Which is a more powerful argument?

[Annika1980]

Kerry SAID this....
Bush DID this ....

[Michael McKelvy]

"Annika1980" > wrote in message
...
> Kerry SAID this....
> Bush DID this ....
>
>
>

It's not who said it, it only matters if it's the whole truth, something
both of them have problems with. Sometimes it's an exaggeration like
claiming Kerry voted to raise taxes, when in fact, some of those votes may
have been not to lower a particular tax. Or it may be an outright lie, like
Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will become
privatized.

You can get an idea of who's spinning who by using www.factcheck.org or
www.spinsanity.com, either way you'll not find much moral high ground for
whomever your candidate may be.

[jak163]

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
> wrote:

>Or it may be an outright lie, like
>Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will become
>privatized.

Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social Security.
What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?

[MINe 109]

In article >,
jak163 > wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
> > wrote:
>
> >Or it may be an outright lie, like
> >Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will become
> >privatized.
>
> Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social Security.
> What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?

Weasel words: Bush hasn't endorsed a *specific* privatization plan.

Stephen

[Michael McKelvy]

"jak163" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
> > wrote:
>
>>Or it may be an outright lie, like
>>Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will
>>become
>>privatized.
>
> Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social Security.
> What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?

Time to check you hearing and your brain and make sure they work together.

Many ideas have been researched and PARTIAL privatization of Social Security
has been discussed. That is a far cry from saying Bush is going to
privatize the whole ****ing thing.


It should also be noted that creating private Social Security accounts, as
Bush proposes, doesn't require substituting price-indexing for
wage-indexing. Price-indexing could also be used to hold down the future
cost of the current system as well. In either case, wage-indexing propels
the starting point of future benefits upward more rapidly, and costs more.

Also, the proposed price-indexing wouldn't affect annual cost-of-living
adjustments for retirees once they begin receiving benefits, only the level
at which benefits are set in the first year they are paid. After the first
year, benefits would continue to be increased yearly to maintain purchasing
power

So why not pull your head out of your ass and be honest for once.

Kerry Lied.

[Michael McKelvy]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> jak163 > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Or it may be an outright lie, like
>> >Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will
>> >become
>> >privatized.
>>
>> Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social Security.
>> What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?
>
> Weasel words: Bush hasn't endorsed a *specific* privatization plan.
>
> Stephen

There's also the fact that Bush has no power at all to do anything to Social
Security. That's the job of the Legislative branch.

[MINe 109]

In article et>,
"Michael McKelvy" > wrote:

> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > jak163 > wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >Or it may be an outright lie, like
> >> >Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will
> >> >become
> >> >privatized.
> >>
> >> Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social Security.
> >> What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?
> >
> > Weasel words: Bush hasn't endorsed a *specific* privatization plan.

> There's also the fact that Bush has no power at all to do anything to Social
> Security. That's the job of the Legislative branch.

So Bush lies when he proposes anything that requires an act of Congress?

Ob audio: I found a used copy of the Chesky test disc ($.98). From the
spoken text, I got the sense that Chesky assumes playback at louder than
real levels. Is this a common audiophile failing?

Stephen

[GeoSynch]

MINe 109 wrote:

> Ob audio: I found a used copy of the Chesky test disc ($.98). From the
> spoken text, I got the sense that Chesky assumes playback at louder than
> real levels. Is this a common audiophile failing?

Only if you're hard of hearing.


GeoSynch

[S888Wheel]

>From: MINe 109
>Date: 10/23/2004 7:11 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>In article et>,
> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote:
>
>> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >,
>> > jak163 > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Or it may be an outright lie, like
>> >> >Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will
>> >> >become
>> >> >privatized.
>> >>
>> >> Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social Security.
>> >> What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?
>> >
>> > Weasel words: Bush hasn't endorsed a *specific* privatization plan.
>
>> There's also the fact that Bush has no power at all to do anything to
>Social
>> Security. That's the job of the Legislative branch.
>
>So Bush lies when he proposes anything that requires an act of Congress?
>
>Ob audio: I found a used copy of the Chesky test disc ($.98). From the
>spoken text, I got the sense that Chesky assumes playback at louder than
>real levels. Is this a common audiophile failing?
>
I believe so.
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Michael McKelvy]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message
...
> In article et>,
> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote:
>
>> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >,
>> > jak163 > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Or it may be an outright lie, like
>> >> >Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will
>> >> >become
>> >> >privatized.
>> >>
>> >> Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social Security.
>> >> What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?
>> >
>> > Weasel words: Bush hasn't endorsed a *specific* privatization plan.
>
>> There's also the fact that Bush has no power at all to do anything to
>> Social
>> Security. That's the job of the Legislative branch.
>
> So Bush lies when he proposes anything that requires an act of Congress?
>

The most a President can do in most situations is propose legislation,
Congress must pass it.

