| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"W. Syme" |
| Date: |
04 Oct 2004 08:36:22 AM |
| Object: |
OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm
This election is a lot of things, but certainly not anything
resembling politics. Jeeez.
.
|
|
| User: "Ike" |
|
| Title: Re: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
04 Oct 2004 11:12:12 AM |
|
|
"W. Syme" <Winston.Syme.superstitions@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:1096897041.OBaAJp3b1Z+rRvnv5rqR+w@1usenet...
http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm
This election is a lot of things, but certainly not anything
resembling politics. Jeeez.
If it doesn't resemble politics, it's becuase a Jesus Freak is president and
is trying to use mind control and huge sums of money to steal and buy the
election. The drudge report is not extremely credible anyway and I haven't
ime to surf around looking at the videos.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
04 Oct 2004 08:27:38 PM |
|
|
In article <1096897041.OBaAJp3b1Z+rRvnv5rqR+w@1usenet>,
Winston.Syme.superstitions@fastmail.fm says...
http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm
Gee, maybe it was a kleenex or a handkerchief to dab his brow or any
number of other things. OTOH, it's been suggested that Bush may be
using a covert earpiece, like a bone conducting microphone which would
probably work quite well on his thick skull.
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=3562
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "TCS" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
04 Oct 2004 10:41:26 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 19:27:38 -0600, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <1096897041.OBaAJp3b1Z+rRvnv5rqR+w@1usenet>,
Winston.Syme.superstitions@fastmail.fm says...
http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm
Gee, maybe it was a kleenex or a handkerchief to dab his brow or any
number of other things. OTOH, it's been suggested that Bush may be
using a covert earpiece, like a bone conducting microphone which would
probably work quite well on his thick skull.
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=3562
And the person at the other end was asleep?
Bush certainly didn't appear to have any outside help.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
04 Oct 2004 10:50:59 PM |
|
|
"TCS" <The-Central-Scrutinizer@p.o.b.o.x.com> wrote
Bush certainly didn't appear to have any outside help.
There was one moment where it certainly appeared that he did.
I mean, Bush had to actually be reminded that Iraq didn't attack
us, yet he suddenly came up with when the raining season was
ending in Africa....
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
06 Oct 2004 12:34:07 AM |
|
|
"TCS" <The-Central-Scrutinizer@p.o.b.o.x.com> wrote in message
news:slrncm45v6.fij.The-Central-Scrutinizer@linux.client.comcast.net...
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 19:27:38 -0600, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <1096897041.OBaAJp3b1Z+rRvnv5rqR+w@1usenet>,
Winston.Syme.superstitions@fastmail.fm says...
http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm
Gee, maybe it was a kleenex or a handkerchief to dab his brow or any
number of other things. OTOH, it's been suggested that Bush may be
using a covert earpiece, like a bone conducting microphone which would
probably work quite well on his thick skull.
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=3562
And the person at the other end was asleep?
Bush certainly didn't appear to have any outside help.
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
06 Oct 2004 12:53:13 AM |
|
|
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Know what's scary? Not that Bush was apparently scolding
the voices in his head live on TV, but the fact that nobody in
the media seems to notice or care.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
06 Oct 2004 01:22:00 AM |
|
|
"JTEM" <jaytem@gaydar.co.uk> wrote in message
news:is2dnRbWiKRPG_7cRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Know what's scary? Not that Bush was apparently scolding
the voices in his head live on TV, but the fact that nobody in
the media seems to notice or care.
Maybe a bunch of us should go to the Bushie websites and
ask them? ;-)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
06 Oct 2004 01:41:31 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 01:53:13 -0400, "JTEM" <jaytem@gaydar.co.uk> wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Know what's scary? Not that Bush was apparently scolding
the voices in his head live on TV, but the fact that nobody in
the media seems to notice or care.
Worse-the populace didn't care.
**
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
07 Oct 2004 01:59:55 AM |
|
|
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 01:53:13 -0400, "JTEM" <jaytem@gaydar.co.uk> wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Know what's scary? Not that Bush was apparently scolding
the voices in his head live on TV, but the fact that nobody in
the media seems to notice or care.
Worse-the populace didn't care.
Funny you should mention that. Did you see the article by Mark Moford
today?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1006-31.htm
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
07 Oct 2004 02:28:47 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 01:53:13 -0400, "JTEM" <jaytem@gaydar.co.uk> wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Know what's scary? Not that Bush was apparently scolding
the voices in his head live on TV, but the fact that nobody in
the media seems to notice or care.
Worse-the populace didn't care.
Funny you should mention that. Did you see the article by Mark Moford
today?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1006-31.htm
No, I hadn't. I'm behind on my reading.
( checking )
Perhaps because there's no effective difference?
