|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
10 Apr 2004 09:01:29 PM |
|
|
DP wrote:
The army needs an experienced soldier.
Isn't he too old to go back into military service?
Not as Commander In Chief. Smarten up!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Who Cares!" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
10 Apr 2004 09:58:57 PM |
|
|
"Dixit" <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ZF1ec.7387$xn4.30493@attbi_s51...
|
|
| DP wrote:
|
| >>The army needs an experienced soldier.
| >
| >
| > Isn't he too old to go back into military service?
|
| Not as Commander In Chief. Smarten up!
He wasn't a soldier, he was a sailor. One that kept getting hit by
shrapnel. One that cam back early form VN and dissed the troops. If
that is your idea of a commander in cheif...
But then again,
Who Cares!
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
10 Apr 2004 10:58:46 PM |
|
|
"Who Cares!" wrote:
He wasn't a soldier, he was a sailor. One that kept getting hit by
shrapnel. One that cam back early form VN and dissed the troops. If
that is your idea of a commander in cheif...
John Kerry was a warrior who came back from a war and reported that he
and other members of the American military were routinely being
ordered to do dishonorable things in Vietnam. That was an experience
that might well help him to not do that same thing to another
generation of America's military if he were in charge.
To point out the leadership's wrong doing is not an insult or any
disrespect toward the man or woman holding the rifle. It is an
indication that he or she is respected as more than cannon fodder or
an instrument of political whim. Making your opinion known when you
think your elected representatives are wrong in what they are doing
with the military is your responsibility as a citizen in a democracy.
John Kerry has shown that he was not afraid of that responsibility.
We can argue about the correctness of his opinions, but his motives
were clear and honorable.
If I were in the military (and I once was), I would like to have a
commander in chief who worried about whether or not what he was
ordering me to do was honorable or not. George W. Bush seems not to
be interested in this question, since he appears to avoid rational
criticism of his decisions. As Paul O'neill quotes him on several
occasions, "I'm not going to second guess myself." This is a sign of
a man who does not want to reflect on the possibility that he may be
making mistakes.
Why do you see honest criticism as a bad thing?
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
| User: "Who Cares!" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
11 Apr 2004 10:18:39 PM |
|
|
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:4078C276.F7DC3F40@rica.net...
| "Who Cares!" wrote:
|
| > He wasn't a soldier, he was a sailor. One that kept getting hit
by
| > shrapnel. One that cam back early form VN and dissed the troops.
If
| > that is your idea of a commander in cheif...
|
| John Kerry was a warrior who came back from a war and reported that
he
| and other members of the American military were routinely being
| ordered to do dishonorable things in Vietnam. That was an
experience
| that might well help him to not do that same thing to another
| generation of America's military if he were in charge.
John Kerry came back from a war to run for office. He received three
minor wounds that required nothing more than a band-aid. I have
friends that got their legs blown off - why weren't they touted as
heros? They don't try to further their agenda's on their service like
Kerry does, but they have more right to.
|
| To point out the leadership's wrong doing is not an insult or any
| disrespect toward the man or woman holding the rifle. It is an
| indication that he or she is respected as more than cannon fodder or
| an instrument of political whim. Making your opinion known when you
| think your elected representatives are wrong in what they are doing
| with the military is your responsibility as a citizen in a
democracy.
| John Kerry has shown that he was not afraid of that responsibility.
| We can argue about the correctness of his opinions, but his motives
| were clear and honorable.
Kerry willingly participated in these "atrocities" and claims that
qualifies him to be a military leader? If his atrocity claims are tru
he should be in prrison, not running for the Presidency.
|
| If I were in the military (and I once was), I would like to have a
| commander in chief who worried about whether or not what he was
| ordering me to do was honorable or not. George W. Bush seems not to
| be interested in this question, since he appears to avoid rational
| criticism of his decisions. As Paul O'neill quotes him on several
| occasions, "I'm not going to second guess myself." This is a sign
of
| a man who does not want to reflect on the possibility that he may be
| making mistakes.