There are Presedential Directives that can act like laws bu they can be
overturned when another President wishes it. Clinton's lfting of George
H.W. Bushes ban on fetal tissue research was one such.

IN the case of the Privatization of Social Security that Kerry spoke of he
said Bush was going to implement it come January. He has said no such
thing. The idea of partial privatization has been discussed, no legislation
has been proposed of any kind by Bush regarding this matter.



> Ob audio: I found a used copy of the Chesky test disc ($.98). From the
> spoken text, I got the sense that Chesky assumes playback at louder than
> real levels. Is this a common audiophile failing?
>
> Stephen

[MINe 109]

In article t>,
"Michael McKelvy" > wrote:

> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article et>,
> > "Michael McKelvy" > wrote:
> >
> >> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article >,
> >> > jak163 > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Or it may be an outright lie, like
> >> >> >Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security will
> >> >> >become
> >> >> >privatized.
> >> >>
> >> >> Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social Security.
> >> >> What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?
> >> >
> >> > Weasel words: Bush hasn't endorsed a *specific* privatization plan.
> >
> >> There's also the fact that Bush has no power at all to do anything to
> >> Social
> >> Security. That's the job of the Legislative branch.
> >
> > So Bush lies when he proposes anything that requires an act of Congress?
> >
>
> The most a President can do in most situations is propose legislation,
> Congress must pass it.
>
> There are Presedential Directives that can act like laws bu they can be
> overturned when another President wishes it. Clinton's lfting of George
> H.W. Bushes ban on fetal tissue research was one such.
>
> IN the case of the Privatization of Social Security that Kerry spoke of he
> said Bush was going to implement it come January. He has said no such
> thing. The idea of partial privatization has been discussed, no legislation
> has been proposed of any kind by Bush regarding this matter.

This discussion is sufficient to reveal Bush's intent to change the
Social Security system. The rest of it is a quibble.

> > Ob audio: I found a used copy of the Chesky test disc ($.98). From the
> > spoken text, I got the sense that Chesky assumes playback at louder than
> > real levels. Is this a common audiophile failing?

Except the drum kit.

[jeffc]

"Annika1980" > wrote in message
...
> Kerry SAID this....
> Bush DID this ....

Y'all are worse than the policiticians you criticize. Not a single person
has bothered to answer the actual question.

[Clyde Slick]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Annika1980" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Kerry SAID this....
>> Bush DID this ....
>
> Y'all are worse than the policiticians you criticize. Not a single person
> has bothered to answer the actual question.
>
>

Thanks for admitting that Kerry hasn't done
anything in 20 years as a Senator.

[Michael McKelvy]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message
...
> In article t>,
> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote:
>
>> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article et>,
>> > "Michael McKelvy" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > In article >,
>> >> > jak163 > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:54:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Or it may be an outright lie, like
>> >> >> >Kerry saying that there's a January surprise and Social Security
>> >> >> >will
>> >> >> >become
>> >> >> >privatized.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Bush has made very clear that he intends to privatize Social
>> >> >> Security.
>> >> >> What do you mean when you say that this is a lie?
>> >> >
>> >> > Weasel words: Bush hasn't endorsed a *specific* privatization plan.
>> >
>> >> There's also the fact that Bush has no power at all to do anything to
>> >> Social
>> >> Security. That's the job of the Legislative branch.
>> >
>> > So Bush lies when he proposes anything that requires an act of
>> > Congress?
>> >
>>
>> The most a President can do in most situations is propose legislation,
>> Congress must pass it.
>>
>> There are Presedential Directives that can act like laws bu they can be
>> overturned when another President wishes it. Clinton's lfting of George
>> H.W. Bushes ban on fetal tissue research was one such.
>>
>> IN the case of the Privatization of Social Security that Kerry spoke of
>> he
>> said Bush was going to implement it come January. He has said no such
>> thing. The idea of partial privatization has been discussed, no
>> legislation
>> has been proposed of any kind by Bush regarding this matter.
>
> This discussion is sufficient to reveal Bush's intent to change the
> Social Security system. The rest of it is a quibble.

Almost everybody with a brain wants to change it, before it dies.
The Kerry statement was a lie.
>
>> > Ob audio: I found a used copy of the Chesky test disc ($.98). From the
>> > spoken text, I got the sense that Chesky assumes playback at louder
>> > than
>> > real levels. Is this a common audiophile failing?
>
> Except the drum kit.