You lose no matter how you play?
That your vote is immaterial?
The realization a straight answer won't be forthcoming on anything?
The terminal lack of substance in the whole thing?
That your voice isn't heard unless you pony up shitloads of cash?
I think people do pay more attention than is thought. The same bland
***** from the main political parties gets automatically flushed.
Same ***** different day. A 'difference' which makes no difference is
no difference. No matter how you 'play the cards' you lose. At least
you can 'win' a bit by not wasting more time.
Recall the surprise in Minnesota when the Governorship went to Jesse
Ventura. That was a signal "We're tired of the nattering ***** and
silly arsed games."
Recall the attention Ross Perot had, until he dropped out then tried
to get back in again. Ross didn't deal in semantic nothings. He flat
indicated there were some hefty problems and the solutions would not
be fun. The audience was being brought in to the process as active
participants. The verbage also indicated failure was possible, but
they were going to try.
The sheer size of the country may add to the terminal disconnect with
the voter. There's also the fact a person gets more of a result from
pissing upwind than they do voting.
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
**
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
08 Oct 2004 07:58:52 AM |
|
|
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 01:53:13 -0400, "JTEM" <jaytem@gaydar.co.uk> wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Know what's scary? Not that Bush was apparently scolding
the voices in his head live on TV, but the fact that nobody in
the media seems to notice or care.
Worse-the populace didn't care.
Funny you should mention that. Did you see the article by Mark Moford
today?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1006-31.htm
No, I hadn't. I'm behind on my reading.
( checking )
Perhaps because there's no effective difference?
You lose no matter how you play?
That your vote is immaterial?
The realization a straight answer won't be forthcoming on anything?
The terminal lack of substance in the whole thing?
That your voice isn't heard unless you pony up shitloads of cash?
I think people do pay more attention than is thought. The same bland
***** from the main political parties gets automatically flushed.
Same ***** different day. A 'difference' which makes no difference is
no difference. No matter how you 'play the cards' you lose. At least
you can 'win' a bit by not wasting more time.
Recall the surprise in Minnesota when the Governorship went to Jesse
Ventura. That was a signal "We're tired of the nattering ***** and
silly arsed games."
Recall the attention Ross Perot had, until he dropped out then tried
to get back in again. Ross didn't deal in semantic nothings. He flat
indicated there were some hefty problems and the solutions would not
be fun. The audience was being brought in to the process as active
participants. The verbage also indicated failure was possible, but
they were going to try.
The sheer size of the country may add to the terminal disconnect with
the voter. There's also the fact a person gets more of a result from
pissing upwind than they do voting.
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
08 Oct 2004 09:54:05 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 01:53:13 -0400, "JTEM" <jaytem@gaydar.co.uk> wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Know what's scary? Not that Bush was apparently scolding
the voices in his head live on TV, but the fact that nobody in
the media seems to notice or care.
Worse-the populace didn't care.
Funny you should mention that. Did you see the article by Mark Moford
today?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1006-31.htm
No, I hadn't. I'm behind on my reading.
( checking )
Perhaps because there's no effective difference?
You lose no matter how you play?
That your vote is immaterial?
The realization a straight answer won't be forthcoming on anything?
The terminal lack of substance in the whole thing?
That your voice isn't heard unless you pony up shitloads of cash?
I think people do pay more attention than is thought. The same bland
***** from the main political parties gets automatically flushed.
Same ***** different day. A 'difference' which makes no difference is
no difference. No matter how you 'play the cards' you lose. At least
you can 'win' a bit by not wasting more time.
Recall the surprise in Minnesota when the Governorship went to Jesse
Ventura. That was a signal "We're tired of the nattering ***** and
silly arsed games."
Recall the attention Ross Perot had, until he dropped out then tried
to get back in again. Ross didn't deal in semantic nothings. He flat
indicated there were some hefty problems and the solutions would not
be fun. The audience was being brought in to the process as active
participants. The verbage also indicated failure was possible, but
they were going to try.
The sheer size of the country may add to the terminal disconnect with
the voter. There's also the fact a person gets more of a result from
pissing upwind than they do voting.
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I worked for and knew Perot personally.
Don't vote for him. His bad points way outweigh his good points.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
09 Oct 2004 02:43:50 AM |
|
|
In article <4167a92a.3408703@news-west.newscene.com>,
(Kate ) wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 01:53:13 -0400, "JTEM" <jaytem@gaydar.co.uk> wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Know what's scary? Not that Bush was apparently scolding
the voices in his head live on TV, but the fact that nobody in
the media seems to notice or care.
Worse-the populace didn't care.
Funny you should mention that. Did you see the article by Mark Moford
today?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1006-31.htm
No, I hadn't. I'm behind on my reading.