Oh, I see. Freeing 24,000,000 Iraqis is not honorable? Decimating
al-Quaida is not honorable? Preventing terrorist attacks on the US is
not honorable? But calling your fellow soldiers baby rapists,
murderers and wanton killers is? You have a warped sense of honor!
|
| Why do you see honest criticism as a bad thing?
Criticism is goon. Slander is not.
But then again,
WHo Cares!
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
12 Apr 2004 12:29:16 PM |
|
|
"Who Cares!" <whocares@freetidet.org> wrote
John Kerry came back from a war to run for office.
Yet he didn't.
Amazing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
11 Apr 2004 01:16:20 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:58:46 -0400, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net>
wrote:
"Who Cares!" wrote:
He wasn't a soldier, he was a sailor. One that kept getting hit by
shrapnel. One that cam back early form VN and dissed the troops. If
that is your idea of a commander in cheif...
John Kerry was a warrior who came back from a war and reported that he
and other members of the American military were routinely being
ordered to do dishonorable things in Vietnam. That was an experience
that might well help him to not do that same thing to another
generation of America's military if he were in charge.
To point out the leadership's wrong doing is not an insult or any
disrespect toward the man or woman holding the rifle. It is an
indication that he or she is respected as more than cannon fodder or
an instrument of political whim. Making your opinion known when you
think your elected representatives are wrong in what they are doing
with the military is your responsibility as a citizen in a democracy.
John Kerry has shown that he was not afraid of that responsibility.
We can argue about the correctness of his opinions, but his motives
were clear and honorable.
If I were in the military (and I once was), I would like to have a
commander in chief who worried about whether or not what he was
ordering me to do was honorable or not. George W. Bush seems not to
be interested in this question, since he appears to avoid rational
criticism of his decisions. As Paul O'neill quotes him on several
occasions, "I'm not going to second guess myself." This is a sign of
a man who does not want to reflect on the possibility that he may be
making mistakes.
Why do you see honest criticism as a bad thing?
Apparently some republicans do. It makes them almost feel guilty.
Then they turn off their brains again and wave their genitals around
instead.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
11 Apr 2004 01:18:04 AM |
|
|
In article <4087e1c4.121808000@news-west.newscene.com>,
cobalt@newscene.com says...
Apparently some republicans do. It makes them almost feel guilty.
Then they turn off their brains again and wave their genitals around
instead.
Hee hee hee hee!
--
Ah, breaker one-nine, this here's the Rubber Duck.
You gotta copy on me, Pig Pen, c'mon? Ah, yeah,
10-4, Pig Pen, fer shure, fer shure. By golly,
it's clean clear to Flag Town, c'mon. Yeah,
that's a big 10-4 there, Pig Pen, yeah, we
definitely got the front door, good buddy.
Mercy sakes alive, looks like we got us a convoy...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
13 Apr 2004 04:16:14 PM |
|
|
On 11 Apr 2004 01:16:20 -0500, (Kate ), Message ID:
<4087e1c4.121808000@news-west.newscene.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:58:46 -0400, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net>
wrote:
"Who Cares!" wrote:
He wasn't a soldier, he was a sailor. One that kept getting hit by
shrapnel. One that cam back early form VN and dissed the troops. If
that is your idea of a commander in cheif...
John Kerry was a warrior who came back from a war and reported that he
and other members of the American military were routinely being
ordered to do dishonorable things in Vietnam. That was an experience
that might well help him to not do that same thing to another
generation of America's military if he were in charge.
To point out the leadership's wrong doing is not an insult or any
disrespect toward the man or woman holding the rifle. It is an
indication that he or she is respected as more than cannon fodder or
an instrument of political whim. Making your opinion known when you
think your elected representatives are wrong in what they are doing
with the military is your responsibility as a citizen in a democracy.
John Kerry has shown that he was not afraid of that responsibility.
We can argue about the correctness of his opinions, but his motives
were clear and honorable.
