Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed and
otherwise murdered a million people. Real people Al. And had we stayed there
that would not have happened.

Ho Chi Min is "barbarously evil" because he sought one unified Vietnam
in the face of an overwhelming invading opponent? It was war, and a
lot of people got killed on both sides, but it was the average
Vietnamese that suffered the most... and they suffered because we
prosecuted an unjust and unsustainable war against them.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to his
dominion. This si why I say I doubt you give a whit about human suffering -
because this brutality was many many times worse than anything that happened
during the War. Your political blind faith and emotional allegiance has inured
you to the real human suffering and tragedy that occured. It's just words to
you.


You don't write from a point of view of history, Will. You write as a
person whose views are so rigid that he must fantastically distort
events to fit his own idealogy.

I "distorted" reality into the deaths of millions after we left Vietnam?
Well yes I did, in that I opposed the War and promoted our withdrawal and that
resulted in Genocide and mass murder.

Never again.

Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

Blind Joni wrote:

I get it. It just seems that governments have been doing this kind of
stuff forever..but we seem to be the ultimate evil to some.

Governments HAVE been doing this forever. The wierd thing is that it
surprises some people that the folks having it "done" to them don't usually
like it very much.


I think that this is
evidence of the belief held by many that humans have evolved into better
humans in the last few hundred, thousand, whatever... years..but the
evidence doesn't seem to show that.

Not better humans, but we HAVE become more efficient killers. We can now
kill thousands at a time without even getting our hands dirty. And the
American political machine, and PARTICULARLY the GOP, have gotten very good
at convincing a large percentage of Americans that we are sill ALWAYS the
good guys, in spite of the killing. But they seem surprised when the
people whose families & friends are getting killed don't realize that we're
the good guys. Go figure.

So what reality are we trying to deal
with? The isolated, intellectual, and "enlightened" rarely make policy.

Well, I'd argue that most of the policy makers are indeed isolated, or at
least insulated from the problems, ideas, & concerns of "Real"people. I
would classify Carl Rove as "Intellectual". But you're certainly right
about "Enlightened". In fact, the Enightened tend to be seen as enemies by
well entrenched govermnments. Consider the persecution metted out to Jesus
Christ, the Dalai Lama, & Nelson Mandella by the governments they
challenged.

Blind Joni wrote:

I get it. It just seems that governments have been doing this kind of
stuff forever..but we seem to be the ultimate evil to some.

Governments HAVE been doing this forever. The wierd thing is that it
surprises some people that the folks having it "done" to them don't usually
like it very much.


I think that this is
evidence of the belief held by many that humans have evolved into better
humans in the last few hundred, thousand, whatever... years..but the
evidence doesn't seem to show that.

Not better humans, but we HAVE become more efficient killers. We can now
kill thousands at a time without even getting our hands dirty. And the
American political machine, and PARTICULARLY the GOP, have gotten very good
at convincing a large percentage of Americans that we are sill ALWAYS the
good guys, in spite of the killing. But they seem surprised when the
people whose families & friends are getting killed don't realize that we're
the good guys. Go figure.

So what reality are we trying to deal
with? The isolated, intellectual, and "enlightened" rarely make policy.

Well, I'd argue that most of the policy makers are indeed isolated, or at
least insulated from the problems, ideas, & concerns of "Real"people. I
would classify Carl Rove as "Intellectual". But you're certainly right
about "Enlightened". In fact, the Enightened tend to be seen as enemies by
well entrenched govermnments. Consider the persecution metted out to Jesus
Christ, the Dalai Lama, & Nelson Mandella by the governments they
challenged.

Randall Shawver wrote:

I think a lot of people in other countries realize that Bush is not
that popular among Americans,


Speak for yourself. I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.

Most defininitely, but hardly all of them. OTOH, I don't
know a single person locally or on the net who has switched
_to_ the shrub. That makes it really difficult for me, at
least, to understand how he could be doing better in he
polls than he did in the last election. Somethin' ain't right.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Randall Shawver wrote:

I think a lot of people in other countries realize that Bush is not
that popular among Americans,


Speak for yourself. I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.

Most defininitely, but hardly all of them. OTOH, I don't
know a single person locally or on the net who has switched
_to_ the shrub. That makes it really difficult for me, at
least, to understand how he could be doing better in he
polls than he did in the last election. Somethin' ain't right.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

"WillStG" wrote in message
...

Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed
and
otherwise murdered a million people.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to
his
dominion.

Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.

Glenn D.

"WillStG" wrote in message
...

Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed
and
otherwise murdered a million people.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to
his
dominion.

Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.

Glenn D.

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
Speak for yourself. I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.


A lot of that has to do with geography.

That's strange! Why would geographic area determinine your vote.

Nationally broadcast exit polls from eastern locations tend to influence
voting in the western locations.

Glenn D.

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
Speak for yourself. I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.


A lot of that has to do with geography.

That's strange! Why would geographic area determinine your vote.

Nationally broadcast exit polls from eastern locations tend to influence
voting in the western locations.

Glenn D.

Bob Cain
, I don't
know a single person locally or on the net who has switched
_to_ the shrub. That makes it really difficult for me, at
least, to understand how he could be doing better in he
polls than he did in the last election. Somethin' ain't right.

It's called "living in a bubble" Bob. Where one only reads papers or
watches news on the side of the issues one agrees with, where one only has
freinds who agree with you on the issues, when you don't really interact with a
very diverse group of people.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

Bob Cain
, I don't
know a single person locally or on the net who has switched
_to_ the shrub. That makes it really difficult for me, at
least, to understand how he could be doing better in he
polls than he did in the last election. Somethin' ain't right.

It's called "living in a bubble" Bob. Where one only reads papers or
watches news on the side of the issues one agrees with, where one only has
freinds who agree with you on the issues, when you don't really interact with a
very diverse group of people.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

"Glenn Dowdy"
Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.

Thank you, I had forgotten. But the NLF certainly invoked his name in all
the crimes against humanity they committed.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

"Glenn Dowdy"
Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.

Thank you, I had forgotten. But the NLF certainly invoked his name in all
the crimes against humanity they committed.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

Blind Joni wrote:

Speak for yourself. I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.


A lot of that has to do with geography.

That's strange! Why would geographic area determinine your vote.


Ask your neighbors in Albany.

The water, maybe?

: )

Hey, I lived in the hick town of hick towns. NASCAR Dad Bubba Bush fan
heaven. I know.

And I lived in NYC.

Blind Joni wrote:

Speak for yourself. I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.


A lot of that has to do with geography.

That's strange! Why would geographic area determinine your vote.


Ask your neighbors in Albany.

The water, maybe?

: )

Hey, I lived in the hick town of hick towns. NASCAR Dad Bubba Bush fan
heaven. I know.

And I lived in NYC.

No, it's Bush and his supporters who act as if Bush has some kind of
mandate, when he definitely does not.

This is interesting. Would it be preferable to have a President who did what
others wanted him to do..or one with a vision..either one you agree with or
not?



But the Big Lie was that he would govern according to the huge split in
the country at the time. Uniter, not divider? Remember that?

The closest thing to "bi-partisanship" he did was try to recruit Breaux
(D) for his cabinet, which would have served to let him ram his
proposals through the Senate with more ease. I pay attention.

No, it's Bush and his supporters who act as if Bush has some kind of
mandate, when he definitely does not.

This is interesting. Would it be preferable to have a President who did what
others wanted him to do..or one with a vision..either one you agree with or
not?



But the Big Lie was that he would govern according to the huge split in
the country at the time. Uniter, not divider? Remember that?

The closest thing to "bi-partisanship" he did was try to recruit Breaux
(D) for his cabinet, which would have served to let him ram his
proposals through the Senate with more ease. I pay attention.

Blind Joni wrote:

I get it. It just seems that governments have been doing this kind of stuff
forever..but we seem to be the ultimate evil to some. I think that this is
evidence of the belief held by many that humans have evolved into better
humans in the last few hundred, thousand, whatever... years..but the evidence
doesn't seem to show that. So what reality are we trying to deal with? The
isolated, intellectual, and "enlightened" rarely make policy.


We are only made better when the oppressed are heard, and the ruling
class is embarrassed into cutting them some slack. - i.e. Trade Unions.

That's what ****es me off so much with Shrubby. He doesn't get the fact
that *he* works for *us*, not the other way around.

Left to our own devices, humans can be brutal.

Blind Joni wrote:

I get it. It just seems that governments have been doing this kind of stuff
forever..but we seem to be the ultimate evil to some. I think that this is
evidence of the belief held by many that humans have evolved into better
humans in the last few hundred, thousand, whatever... years..but the evidence
doesn't seem to show that. So what reality are we trying to deal with? The
isolated, intellectual, and "enlightened" rarely make policy.