( checking )
Perhaps because there's no effective difference?
You lose no matter how you play?
That your vote is immaterial?
The realization a straight answer won't be forthcoming on anything?
The terminal lack of substance in the whole thing?
That your voice isn't heard unless you pony up shitloads of cash?
I think people do pay more attention than is thought. The same bland
***** from the main political parties gets automatically flushed.
Same ***** different day. A 'difference' which makes no difference is
no difference. No matter how you 'play the cards' you lose. At least
you can 'win' a bit by not wasting more time.
Recall the surprise in Minnesota when the Governorship went to Jesse
Ventura. That was a signal "We're tired of the nattering ***** and
silly arsed games."
Recall the attention Ross Perot had, until he dropped out then tried
to get back in again. Ross didn't deal in semantic nothings. He flat
indicated there were some hefty problems and the solutions would not
be fun. The audience was being brought in to the process as active
participants. The verbage also indicated failure was possible, but
they were going to try.
The sheer size of the country may add to the terminal disconnect with
the voter. There's also the fact a person gets more of a result from
pissing upwind than they do voting.
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I worked for and knew Perot personally.
Don't vote for him. His bad points way outweigh his good points.
I don't think that I would vote for Perot, if he were running, but I use
him as an example of a third party candidate who did capture the
imagination of the voters for a while. It's too bad that he turned out
to be a flake, but maybe the next one won't be.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
08 Oct 2004 02:01:21 PM |
|
|
On 8 Oct 2004 09:54:05 -0500, (Kate ) wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I worked for and knew Perot personally.
Don't vote for him. His bad points way outweigh his good points.
San surprise. However, in comparison with what was presented in the
media Perot was a 'breath of fresh aire.'
Your point is an excellant example of citizens having to make
determinations with almost zero information.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
08 Oct 2004 01:55:41 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I used to vote for the person who I perceived will do the least harm.
It was sometime after the 2000 debacle's (emergency turn to the reich)
I realized for quite some time there had been a slow gradual shift to
the reich (totalitarianism).
Perhaps, what the country needs as a wake up call is what the current
Reichstag Puppet Masters intend. Something so abrupt it wakes the
populace.
Perhaps, the lurch won't make any difference.
With the blatant elimination of 'free and fair elections' (have we
ever had on?), for myself, I see *my* participation as a 'rubber
stamp' of approval. (Of course, my non participation has no effect,
either).
I see personal participation via voting, or not, as well as one's
selection off the 'menu' as an individual decision.
I won't participate in state elections, either. In the last couple of
years I haven't participated in local items as;
they were 'square filling' i.e., re-selecting an unopposed incubent to
post
items which had no effect on me one way or another
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
09 Oct 2004 02:38:25 AM |
|
|
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I used to vote for the person who I perceived will do the least harm.
It was sometime after the 2000 debacle's (emergency turn to the reich)
I realized for quite some time there had been a slow gradual shift to
the reich (totalitarianism).
Perhaps, what the country needs as a wake up call is what the current
Reichstag Puppet Masters intend. Something so abrupt it wakes the
populace.
Perhaps, the lurch won't make any difference.
With the blatant elimination of 'free and fair elections' (have we
ever had on?), for myself, I see *my* participation as a 'rubber
stamp' of approval. (Of course, my non participation has no effect,
either).
I see personal participation via voting, or not, as well as one's
selection off the 'menu' as an individual decision.
I won't participate in state elections, either. In the last couple of
years I haven't participated in local items as;
they were 'square filling' i.e., re-selecting an unopposed incubent to
post
items which had no effect on me one way or another
Maybe if we had more parties. I watched Now on PBS tonight. They had
Nader, the Green, the Libertarian, and a few other candidates on. Nader
was making the point that the system is rigged against third party
candidates, so the choice is between the corporations who support
Tweedledum and those who support Tweedledumber. We need more parties to
take part in the process.
Nader's solution is to get corporate money out of politics and allow
only public money from the box that you check off on your 1040 to be
used for campaign financing, He would also lower the bar for getting on
ballots and taking part in debates.
I doubt that this could be achieved in the present climate, but I'm sure
that many others are tired of the duopoly which we now live under.
In the mean time, I will vote against the candidate who IMHO will screw
up the country least, i. e. Kerry.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
09 Oct 2004 12:31:02 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:38:25 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I used to vote for the person who I perceived will do the least harm.
It was sometime after the 2000 debacle's (emergency turn to the reich)
I realized for quite some time there had been a slow gradual shift to
the reich (totalitarianism).
Perhaps, what the country needs as a wake up call is what the current
Reichstag Puppet Masters intend. Something so abrupt it wakes the
populace.
Perhaps, the lurch won't make any difference.