If I were in the military (and I once was), I would like to have a
commander in chief who worried about whether or not what he was
ordering me to do was honorable or not. George W. Bush seems not to
be interested in this question, since he appears to avoid rational
criticism of his decisions. As Paul O'neill quotes him on several
occasions, "I'm not going to second guess myself." This is a sign of
a man who does not want to reflect on the possibility that he may be
making mistakes.
Why do you see honest criticism as a bad thing?
Apparently some republicans do. It makes them almost feel guilty.
Then they turn off their brains again and wave their genitals around
instead.
They've got no genitals....all they wave around is their arsehole.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
11 Apr 2004 07:15:28 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 02:58:57 GMT, "Who Cares!"
<whocares@freetidet.org> wrote:
"Dixit" <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ZF1ec.7387$xn4.30493@attbi_s51...
|
|
| DP wrote:
|
| >>The army needs an experienced soldier.
| >
| >
| > Isn't he too old to go back into military service?
|
| Not as Commander In Chief. Smarten up!
He wasn't a soldier, he was a sailor. One that kept getting hit by
shrapnel. One that cam back early form VN and dissed the troops. If
that is your idea of a commander in cheif...
Seems to me better than a DESERTER in chief, which is what you got
right now.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jose soplar" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
21 Apr 2004 05:36:38 PM |
|
|
Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<ZF1ec.7387$xn4.30493@attbi_s51>...
DP wrote:
The army needs an experienced soldier.
Isn't he too old to go back into military service?
Not as Commander In Chief. Smarten up!
Who wants a war criminal in the Oval Office.
.
|
|
|
| User: "turk" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
21 Apr 2004 08:04:30 PM |
|
|
"jose soplar" <josesoplar@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9312d9f1.0404211436.3965396f@posting.google.com...
Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<ZF1ec.7387$xn4.30493@attbi_s51>...
DP wrote:
The army needs an experienced soldier.
Isn't he too old to go back into military service?
Not as Commander In Chief. Smarten up!
Who wants a war criminal in the Oval Office.
Republican spin-doctoring has officially gone off the deep end. War hero
now translates to war criminal in their pathetic little illusions. What a
strange, delusional world you must live in. How do you deal with the flying
monkies and oddly dressed little people?
turk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Neal Atkins" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
21 Apr 2004 08:46:35 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 01:04:30 GMT, "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net>
wrote:
Who wants a war criminal in the Oval Office.
Republican spin-doctoring has officially gone off the deep end. War hero
now translates to war criminal in their pathetic little illusions. What a
strange, delusional world you must live in. How do you deal with the flying
monkies and oddly dressed little people?
Awwwwwww, turkey, you should learn a little more about your political
heros before you supplicate yourself before them.
from:
http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html
....I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of the group
of 1,000 which is a small representation of a very much larger group
of veterans in this country, and were it possible for all of them to
sit at this table they would be here and have the same kind of
testimony....
I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that
several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over
150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans
testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated
incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full
awareness of officers at all levels of command....
They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off
ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human
genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies,
randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of
Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and
generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the
normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging
which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.
-----------------------------------------------
So WAR CRIMINAL Kerry admits shooting people, raping them, etc. And
this is what you WANT in the White House?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brooks Gregory" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 08:29:55 AM |
|
|
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mr. N" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 11:38:42 AM |
|
|
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
Cite, please.
--
-My Real Name
______________
Proud of America
Ashamed of Bush
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 01:43:25 PM |
|
|
"Mr. N" <seattledemocracy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10etik4j140shfb@news.supernews.com...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations
indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
Cite, please.
Are you crazy ? These guys never have any basis to their trolling posts...
LMAO You could take that comedy routine on the road..
Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.
--
-My Real Name
______________
Proud of America
Ashamed of Bush
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 02:26:01 PM |
|
|
In article <10etik4j140shfb@news.supernews.com>,
seattledemocracy@hotmail.com says...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
Cite, please.
Kerry 40%, Bush 54% among veterans.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/04/opinion/polls/main621136.shtml
That's 4 out of 10 for Kerry. Certainly more than 2%. He can't cite
anything because he's talking out his *****.
