.
They're only being run in states that are contentious. No point in
running
them in states that will vote democratic no matter what.
Then why is it that, even tho' I live in one of those states, that all
I'm
hearing is the crap about Kerry's war record?
I doubt that very much.
Doubt away, but I leave lying to those who need to do it.
Like the liberals.
The Swift Boat Veterans are liberals?
Fancy that!
But they're easy
enough to find if you really wanted to.
Only the 527 groups are going after Kerry's
war record.
And they've been proven to be liars.
Which is irrelevant to our discussion which is why hasn't Kerry
denounced
all 527 groups when 87% of the money they raise go to attack ads
against
Republicans.
He has made a blanket denunciation AFAIK, and has gone after the worst
group
legally.
And how do the money that anti-Kerry groups raise attack
Republicans???
It's called censorship.
Oh, so now if people are kept from lying it's "censorship"???
You wish!!
If they lied, it's called libel. Since they're not being sued for libel
it's
called censorship. Nice try again.
So if Kerry doesn't have time to stop campaigning & sue the ads are
truthful?
If the ads were true, they could keep them up.
You try again.
The Nazi's did it in 1933 remember?
Godwin's Law: you lose.
Nice try again. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Non sequitur.
Calling in
Goodwin's obscure notion that the first person to use the word "Nazi" or
"Hitler" loses the argument is nothing more than apocryphal.
But you knew what I meant, so it hardly matters if anyone actually was named
Godwin or not.
I think the
analogy of the Nazi's using censorship by burning all books they felt were
unpatriotic has a clear connection with trying to censor free speech.
And I think that pretending that protesting lies is "censorship" is a form
of censorship in and of itself.
Which
by the way I'm in disagreement with Bush about since he wants to end them.
Which ought to tell you something right there.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Trevorrow" |
|
| Title: Re: JAMES BAKER SAYS "F--- 'EM, THEY DON'T VOTE FOR US!" REPUGS HATE AMERICA!! |
30 Aug 2004 04:00:53 PM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:NCHYc.2388$Gr2.177@trnddc07...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xQDYc.3086$4m2.3052@trnddc01...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eUwYc.3606$UI6.394@trnddc08...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UGkYc.664$O85.407@trnddc05...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:2bcYc.426$6q.187@trnddc06...
"Phil Trevorrow" <philtrev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:t%0Yc.2481$wk1.2279@trndny07...
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XtJXc.21$bD5.0@trnddc03...
You *do* know that it was actually 16 months right?
I said "in" Vietnam, not stationed on a ship outside of Vietnam.
But closer to 'Nam than Bush & the other deferment crowd who serve
him.
Are we playing horse shoes now?
You seem to be; I thought I'd be friendly & join in.
I seem to be? Seems to me you're the one who started it.
No, not at all.
You started chipping away at Kerry's service.
I started chipping away at his record in the senate back on the 26th. Your
very first reply to me was about Kerry's Vietnam service. In fact, I wasn't
even talking to you, I was replying to Vash about Kerry being our senator.
Here's my initial reply to Vash:
I'm living under Bush, now, & can;t think of anything worse.
I can. I've lived under Kerry when he was Lt. Governor and as my senator.
Why do you think he's focusing on his four months in Vietnam instead of his
20 years in office? He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
To which you replied:
He doesn't want you to know the real Kerry, that's why.
Now, if his record is so bad, why is Bush focusing solely on telling
terrible lies about Kerryu's service in Vietnam?
If I were Bush, Vietnam service is the last thing Ito which I'd want to
draw
attention.
So I ask again, who started it?
Where have you been Sue?
Susan.
Pardon me. Susan.
Those records were mysteriously found by the
military a couple months ago.
Uh, where have YOU been?
The Bush administration *themselves* said that the records were destroyed,
and that they had no idea how - but that *t | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