With the blatant elimination of 'free and fair elections' (have we
ever had on?), for myself, I see *my* participation as a 'rubber
stamp' of approval. (Of course, my non participation has no effect,
either).
I see personal participation via voting, or not, as well as one's
selection off the 'menu' as an individual decision.
I won't participate in state elections, either. In the last couple of
years I haven't participated in local items as;
they were 'square filling' i.e., re-selecting an unopposed incubent to
post
items which had no effect on me one way or another
Maybe if we had more parties.
Maybe. However, the 'RepuDems' have rigged the system to effectively
eliminate other parties (other than "Independant" which is generally a
nomenclature change only)
I watched Now on PBS tonight. They had
Nader, the Green, the Libertarian, and a few other candidates on. Nader
was making the point that the system is rigged against third party
candidates, so the choice is between the corporations who support
Tweedledum and those who support Tweedledumber. We need more parties to
take part in the process.
Take part in the process of corporate ownership of political
candidates? Large investors *do* require a hefty ROI.
Nader's solution is to get corporate money out of politics and allow
only public money from the box that you check off on your 1040 to be
used for campaign financing, He would also lower the bar for getting on
ballots and taking part in debates.
That would be, imo, a hefty step in the right direction. It would
start getting the populace involved in the process as they might then
have a stake in it.
I doubt that this could be achieved in the present climate, but I'm sure
that many others are tired of the duopoly which we now live under.
Yes, but these people are powerless.
In the mean time, I will vote against the candidate who IMHO will screw
up the country least, i. e. Kerry.
Again, no argument.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
10 Oct 2004 02:23:30 AM |
|
|
In article <6o7gm0tr1g3bvks6otb5vld31lnc2lh31u@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:38:25 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I used to vote for the person who I perceived will do the least harm.
It was sometime after the 2000 debacle's (emergency turn to the reich)
I realized for quite some time there had been a slow gradual shift to
the reich (totalitarianism).
Perhaps, what the country needs as a wake up call is what the current
Reichstag Puppet Masters intend. Something so abrupt it wakes the
populace.
Perhaps, the lurch won't make any difference.
With the blatant elimination of 'free and fair elections' (have we
ever had on?), for myself, I see *my* participation as a 'rubber
stamp' of approval. (Of course, my non participation has no effect,
either).
I see personal participation via voting, or not, as well as one's
selection off the 'menu' as an individual decision.
I won't participate in state elections, either. In the last couple of
years I haven't participated in local items as;
they were 'square filling' i.e., re-selecting an unopposed incubent to
post
items which had no effect on me one way or another
Maybe if we had more parties.
Maybe. However, the 'RepuDems' have rigged the system to effectively
eliminate other parties (other than "Independant" which is generally a
nomenclature change only)
They definitely have. Sorry third party guys, this is a private club.
I watched Now on PBS tonight. They had
Nader, the Green, the Libertarian, and a few other candidates on. Nader
was making the point that the system is rigged against third party
candidates, so the choice is between the corporations who support
Tweedledum and those who support Tweedledumber. We need more parties to
take part in the process.
Take part in the process of corporate ownership of political
candidates? Large investors *do* require a hefty ROI.
Perhaps instead of all of this expensive election business, the
executives from the respective corporations and their lawyers could just
meet in closed room and just pick a ruler for us. Sort of like how the
College of Cardinals choose a new Pope. <just kidding>
Nader's solution is to get corporate money out of politics and allow
only public money from the box that you check off on your 1040 to be
used for campaign financing, He would also lower the bar for getting on
ballots and taking part in debates.
That would be, imo, a hefty step in the right direction. It would
start getting the populace involved in the process as they might then
have a stake in it.
It would be a welcome change.
I doubt that this could be achieved in the present climate, but I'm sure
that many others are tired of the duopoly which we now live under.
Yes, but these people are powerless.
The individuals need someone to help galvanize opinion and organize
them. But sadly most people capable of doing that have been co-opted by
either the corporate or the political system.
In the mean time, I will vote against the candidate who IMHO will screw
up the country least, i. e. Kerry.
Again, no argument.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
10 Oct 2004 11:50:41 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 00:23:30 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <6o7gm0tr1g3bvks6otb5vld31lnc2lh31u@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:38:25 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I used to vote for the person who I perceived will do the least harm.
It was sometime after the 2000 debacle's (emergency turn to the reich)
I realized for quite some time there had been a slow gradual shift to
the reich (totalitarianism).
Perhaps, what the country needs as a wake up call is what the current
Reichstag Puppet Masters intend. Something so abrupt it wakes the
populace.
Perhaps, the lurch won't make any difference.