We are only made better when the oppressed are heard, and the ruling
class is embarrassed into cutting them some slack. - i.e. Trade Unions.

That's what ****es me off so much with Shrubby. He doesn't get the fact
that *he* works for *us*, not the other way around.

Left to our own devices, humans can be brutal.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed
and
otherwise murdered a million people.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to
his
dominion.

Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.


Ooooooooooooooops! Typo!

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed
and
otherwise murdered a million people.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to
his
dominion.

Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.


Ooooooooooooooops! Typo!

Don Cooper
Ooooooooooooooops! Typo!

Proving your callousness that you would trivialize real human suffering,
only proving that you care not one whit for the millions who died horribly.
It's just a rhetorical game with no real consequences to you, and Asian blood
is worthless in your heart.

Genocide, summary executions, forced labor camps, starving people
intentionally and the deaths of as many as 500,000 Boat people on the high seas
do not merit your empathy, do they? Because you think Ho Chi Min, the
National Liberation Front, and the Viet Cong were more moral than Americans.

But you spell so well.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

Don Cooper
Ooooooooooooooops! Typo!

Proving your callousness that you would trivialize real human suffering,
only proving that you care not one whit for the millions who died horribly.
It's just a rhetorical game with no real consequences to you, and Asian blood
is worthless in your heart.

Genocide, summary executions, forced labor camps, starving people
intentionally and the deaths of as many as 500,000 Boat people on the high seas
do not merit your empathy, do they? Because you think Ho Chi Min, the
National Liberation Front, and the Viet Cong were more moral than Americans.

But you spell so well.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

Glenn Dowdy wrote:

"WillStG" wrote in message
...


Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed

and

otherwise murdered a million people.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to

his

dominion.


Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.

ROTFLMAO! :-) :-)


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Glenn Dowdy wrote:

"WillStG" wrote in message
...


Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed

and

otherwise murdered a million people.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to

his

dominion.


Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.

ROTFLMAO! :-) :-)


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Don Cooper
But the Big Lie was that he would govern according to the huge split in
the country at the time. Uniter, not divider? Remember that?

The closest thing to "bi-partisanship" he did was try to recruit Breaux
(D) for his cabinet, which would have served to let him ram his
proposals through the Senate with more ease. I pay attention.

Yet somehow you managed to miss the Education Bill co-sponsored by Ted
Kennedy and the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill that Clinton would have killed
to be able to get through the Congress. And the 15 Biilion dollars for aids in
Africa was a bi-partisan intiative, guess Dubya is kinda soft to humanitarian
appeals such as that Christian Socialist Bono was pitching.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

Don Cooper
But the Big Lie was that he would govern according to the huge split in
the country at the time. Uniter, not divider? Remember that?

The closest thing to "bi-partisanship" he did was try to recruit Breaux
(D) for his cabinet, which would have served to let him ram his
proposals through the Senate with more ease. I pay attention.

Yet somehow you managed to miss the Education Bill co-sponsored by Ted
Kennedy and the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill that Clinton would have killed
to be able to get through the Congress. And the 15 Biilion dollars for aids in
Africa was a bi-partisan intiative, guess Dubya is kinda soft to humanitarian
appeals such as that Christian Socialist Bono was pitching.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

On 22 Sep 2004 00:52:41 GMT, (Blind Joni) wrote:

I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.

I don't have to speak only for myself, since he did not win the
popular vote, it's ovbious that most Americans did not wish him to be
president.

Which doesn't matter as that is not what chooses the President..you already
know that

I'm not arguing legal points. I'm talking about a popular mandate,
which has nothing to do with the electoral college.

.
No, it's Bush and his supporters who act as if Bush has some kind of
mandate, when he definitely does not.

This is interesting. Would it be preferable to have a President who did what
others wanted him to do..or one with a vision..either one you agree with or
not?

The president should answer to the people. His "vision" should at
least have popular support or the people, ie. more than half. A
"mandate" implies a landslide election and great popular support.
Bush has had neither. Is not this still a government by, for, and of
the people? Apparently not.

On 22 Sep 2004 00:52:41 GMT, (Blind Joni) wrote:

I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.

I don't have to speak only for myself, since he did not win the
popular vote, it's ovbious that most Americans did not wish him to be
president.