[Michael McKelvy]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Annika1980" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Kerry SAID this....
>> Bush DID this ....
>
> Y'all are worse than the policiticians you criticize. Not a single person
> has bothered to answer the actual question.
>
I answered it in the only way I could. I'm not concerned with who says
what, I'm concerned with who's telling the truth.

[jeffc]

"Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> "jeffc" > wrote in message
> m...
> >
> > "Annika1980" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Kerry SAID this....
> >> Bush DID this ....
> >
> > Y'all are worse than the policiticians you criticize. Not a single
person
> > has bothered to answer the actual question.
> >
> I answered it in the only way I could. I'm not concerned with who says
> what, I'm concerned with who's telling the truth.

And yet again, completely missing the point. Is it really any wonder
America is in the shape it's in?

[jeffc]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> "jeffc" > wrote in message
> m...
> >
> > "Annika1980" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Kerry SAID this....
> >> Bush DID this ....
> >
> > Y'all are worse than the policiticians you criticize. Not a single
person
> > has bothered to answer the actual question.
> >
> >
>
> Thanks for admitting that Kerry hasn't done
> anything in 20 years as a Senator.

You still don't understand what the question was. Please tell me you're not
old enough to vote.

[Clyde Slick]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>> m...
>> >
>> > "Annika1980" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> Kerry SAID this....
>> >> Bush DID this ....
>> >
>> > Y'all are worse than the policiticians you criticize. Not a single
> person
>> > has bothered to answer the actual question.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Thanks for admitting that Kerry hasn't done
>> anything in 20 years as a Senator.
>
> You still don't understand what the question was. Please tell me you're
> not
> old enough to vote.
>
>

I absolutely understand the question.
Ask a better question, and I will answer it.

[jeffc]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> >> Thanks for admitting that Kerry hasn't done
> >> anything in 20 years as a Senator.
> >
> > You still don't understand what the question was. Please tell me you're
> > not
> > old enough to vote.
> >
> I absolutely understand the question.
> Ask a better question, and I will answer it.

Well if you understood the question, why did you answer a different
question? To promote your agenda? Which gets back to what I originally
said - you're no better than the politicians.

[Clyde Slick]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for admitting that Kerry hasn't done
>> >> anything in 20 years as a Senator.
>> >
>> > You still don't understand what the question was. Please tell me
>> > you're
>> > not
>> > old enough to vote.
>> >
>> I absolutely understand the question.
>> Ask a better question, and I will answer it.
>
> Well if you understood the question, why did you answer a different
> question? To promote your agenda? Which gets back to what I originally
> said - you're no better than the politicians.
>

You are no better either, as evidenced by the question that you asked.
Ask a better question.

[jeffc]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> >
> > Well if you understood the question, why did you answer a different
> > question? To promote your agenda? Which gets back to what I originally
> > said - you're no better than the politicians.
> >
>
> You are no better either, as evidenced by the question that you asked.

I didn't ask anything - it was someone else. Try to pay attention.

[Michael McKelvy]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>>
>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>> m...
>> >
>> > "Annika1980" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> Kerry SAID this....
>> >> Bush DID this ....
>> >
>> > Y'all are worse than the policiticians you criticize. Not a single
> person
>> > has bothered to answer the actual question.
>> >
>> I answered it in the only way I could. I'm not concerned with who says
>> what, I'm concerned with who's telling the truth.
>
> And yet again, completely missing the point. Is it really any wonder
> America is in the shape it's in?
>
>
What shape is that? Economic recovery? A fairly even divide on who should
be president? The GOP in control of both houses of Congress?
Low inflation? Low unemployment? Record low interest rates?

[Clyde Slick]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> >
>> > Well if you understood the question, why did you answer a different
>> > question? To promote your agenda? Which gets back to what I
>> > originally
>> > said - you're no better than the politicians.
>> >
>>
>> You are no better either, as evidenced by the question that you asked.
>
> I didn't ask anything - it was someone else. Try to pay attention.
>
>

You asked me to answer it. Ask a better question, and I will answer it.

[jeffc]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> "jeffc" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Well if you understood the question, why did you answer a different
> >> > question? To promote your agenda? Which gets back to what I
> >> > originally
> >> > said - you're no better than the politicians.
> >> >
> >>
> >> You are no better either, as evidenced by the question that you asked.
> >
> > I didn't ask anything - it was someone else. Try to pay attention.
> >
> >
>
> You asked me to answer it. Ask a better question, and I will answer it.

No I didn't. Someone else asked a question. You answered a different
question. I told you you didn't answer the question. The reason you can't
figure this out is the same reason you can't figure out who to vote for, and
the American people will forever be stuck with ****ty presidents.