With the blatant elimination of 'free and fair elections' (have we
ever had on?), for myself, I see *my* participation as a 'rubber
stamp' of approval. (Of course, my non participation has no effect,
either).
I see personal participation via voting, or not, as well as one's
selection off the 'menu' as an individual decision.
I won't participate in state elections, either. In the last couple of
years I haven't participated in local items as;
they were 'square filling' i.e., re-selecting an unopposed incubent to
post
items which had no effect on me one way or another
Maybe if we had more parties.
Maybe. However, the 'RepuDems' have rigged the system to effectively
eliminate other parties (other than "Independant" which is generally a
nomenclature change only)
They definitely have. Sorry third party guys, this is a private club.
Only the 'apology' isn't.
I watched Now on PBS tonight. They had
Nader, the Green, the Libertarian, and a few other candidates on. Nader
was making the point that the system is rigged against third party
candidates, so the choice is between the corporations who support
Tweedledum and those who support Tweedledumber. We need more parties to
take part in the process.
Take part in the process of corporate ownership of political
candidates? Large investors *do* require a hefty ROI.
Perhaps instead of all of this expensive election business, the
executives from the respective corporations and their lawyers could just
meet in closed room and just pick a ruler for us.
Be a helluva lot cheaper than the current ringmasterless circus.
Sort of like how the
College of Cardinals choose a new Pope. <just kidding>
The hefty amount of backstabbing is why Cardinals wear red.
Nader's solution is to get corporate money out of politics and allow
only public money from the box that you check off on your 1040 to be
used for campaign financing, He would also lower the bar for getting on
ballots and taking part in debates.
That would be, imo, a hefty step in the right direction. It would
start getting the populace involved in the process as they might then
have a stake in it.
It would be a welcome change.
I doubt that this could be achieved in the present climate, but I'm sure
that many others are tired of the duopoly which we now live under.
Yes, but these people are powerless.
The individuals need someone to help galvanize opinion and organize
them. But sadly most people capable of doing that have been co-opted by
either the corporate or the political system.
The populace must first be educated and able and willing to think.
In the mean time, I will vote against the candidate who IMHO will screw
up the country least, i. e. Kerry.
Again, no argument.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
10 Oct 2004 11:00:57 PM |
|
|
In article <fupim05e41bhpfq8shd4ujt85045c6e50j@4ax.com>,
stoney <> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 00:23:30 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <6o7gm0tr1g3bvks6otb5vld31lnc2lh31u@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:38:25 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I used to vote for the person who I perceived will do the least harm.
It was sometime after the 2000 debacle's (emergency turn to the reich)
I realized for quite some time there had been a slow gradual shift to
the reich (totalitarianism).
Perhaps, what the country needs as a wake up call is what the current
Reichstag Puppet Masters intend. Something so abrupt it wakes the
populace.
Perhaps, the lurch won't make any difference.
With the blatant elimination of 'free and fair elections' (have we
ever had on?), for myself, I see *my* participation as a 'rubber
stamp' of approval. (Of course, my non participation has no effect,
either).
I see personal participation via voting, or not, as well as one's
selection off the 'menu' as an individual decision.
I won't participate in state elections, either. In the last couple of
years I haven't participated in local items as;
they were 'square filling' i.e., re-selecting an unopposed incubent to
post
items which had no effect on me one way or another
Maybe if we had more parties.
Maybe. However, the 'RepuDems' have rigged the system to effectively
eliminate other parties (other than "Independant" which is generally a
nomenclature change only)
They definitely have. Sorry third party guys, this is a private club.
Only the 'apology' isn't.
I watched Now on PBS tonight. They had
Nader, the Green, the Libertarian, and a few other candidates on. Nader
was making the point that the system is rigged against third party
candidates, so the choice is between the corporations who support
Tweedledum and those who support Tweedledumber. We need more parties to
take part in the process.
Take part in the process of corporate ownership of political
candidates? Large investors *do* require a hefty ROI.
Perhaps instead of all of this expensive election business, the
executives from the respective corporations and their lawyers could just
meet in closed room and just pick a ruler for us.
Be a helluva lot cheaper than the current ringmasterless circus.
Sort of like how the
College of Cardinals choose a new Pope. <just kidding>
The hefty amount of backstabbing is why Cardinals wear red.
Now that you mention it...
Nader's solution is to get corporate money out of politics and allow
only public money from the box that you check off on your 1040 to be
used for campaign financing, He would also lower the bar for getting on
ballots and taking part in debates.
That would be, imo, a hefty step in the right direction. It would
start getting the populace involved in the process as they might then
have a stake in it.
It would be a welcome change.
I doubt that this could be achieved in the present climate, but I'm sure
that many others are tired of the duopoly which we now live under.
Yes, but these people are powerless.