Which doesn't matter as that is not what chooses the President..you already
know that

I'm not arguing legal points. I'm talking about a popular mandate,
which has nothing to do with the electoral college.

.
No, it's Bush and his supporters who act as if Bush has some kind of
mandate, when he definitely does not.

This is interesting. Would it be preferable to have a President who did what
others wanted him to do..or one with a vision..either one you agree with or
not?

The president should answer to the people. His "vision" should at
least have popular support or the people, ie. more than half. A
"mandate" implies a landslide election and great popular support.
Bush has had neither. Is not this still a government by, for, and of
the people? Apparently not.

On 22 Sep 2004 00:37:14 GMT, (Blind Joni) wrote:

As usual, not a real answer anywhere, or even a semi-thoughtful reply.

Al

No doubt you have a master plan to "purify" American culture?

I thought this was a useful quuestion. Answer?

I thought it was a stupid question. What did it have to do with the
context of my post? (which you removed)

On 22 Sep 2004 00:37:14 GMT, (Blind Joni) wrote:

As usual, not a real answer anywhere, or even a semi-thoughtful reply.

Al

No doubt you have a master plan to "purify" American culture?

I thought this was a useful quuestion. Answer?

I thought it was a stupid question. What did it have to do with the
context of my post? (which you removed)

On 22 Sep 2004 00:50:04 GMT, (Blind Joni) wrote:

Speak for yourself. I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.


A lot of that has to do with geography.

That's strange! Why would geographic area determinine your vote.

People in cities experience greater cultural diversity, especially on
the coasts. Urban areas also trend towards having a more educated
population than do rural areas. This is why California, New York, etc
tend to be more socially liberal. You know, the "blue" states.

On 22 Sep 2004 00:50:04 GMT, (Blind Joni) wrote:

Speak for yourself. I know a lot of americans that voted for Bush, and
still support him.


A lot of that has to do with geography.

That's strange! Why would geographic area determinine your vote.

People in cities experience greater cultural diversity, especially on
the coasts. Urban areas also trend towards having a more educated
population than do rural areas. This is why California, New York, etc
tend to be more socially liberal. You know, the "blue" states.

On 22 Sep 2004 01:01:13 GMT, (Blind Joni) wrote:

And my point is that they assign blame for any "experience" to whatever they
are told to believe..by governments that don't allow freedom of speech. I
wouldn't say a very objective perspective..though no fault of the citizens.

Look, take a place like Jamaica, (a small country with which I have
much experience). There isn't much government censorhip there.
Jamaicans who were aware *knew* what the US and the CIA was doing down
there in the 1970s and 1980s because they could see it with their own
eyes. They didn't need to read a newspaper or watch TV. Kingston
isn't that big of a town...

We're not talking about Jamaica..are we. We're talking about a big country with
poor communication.

What's your example?

ou don't seem to understand that our government has been interfering
with foreign *democracies* for decades. We mess with elected
governments (if they don't see things our way), about as often as suck
up to dictators, (if they control something we want). Are you aware
that the US meddled with a democratic election in Australia not that
long ago? Was behind the assasination of an elected president in Chile
in the 1970s? Overthrew a democratically elected leader in Iran to
install the Shah?


I get it. It just seems that governments have been doing this kind of stuff
forever..

No -- *our government* has been doing it a lot in the last 50s years.

but we seem to be the ultimate evil to some.

No one is using the "e" word but you. The US has been the greatest
power in the world since WWII and should also be the most responsible
about using that power. We wouldn't be hated as much if we hadn't
been trying so hard to manipulate the world for the last 55 years.

I think that this is
evidence of the belief held by many that humans have evolved into better
humans in the last few hundred, thousand, whatever... years..but the evidence
doesn't seem to show that. So what reality are we trying to deal with? The
isolated, intellectual, and "enlightened" rarely make policy.

What do you mean? The Neo-cons are isolated intellectuals who make
policy for GW Bush. As liberal intellectuals have helped form policy
in other administrations.

On 22 Sep 2004 01:01:13 GMT, (Blind Joni) wrote:

And my point is that they assign blame for any "experience" to whatever they
are told to believe..by governments that don't allow freedom of speech. I
wouldn't say a very objective perspective..though no fault of the citizens.

