On 1 Jul 2004 08:25:28 -0700, wrote:

(Blind Joni) wrote in message ...
Bush is by far more decisive and a better leader.

Yeah, I watched him deciding while he was sitting in front
of that class knowing that NY was burning. I was awed by it.


That scene was total bull****!!! I wanna call Moore next time I hear about a
tragedy and find out how to react...stupidist scene in the film. Gee...I wonder
what he was thinking??...cutting edge all the way!!

John, I disagree. That scene was extremely disturbing because it
*appeared* as though Bush had no idea of what to do, without the
handlers to guide him.

For the 1st time in our history, international terrorists succeeded on
a grand scale. I bet anyone would have had to sit and ponder for a few
minutes.

Clinton would have probably gotten a blow job before he reacted.
Then he would lie before a grand jury and say it wasnt really
terrorists, it was terrorism foreplay.

Carter would have made a PB&J sandwich and consulted Evlis Presley as
to what to do.Elvis would have responded to put a banana in his
sandwich.

Kerry would **** his pants, and call for sanctions against depends
undergarments.

It is unlikely any reaction would have stopped what transpired on
Sep11.It is what actions are taken afterwards to bring justice that
will be looked at.

Randall

Randall Shawver writes:
Kerry would **** his pants, and call for sanctions against depends
undergarments.

Kerry would've taken charge. Just like he did when his crewman was drowning,
and his boat was under enemy fire in 'Nam. Only a pussy like bush would've
sat there like a moron.

On 1 Jul 2004 18:26:03 GMT, georgeh wrote:

Randall Shawver writes:
Kerry would **** his pants, and call for sanctions against depends
undergarments.

Kerry would've taken charge. Just like he did when his crewman was drowning,
and his boat was under enemy fire in 'Nam. Only a pussy like bush would've
sat there like a moron.

Just like Bush Senior did when he was shot down in combat?
If Bush is a pussy, then Clinton was a big fat hairy one.

Randall

In article ,
Randall Shawver wrote:

On 1 Jul 2004 18:26:03 GMT, georgeh wrote:

Randall Shawver writes:
Kerry would **** his pants, and call for sanctions against depends
undergarments.

Kerry would've taken charge. Just like he did when his crewman was drowning,
and his boat was under enemy fire in 'Nam. Only a pussy like bush would've
sat there like a moron.

Just like Bush Senior did when he was shot down in combat?
If Bush is a pussy, then Clinton was a big fat hairy one.

Randall

Thats what I like best here
the fine reserved adult conversations. never falling to 2nd grade type
debasments of the opponentor other point of view
George

Thats what I like best here
the fine reserved adult conversations. never falling to 2nd grade type
debasments of the opponentor other point of view
George

I figured I would join the club you started. I will reserve
intelligent conversation for the posters that demand it.

Randall

In article ,
Randall Shawver wrote:


Thats what I like best here
the fine reserved adult conversations. never falling to 2nd grade type
debasments of the opponentor other point of view
George

I figured I would join the club you started. I will reserve
intelligent conversation for the posters that demand it.

Randall

addmission denied, please reapply at a later date
G

wrote:

Meanwhile, as most of us now know, Mr. Cheney was immediately whisked
away to an underground bunker and didn't even show his mug for weeks.

This is the definitive part of the situation and by far the
most disturbing. It speaks volumes about what was really
elected (if that term applies at all.)


Bob
--

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

A. Einstein

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 16:40:11 -0400, Randall Shawver wrote
(in article ):

On 1 Jul 2004 18:26:03 GMT, georgeh wrote:

Randall Shawver writes:
Kerry would **** his pants, and call for sanctions against depends
undergarments.

Kerry would've taken charge. Just like he did when his crewman was
drowning,
and his boat was under enemy fire in 'Nam. Only a pussy like bush would've
sat there like a moron.

Just like Bush Senior did when he was shot down in combat?
If Bush is a pussy, then Clinton was a big fat hairy one.



Mostly this claim doesn't stand up because :Even if your daddy is a heroic,
that just makes you the "son of a hero" not actually "heroic"

And if you here the story from Bush's squadron, they say he was reckless, and
cowardly. He ditched a plane for no good reason.

And if you here the story from Bush's squadron, they say he was reckless, and
cowardly. He ditched a plane for no good reason.

I didnt know you were personal friends with his squadron.
I guess they told you this at thanksgiving dinner.

Randall

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 11:21:33 -0400, EggHd wrote
(in article ):

Subject: Fahrenheit 9/11
From: (EggHd)
Date: Monday 11:21 AM
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro

Bush at least has convictions and you know
what you get with Bush...