The individuals need someone to help galvanize opinion and organize
them. But sadly most people capable of doing that have been co-opted by
either the corporate or the political system.
The populace must first be educated and able and willing to think.
The problem is that the educational system, the media, and the
pronouncements of the government seem to be doing everything in their
power to discourage the above. Their message seems to be: "Don't think.
It's too hard for you. Just trust us. Be good citizens, don't question
your government, obey the law, pay your taxes, and consume, consume,
consume!"
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
12 Oct 2004 12:17:46 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:00:57 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <fupim05e41bhpfq8shd4ujt85045c6e50j@4ax.com>,
stoney < > wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 00:23:30 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <6o7gm0tr1g3bvks6otb5vld31lnc2lh31u@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:38:25 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I used to vote for the person who I perceived will do the least harm.
It was sometime after the 2000 debacle's (emergency turn to the reich)
I realized for quite some time there had been a slow gradual shift to
the reich (totalitarianism).
Perhaps, what the country needs as a wake up call is what the current
Reichstag Puppet Masters intend. Something so abrupt it wakes the
populace.
Perhaps, the lurch won't make any difference.
With the blatant elimination of 'free and fair elections' (have we
ever had on?), for myself, I see *my* participation as a 'rubber
stamp' of approval. (Of course, my non participation has no effect,
either).
I see personal participation via voting, or not, as well as one's
selection off the 'menu' as an individual decision.
I won't participate in state elections, either. In the last couple of
years I haven't participated in local items as;
they were 'square filling' i.e., re-selecting an unopposed incubent to
post
items which had no effect on me one way or another
Maybe if we had more parties.
Maybe. However, the 'RepuDems' have rigged the system to effectively
eliminate other parties (other than "Independant" which is generally a
nomenclature change only)
They definitely have. Sorry third party guys, this is a private club.
Only the 'apology' isn't.
I watched Now on PBS tonight. They had
Nader, the Green, the Libertarian, and a few other candidates on. Nader
was making the point that the system is rigged against third party
candidates, so the choice is between the corporations who support
Tweedledum and those who support Tweedledumber. We need more parties to
take part in the process.
Take part in the process of corporate ownership of political
candidates? Large investors *do* require a hefty ROI.
Perhaps instead of all of this expensive election business, the
executives from the respective corporations and their lawyers could just
meet in closed room and just pick a ruler for us.
Be a helluva lot cheaper than the current ringmasterless circus.
Sort of like how the
College of Cardinals choose a new Pope. <just kidding>
The hefty amount of backstabbing is why Cardinals wear red.
Now that you mention it...
Nader's solution is to get corporate money out of politics and allow
only public money from the box that you check off on your 1040 to be
used for campaign financing, He would also lower the bar for getting on
ballots and taking part in debates.
That would be, imo, a hefty step in the right direction. It would
start getting the populace involved in the process as they might then
have a stake in it.
It would be a welcome change.
I doubt that this could be achieved in the present climate, but I'm sure
that many others are tired of the duopoly which we now live under.
Yes, but these people are powerless.
The individuals need someone to help galvanize opinion and organize
them. But sadly most people capable of doing that have been co-opted by
either the corporate or the political system.
The populace must first be educated and able and willing to think.
The problem is that the educational system, the media, and the
pronouncements of the government seem to be doing everything in their
power to discourage the above. Their message seems to be: "Don't think.
It's too hard for you. Just trust us. Be good citizens, don't question
your government, obey the law, pay your taxes, and consume, consume,
consume!"
No 'seems to be' about it.
Remember a few years ago the credit card companies took the american
populace to task for 'spending beyond their means' although it was the
attitudes and actions of the cc companies which encourgaed and enabled
the populace to do so!
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
13 Oct 2004 12:10:12 AM |
|
|
In article <da4om05d25lb39rj1mm6hhkpavtpllst03@4ax.com>,
stoney <> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:00:57 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <fupim05e41bhpfq8shd4ujt85045c6e50j@4ax.com>,
stoney < > wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 00:23:30 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <6o7gm0tr1g3bvks6otb5vld31lnc2lh31u@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:38:25 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:58:52 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <7c4bm0dopkp99om69cckpj4iipq94sqhlr@4ax.com>,
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:59:55 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com>
wrote:
In article <s1f8m0tt15i9gltedrpdtuf4kmucto3vid@4ax.com>,
wrote:
[]
I have no problem with those who vote-that is their perogative.
However, when the votes can't even be counted honestly there's
even
less reason to bother with the exercise.
I agree with much of what you say. If there were another Perot, or
if
Jesse had national stature, I would gladly vote for them, if I
thought
they had a chance. It used to be that I voted for the best man. Now
I
find myself voting for the person who will do the least harm.