[jeffc]

"Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> >
> First time we had a 9/11. This attack did have a massive effect on jobs,
> particulary in the travel and related industries.

And it happened on Bush's watch, partly because of his practices and
policies. I find it hilarious that his administration claims responsibility
for the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9/11, while conveniently
forgetting that WE WERE ATTACKED ON 9/11.

>
> > Record low interest rates? Not even close, and higher than they were
> > when Bush entered office.
>
> But still very low. Again, nothing to do with any Presedential actions.

That's funny, since he takes credit for it.

[Clyde Slick]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Well if you understood the question, why did you answer a different
>> >> > question? To promote your agenda? Which gets back to what I
>> >> > originally
>> >> > said - you're no better than the politicians.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> You are no better either, as evidenced by the question that you asked.
>> >
>> > I didn't ask anything - it was someone else. Try to pay attention.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> You asked me to answer it. Ask a better question, and I will answer it.
>
> No I didn't. Someone else asked a question. You answered a different
> question. I told you you didn't answer the question. The reason you
> can't
> figure this out is the same reason you can't figure out who to vote for,
> and
> the American people will forever be stuck with ****ty presidents.
>
>

Right now, the problem is that I can't figure out what question you asked.
You keep telling me to answer the question, but won't tell me
what the question is.
What ****ing question????

I thought you asked something like

Kerry says....
Bush does...

which one?


So that is the stupid question I keep complaining about.
If it is not your question, than tell me waht 'is' your question.

[jeffc]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> Right now, the problem is that I can't figure out what question you asked.
> You keep telling me to answer the question, but won't tell me
> what the question is.
> What ****ing question????
>
> I thought you asked something like
>
> Kerry says....
> Bush does...

Someone else asked that question. I pointed out that everyone was evading
that question and answering the question they really wanted to answer, like
a true politician.

[Clyde Slick]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Right now, the problem is that I can't figure out what question you
>> asked.
>> You keep telling me to answer the question, but won't tell me
>> what the question is.
>> What ****ing question????
>>
>> I thought you asked something like
>>
>> Kerry says....
>> Bush does...
>
> Someone else asked that question. I pointed out that everyone was evading
> that question and answering the question they really wanted to answer,
> like
> a true politician.
>
At any rate, I don't answer stupid questions.

[Michael McKelvy]

"jeffc" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>> >
>> First time we had a 9/11. This attack did have a massive effect on jobs,
>> particulary in the travel and related industries.
>
> And it happened on Bush's watch, partly because of his practices and
> policies.

Nonsense.

I find it hilarious that his administration claims responsibility
> for the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9/11, while conveniently
> forgetting that WE WERE ATTACKED ON 9/11.
>

The US ability to gather intelligence was seroiously weakened by the
Democrats who got laws passed making it much more difficult. Bush inherited
this system. It took 9/11 to get the ball rolling so it could be fixed.
>>
>> > Record low interest rates? Not even close, and higher than they were
>> > when Bush entered office.
>>
>> But still very low. Again, nothing to do with any Presedential actions.
>
> That's funny, since he takes credit for it.
>
>
Because he hasn't proposed any legislation or tax increases that would ****
it up. All Presidents like to take credit for such things even though none
of them have any effect on it other than who they pick as Fed Chairman.

[jeffc]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
> >
> > Someone else asked that question. I pointed out that everyone was
evading
> > that question and answering the question they really wanted to answer,
> > like
> > a true politician.
> >
> At any rate, I don't answer stupid questions.

No, you just go on and on making stupid replies.

[jeffc]

"Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> I find it hilarious that his administration claims responsibility
> > for the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9/11, while
conveniently
> > forgetting that WE WERE ATTACKED ON 9/11.
> >
>
> The US ability to gather intelligence was seroiously weakened by the
> Democrats who got laws passed making it much more difficult. Bush
inherited
> this system. It took 9/11 to get the ball rolling so it could be fixed.

Riiiiiight. Everything good that happened was his doing. Everything bad
that happened was inherited from the Clinton administration. How absurd.

[jeffc]

"Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
link.net...
> Same as under Clinton, who actuall had more people voting for somebody
else
> than him. Remember Perot?

You're saying more people voted for Perot than Clinton? Yikes, dream on.

> A bunch of
> > people who have no freaking clue what to vote for?
>
> They seem to be fairly certain who they are voting for, it's just not a
> large majority the Reagan got elected.

Ignoring the fact that your statement makes no grammatical sense, I didn't
say WHO, I said WHAT. Your response is pretty typical of people in this
country who can't understand what's being said to them.