Do you mean like in the 2000 debates where he said the US should never be
involved in nation building? That conviction?

No the three Drunk Driving Convictions, and the possesion of cocaine one.

"nmm" wrote in message
...
Bush at least has convictions and you know
what you get with Bush...

Do you mean like in the 2000 debates where he said the US should never
be
involved in nation building? That conviction?

No the three Drunk Driving Convictions, and the possesion of cocaine one.


I've said this before but we voters bear some of the blame for this "squeaky
clean" candidate thing. THERE ARE NO SQUEAKY CLEAN PEOPLE (even among
Christians). So all we force to the front of the line for candidates is
those who have lived life under a rock (and therefore have no life
experience whatsoever) or those who have perfected the art of lying and
silencing their detractors (which of the two, the last one scares me most).

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 23:30:53 -0400, WillStG wrote
(in article ):

Secondly the oft repeated claim "Bush lied" is categorically false. But
you guys on the left don't care, no matter how much damage it does to the
Nation.



Bush LIed, WMD, Uranium from Niger ( in a state of the union address,no
less)

Clinton was trying to protect that girls's honor and be a gentleman. Monica
was obviously a Republican plant.. look at the media circuit she's done
since going public.

At least Neil Bush is honest when he said in court that he "regularly
visited prostitutes"

In article , (R Krizman) wrote:
Brendan Doyle
Who the hell cares if it was a blow job or an affair? That's just blowing
smoke, and you know it

Monica cares, and every woman whose image was trashed by the Clinton's
spinmeisters. You are a party to that with your attitude about it "just being
a blowjob". BRBR

If Monica's image was trashed it wasn't because she had an affair with Clinton.
It's because the affair was made public.

-R
I SEE, its only wrong if you get caught? WTF????

In article , (R Krizman) wrote:
Brendan Doyle
Who the hell cares if it was a blow job or an affair? That's just blowing
smoke, and you know it

Monica cares, and every woman whose image was trashed by the Clinton's
spinmeisters. You are a party to that with your attitude about it "just being
a blowjob". BRBR

If Monica's image was trashed it wasn't because she had an affair with Clinton.
It's because the affair was made public.

-R
I SEE, its only wrong if you get caught? WTF????

If Monica's image was trashed it wasn't because she had an affair with
Clinton.
It's because the affair was made public.

-R
I SEE, its only wrong if you get caught? WTF???? BRBR

We're not talking about right or wrong, we're talking about whether somebody's
image got trashed. People have affairs all the time and you can debate the
morality of that. But if somebody intentionally makes an affair public then
that person carries the burden of responsibility for any resulting damage to
the participants' reputation or image.

Clinton didn't trash Monica's image, it was the other way around.

-R

If Monica's image was trashed it wasn't because she had an affair with
Clinton.
It's because the affair was made public.

-R
I SEE, its only wrong if you get caught? WTF???? BRBR

We're not talking about right or wrong, we're talking about whether somebody's
image got trashed. People have affairs all the time and you can debate the
morality of that. But if somebody intentionally makes an affair public then
that person carries the burden of responsibility for any resulting damage to
the participants' reputation or image.

Clinton didn't trash Monica's image, it was the other way around.

-R

In article ,
(R Krizman) wrote:

[snip]

Clinton didn't trash Monica's image, it was the other way around.

-R

I'd say it was a mutual trashing. Both should have known better.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x-------- http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jay/ ----------x

In article ,
(R Krizman) wrote:

[snip]

Clinton didn't trash Monica's image, it was the other way around.

-R

I'd say it was a mutual trashing. Both should have known better.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x-------- http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jay/ ----------x

We're not talking about right or wrong, we're talking about whether
somebody's
image got trashed. People have affairs all the time and you can debate
the
morality of that.

Let's see, "Foresaking all others", nope no debate there...

But if somebody intentionally makes an affair public then
that person carries the burden of responsibility for any resulting damage
to
the participants' reputation or image.

Outing someone's behavior is the bad thing? How bout the behavior itself?


Clinton didn't trash Monica's image, it was the other way around.

Both of their behavior is responsible for trashing both of their images. It
takes two to tango, and they did way worse.

We're not talking about right or wrong, we're talking about whether
somebody's
image got trashed. People have affairs all the time and you can debate
the
morality of that.

Let's see, "Foresaking all others", nope no debate there...

But if somebody intentionally makes an affair public then
that person carries the burden of responsibility for any resulting damage
to
the participants' reputation or image.

Outing someone's behavior is the bad thing? How bout the behavior itself?


Clinton didn't trash Monica's image, it was the other way around.

Both of their behavior is responsible for trashing both of their images. It
takes two to tango, and they did way worse.