I used to vote for the person who I perceived will do the least
harm.
It was sometime after the 2000 debacle's (emergency turn to the
reich)
I realized for quite some time there had been a slow gradual shift
to
the reich (totalitarianism).
Perhaps, what the country needs as a wake up call is what the
current
Reichstag Puppet Masters intend. Something so abrupt it wakes the
populace.
Perhaps, the lurch won't make any difference.
With the blatant elimination of 'free and fair elections' (have we
ever had on?), for myself, I see *my* participation as a 'rubber
stamp' of approval. (Of course, my non participation has no effect,
either).
I see personal participation via voting, or not, as well as one's
selection off the 'menu' as an individual decision.
I won't participate in state elections, either. In the last couple
of
years I haven't participated in local items as;
they were 'square filling' i.e., re-selecting an unopposed incubent
to
post
items which had no effect on me one way or another
Maybe if we had more parties.
Maybe. However, the 'RepuDems' have rigged the system to effectively
eliminate other parties (other than "Independant" which is generally a
nomenclature change only)
They definitely have. Sorry third party guys, this is a private club.
Only the 'apology' isn't.
I watched Now on PBS tonight. They had
Nader, the Green, the Libertarian, and a few other candidates on.
Nader
was making the point that the system is rigged against third party
candidates, so the choice is between the corporations who support
Tweedledum and those who support Tweedledumber. We need more parties
to
take part in the process.
Take part in the process of corporate ownership of political
candidates? Large investors *do* require a hefty ROI.
Perhaps instead of all of this expensive election business, the
executives from the respective corporations and their lawyers could just
meet in closed room and just pick a ruler for us.
Be a helluva lot cheaper than the current ringmasterless circus.
Sort of like how the
College of Cardinals choose a new Pope. <just kidding>
The hefty amount of backstabbing is why Cardinals wear red.
Now that you mention it...
Nader's solution is to get corporate money out of politics and allow
only public money from the box that you check off on your 1040 to be
used for campaign financing, He would also lower the bar for getting
on
ballots and taking part in debates.
That would be, imo, a hefty step in the right direction. It would
start getting the populace involved in the process as they might then
have a stake in it.
It would be a welcome change.
I doubt that this could be achieved in the present climate, but I'm
sure
that many others are tired of the duopoly which we now live under.
Yes, but these people are powerless.
The individuals need someone to help galvanize opinion and organize
them. But sadly most people capable of doing that have been co-opted by
either the corporate or the political system.
The populace must first be educated and able and willing to think.
The problem is that the educational system, the media, and the
pronouncements of the government seem to be doing everything in their
power to discourage the above. Their message seems to be: "Don't think.
It's too hard for you. Just trust us. Be good citizens, don't question
your government, obey the law, pay your taxes, and consume, consume,
consume!"
No 'seems to be' about it.
Remember a few years ago the credit card companies took the american
populace to task for 'spending beyond their means' although it was the
attitudes and actions of the cc companies which encourgaed and enabled
the populace to do so!
Of course. Now W has transferred that policy to the federal government.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
13 Oct 2004 10:54:06 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:10:12 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <da4om05d25lb39rj1mm6hhkpavtpllst03@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:00:57 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <fupim05e41bhpfq8shd4ujt85045c6e50j@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
[]
The problem is that the educational system, the media, and the
pronouncements of the government seem to be doing everything in their
power to discourage the above. Their message seems to be: "Don't think.
It's too hard for you. Just trust us. Be good citizens, don't question
your government, obey the law, pay your taxes, and consume, consume,
consume!"
No 'seems to be' about it.
Remember a few years ago the credit card companies took the american
populace to task for 'spending beyond their means' although it was the
attitudes and actions of the cc companies which encourgaed and enabled
the populace to do so!
Of course. Now W has transferred that policy to the federal government.
Why not? It keeps major funds in the bank accounts of the 'proper
people(tm).'
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
15 Oct 2004 12:24:18 AM |
|
|
In article <0rjqm0lqgb0lbg03ds1vn3675qfb136hst@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:10:12 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <da4om05d25lb39rj1mm6hhkpavtpllst03@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:00:57 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <fupim05e41bhpfq8shd4ujt85045c6e50j@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
[]
The problem is that the educational system, the media, and the
pronouncements of the government seem to be doing everything in their
power to discourage the above. Their message seems to be: "Don't think.
It's too hard for you. Just trust us. Be good citizens, don't question
your government, obey the law, pay your taxes, and consume, consume,
consume!"
No 'seems to be' about it.
Remember a few years ago the credit card companies took the american
populace to task for 'spending beyond their means' although it was the
attitudes and actions of the cc companies which encourgaed and enabled
the populace to do so!
Of course. Now W has transferred that policy to the federal government.