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
EAC Plant Psychologist
http://www.livejournal.com/users/atheist_enkidu/
"We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing
all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames
them for his own mistakes."
Gene Roddenberry
.
|
|
|
| User: "RFD Man" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 02:52:58 PM |
|
|
"Enkidu" <enkidu@leaddogs.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b58911df838e2539898e1@news.west.cox.net...
In article <10etik4j140shfb@news.supernews.com>,
seattledemocracy@hotmail.com says...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations
indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
Cite, please.
Kerry 40%, Bush 54% among veterans.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/04/opinion/polls/main621136.shtml
That's 4 out of 10 for Kerry. Certainly more than 2%. He can't cite
anything because he's talking out his *****.
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
They give you registration numbers at AA? Wow.
--
Self contained and self sustained.
RFD Man
Everyone should read this book:
Family Friendly Farming:
A Multi-Generational
Home-Based Business
Testament
Available on www.amazon.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
10 Jul 2004 05:01:20 AM |
|
|
RFD Man wrote:
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
They give you registration numbers at AA? Wow.
New here are you?
--
Jez
"The condition of alienation, of being asleep, of being unconscious,
of being out of one's mind, is the condition of the normal man. Society
highly values its normal man.It educates children to lose themselves
and to become absurd,and thus to be normal. Normal men have killed
perhaps 100,000,000 of their fellow normal men in the last fifty years."
R.D. Laing
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tim Bucktoo" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
10 Jul 2004 08:24:04 AM |
|
|
"Jez" <iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:40efbe4f$0$6451$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
RFD Man wrote:
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
They give you registration numbers at AA? Wow.
New here are you?
Yea, he must be. Everyone knows that only "Assholes Abounding" has
registration numbers.
--
I used to be an astronaught.
Now I'm just a naught.
Sgt Tim Bucktoo
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
10 Jul 2004 02:50:57 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 13:24:04 +0000, Tim Bucktoo wrote:
"Jez" <iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:40efbe4f$0$6451$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
RFD Man wrote:
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
They give you registration numbers at AA? Wow.
New here are you?
Yea, he must be. Everyone knows that only "Assholes Abounding" has
registration numbers.
So drools the uberasshole who doesn't need
(/cue Blazing Saddles) "a steenkeng number."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
11 Jul 2004 04:02:22 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 13:24:04 GMT, "Tim Bucktoo" <bucktoo@verizon.org>
wrote:
"Jez" <iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:40efbe4f$0$6451$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
RFD Man wrote:
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
They give you registration numbers at AA? Wow.
New here are you?
Yea, he must be. Everyone knows that only "Assholes Abounding" has
registration numbers.
And for the numerically impaired, you are hereby offered call signs.
Which would you prefer, "Up Yours" or "Go ***** Yourself"?
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -879 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 08:47:24 AM |
|
|
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
To be expected, if you understand the sampling.. Noticeably, you haven't
dated that polling.. Also you fail to mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the commander in
chief.. As the Bush policies and corrupt administration is exposed furthur
during this active campaign, that military polling is beginning to be more
unreliable for Bush.. Looks like he isn't able to depend on the military
vote, quite so much, these days...
Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Critic" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 11:55:15 AM |
|
|
"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:MlxHc.41602$qw1.20756@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations
indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
To be expected, if you understand the sampling.. Noticeably, you haven't
dated that polling.. Also you fail to mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the commander
in
chief..
This would explain Bill Clinton's wild popularity with servicemembers during
his reign.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brooks Gregory" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 12:04:11 PM |
|
|
"Critic" <critic@xxx.worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:T5AHc.221765$Gx4.91834@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:MlxHc.41602$qw1.20756@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations
indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
To be expected, if you understand the sampling.. Noticeably, you haven't
dated that polling.. Also you fail to mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the
commander
in
chief..
This would explain Bill Clinton's wild popularity with servicemembers
during
his reign.