Look, take a place like Jamaica, (a small country with which I have
much experience). There isn't much government censorhip there.
Jamaicans who were aware *knew* what the US and the CIA was doing down
there in the 1970s and 1980s because they could see it with their own
eyes. They didn't need to read a newspaper or watch TV. Kingston
isn't that big of a town...

We're not talking about Jamaica..are we. We're talking about a big country with
poor communication.

What's your example?

ou don't seem to understand that our government has been interfering
with foreign *democracies* for decades. We mess with elected
governments (if they don't see things our way), about as often as suck
up to dictators, (if they control something we want). Are you aware
that the US meddled with a democratic election in Australia not that
long ago? Was behind the assasination of an elected president in Chile
in the 1970s? Overthrew a democratically elected leader in Iran to
install the Shah?


I get it. It just seems that governments have been doing this kind of stuff
forever..

No -- *our government* has been doing it a lot in the last 50s years.

but we seem to be the ultimate evil to some.

No one is using the "e" word but you. The US has been the greatest
power in the world since WWII and should also be the most responsible
about using that power. We wouldn't be hated as much if we hadn't
been trying so hard to manipulate the world for the last 55 years.

I think that this is
evidence of the belief held by many that humans have evolved into better
humans in the last few hundred, thousand, whatever... years..but the evidence
doesn't seem to show that. So what reality are we trying to deal with? The
isolated, intellectual, and "enlightened" rarely make policy.

What do you mean? The Neo-cons are isolated intellectuals who make
policy for GW Bush. As liberal intellectuals have helped form policy
in other administrations.

On 22 Sep 2004 02:19:42 GMT, ospam (WillStG) wrote:


Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed and
otherwise murdered a million people. Real people Al. And had we stayed there
that would not have happened.

You just don't get it, do you... if we have never gone there IT WOULD
NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. Vietnam was original a single, unified country.
It should have been left alone to work out it's own destiny, as long
as it was not an agressor. Here you are arguing against the most
basic concepts that America was founded upon, that of a nation's right
to self determination.


Ho Chi Min is "barbarously evil" because he sought one unified Vietnam
in the face of an overwhelming invading opponent? It was war, and a
lot of people got killed on both sides, but it was the average
Vietnamese that suffered the most... and they suffered because we
prosecuted an unjust and unsustainable war against them.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to his
dominion.

That is because WE CREATED his enemy: a South Vietnamese government
that would never have existed had we not been in the country in the
first place! You are an *amazing* bonehead.

Al

On 22 Sep 2004 02:19:42 GMT, ospam (WillStG) wrote:


Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed and
otherwise murdered a million people. Real people Al. And had we stayed there
that would not have happened.

You just don't get it, do you... if we have never gone there IT WOULD
NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. Vietnam was original a single, unified country.
It should have been left alone to work out it's own destiny, as long
as it was not an agressor. Here you are arguing against the most
basic concepts that America was founded upon, that of a nation's right
to self determination.


Ho Chi Min is "barbarously evil" because he sought one unified Vietnam
in the face of an overwhelming invading opponent? It was war, and a
lot of people got killed on both sides, but it was the average
Vietnamese that suffered the most... and they suffered because we
prosecuted an unjust and unsustainable war against them.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to his
dominion.

That is because WE CREATED his enemy: a South Vietnamese government
that would never have existed had we not been in the country in the
first place! You are an *amazing* bonehead.

Al

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:10:09 -0700, Bob Cain
wrote:



Glenn Dowdy wrote:

"WillStG" wrote in message
...


Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed

and

otherwise murdered a million people.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to

his

dominion.


Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.

ROTFLMAO! :-) :-)

Ignorance is truly bliss...

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:10:09 -0700, Bob Cain
wrote:



Glenn Dowdy wrote:

"WillStG" wrote in message
...


Why is it bull****? The French started it, but it was the USA that
really ****ed Vietnam up.

Because when he got power Ho Chi Min tortured, starved, and executed

and

otherwise murdered a million people.

Ho commited his sadistic acts AFTER the War, AFTER we left people to

his

dominion.


Will, Ho Chi Minh died in 1969.

ROTFLMAO! :-) :-)

Ignorance is truly bliss...

playon wrote:

The president should answer to the people. His "vision" should at
least have popular support or the people, ie. more than half. A
"mandate" implies a landslide election and great popular support.


Exactly. This is how Reagan was able to bring us back to the '50's,
laughing his ass off the whole time.