Why not? It keeps major funds in the bank accounts of the 'proper
people(tm).'
Yeah. All of those poor starving zillionaires.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
16 Oct 2004 06:33:31 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:24:18 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <0rjqm0lqgb0lbg03ds1vn3675qfb136hst@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:10:12 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <da4om05d25lb39rj1mm6hhkpavtpllst03@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:00:57 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <fupim05e41bhpfq8shd4ujt85045c6e50j@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
[]
The problem is that the educational system, the media, and the
pronouncements of the government seem to be doing everything in their
power to discourage the above. Their message seems to be: "Don't think.
It's too hard for you. Just trust us. Be good citizens, don't question
your government, obey the law, pay your taxes, and consume, consume,
consume!"
No 'seems to be' about it.
Remember a few years ago the credit card companies took the american
populace to task for 'spending beyond their means' although it was the
attitudes and actions of the cc companies which encourgaed and enabled
the populace to do so!
Of course. Now W has transferred that policy to the federal government.
Why not? It keeps major funds in the bank accounts of the 'proper
people(tm).'
Yeah. All of those poor starving zillionaires.
Indeed. It was just a couple years ago 'Kenny Boi's' wife was crying
they were down to their last ten million.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
16 Oct 2004 01:51:59 AM |
|
|
In article <2n12n0hjatami3nk0qv9ds9tjd6mgtrgsv@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:24:18 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <0rjqm0lqgb0lbg03ds1vn3675qfb136hst@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:10:12 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <da4om05d25lb39rj1mm6hhkpavtpllst03@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:00:57 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <fupim05e41bhpfq8shd4ujt85045c6e50j@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
[]
The problem is that the educational system, the media, and the
pronouncements of the government seem to be doing everything in their
power to discourage the above. Their message seems to be: "Don't
think.
It's too hard for you. Just trust us. Be good citizens, don't question
your government, obey the law, pay your taxes, and consume, consume,
consume!"
No 'seems to be' about it.
Remember a few years ago the credit card companies took the american
populace to task for 'spending beyond their means' although it was the
attitudes and actions of the cc companies which encourgaed and enabled
the populace to do so!
Of course. Now W has transferred that policy to the federal government.
Why not? It keeps major funds in the bank accounts of the 'proper
people(tm).'
Yeah. All of those poor starving zillionaires.
Indeed. It was just a couple years ago 'Kenny Boi's' wife was crying
they were down to their last ten million.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And <cry, cry> they even had to sell one of their houses.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
18 Oct 2004 12:08:35 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:51:59 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <2n12n0hjatami3nk0qv9ds9tjd6mgtrgsv@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:24:18 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
[]
Of course. Now W has transferred that policy to the federal government.
Why not? It keeps major funds in the bank accounts of the 'proper
people(tm).'
Yeah. All of those poor starving zillionaires.
Indeed. It was just a couple years ago 'Kenny Boi's' wife was crying
they were down to their last ten million.
And <cry, cry> they even had to sell one of their houses.
/sarcasm
My heart bleeds for them.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Keenan Clay Wilkie" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
10 Oct 2004 02:27:52 PM |
|
|
johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> writes:
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
In the mean time, I will vote against the candidate who IMHO will screw
up the country least, i. e. Kerry.
Er, so you think that Kerry will do the least damage and thus you're not
voting (voting against) Kerry?
Or did you misphrase that?
--
See the documented lies of Pastor Frank: http://tinyurl.com/6009
http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif
d a r k s t a r @ i g l o u . c o m | atheist #29
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
10 Oct 2004 10:51:47 PM |
|
|
In article <41698d38$1_1@news.iglou.com>,
(Keenan Clay Wilkie) wrote:
johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> writes:
In article <rmndm01fvm3s2a9f39mg0h357l4m7qdc39@4ax.com>,
wrote:
In the mean time, I will vote against the candidate who IMHO will screw
up the country least, i. e. Kerry.
Er, so you think that Kerry will do the least damage and thus you're not
voting (voting against) Kerry?
Or did you misphrase that?
Oh gosh, I guess I did! Unlike a certain chief executive, I can admit it
when I make a mistake. Thanks for pointing that one out.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted with
new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Firelock" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: "Kerry cheated, seen pulling out cheat sheet" |
07 Oct 2004 08:01:23 AM |
|
|
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<S6idnb4PN9ciHv7cRVn-rg@comcast.com>...
Then, who was Bush talking to when he interrupted himself in
the middle of an answer with "Let me finish!"? No one had
interrupted him. It was like he was talking to himself.
Bush had run out of time while giving a response and was being
signalled by the moderator. The moderator (when Bush said
"Let me finish!") gave him a 30 second extension.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