I'll leave that fellow to think about what he posted: (((Also you fail to
mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the
commander
in
chief..)))
Maybe he can figure a way to reconcile that with the Subject. Which reminds
me. The op led me to believe he was a big time political operative along
with some jerk named Dusty. I invited them to the state convention. My booth
was very prominent but neither of them showed up. Must be phony political
types.
--
When I was in politics, we would never
dream of telling a lie in order to gain an
advantage over our opponent. Now,
just look at those lying rascals. <G>
Brooks Gregory
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 01:41:59 PM |
|
|
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:feAHc.19380671$Of.3214346@news.easynews.com...
"Critic" <critic@xxx.worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:T5AHc.221765$Gx4.91834@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:MlxHc.41602$qw1.20756@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations
indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
To be expected, if you understand the sampling.. Noticeably, you
haven't
dated that polling.. Also you fail to mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the
commander
in
chief..
This would explain Bill Clinton's wild popularity with servicemembers
during
his reign.
I'll leave that fellow to think about what he posted: (((Also you fail to
mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the
commander
in
chief..)))
Maybe he can figure a way to reconcile that with the Subject. Which
reminds
me. The op led me to believe he was a big time political operative along
with some jerk named Dusty. I invited them to the state convention. My
booth
was very prominent but neither of them showed up. Must be phony political
types.
Hmmm .. Brooks.. I thought I covered that convention like a blanket.. Don't
remember any booth that you might have manned.. Enlighten me and give me
some details... LOL..
Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.
--
When I was in politics, we would never
dream of telling a lie in order to gain an
advantage over our opponent. Now,
just look at those lying rascals. <G>
Brooks Gregory
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 01:39:22 PM |
|
|
"Critic" <critic@xxx.worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:T5AHc.221765$Gx4.91834@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:MlxHc.41602$qw1.20756@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations
indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
To be expected, if you understand the sampling.. Noticeably, you haven't
dated that polling.. Also you fail to mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the
commander
in
chief..
This would explain Bill Clinton's wild popularity with servicemembers
during
his reign.
What explanation you need, doughboy ?? You got a problem with what I posted
... spit it out..Or.. are you just taking up space on a newsgroup with a
trolling comment..
Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Critic" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 07:38:42 PM |
|
|
"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:uDBHc.1801$ju1.952@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
"Critic" <critic@xxx.worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:T5AHc.221765$Gx4.91834@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:MlxHc.41602$qw1.20756@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations
indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
To be expected, if you understand the sampling.. Noticeably, you
haven't
dated that polling.. Also you fail to mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the
commander
in
chief..
This would explain Bill Clinton's wild popularity with servicemembers
during
his reign.
What explanation you need, doughboy ?? You got a problem with what I
posted
.. spit it out..Or.. are you just taking up space on a newsgroup with a
trolling comment..
Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.
Just pointing out the folly of your statement.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops support Kerry |
09 Jul 2004 10:20:24 PM |
|
|
"Critic" <critic@xxx.worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:mUGHc.223707$Gx4.169207@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:uDBHc.1801$ju1.952@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
"Critic" <critic@xxx.worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:T5AHc.221765$Gx4.91834@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:MlxHc.41602$qw1.20756@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
"Brooks Gregory" <brooksgregory@sbctelco.com> wrote in message
news:n5xHc.343361$ef4.40654@news.easynews.com...
The last polling I've seen from some of the service organizations
indicate
the Kerry support to be less than 2%.
To be expected, if you understand the sampling.. Noticeably, you
haven't
dated that polling.. Also you fail to mention the fact that military
orientation is dedicated to unqualified duty and support of the
commander
in
chief..
This would explain Bill Clinton's wild popularity with servicemembers
during
his reign.
What explanation you need, doughboy ?? You got a problem with what I
posted
.. spit it out..Or.. are you just taking up space on a newsgroup with a
trolling comment..
Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.
Just pointing out the folly of your statement.
Nah.. you are trolling to make a statement.. ***** or get off the pot..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
