[Jenn]

"Joy". Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent this kind of
thing from happening. eg

[Jenn]

In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

...
"Joy". Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent this kind of
thing from happening. eg

Is this your contribution? Not particularly interesting as
spam goes.

ScottW

Yes, Scott, this is my contribution. And the above is your
"interesting" response. Thanks for it.

[Jenn]

In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

...
In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
.
com
...
"Joy". Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent this kind of
thing from happening. eg

Is this your contribution? Not particularly interesting as
spam goes.

ScottW

Yes, Scott, this is my contribution. And the above is your
"interesting" response. Thanks for it.

Your welcome. In the future I look forward to a better effort
from you.
Something that might be worth discussing rather than just
complaining there is nothing of interest for you today.

ScottW

That isn't what I was doing. The group (as well as others I read) was
hit was dozens of spam posts.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 16, 12:45*am, Jenn wrote:
In article ,





*"ScottW" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message

...
In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
.
com
...
"Joy". *Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent this kind of
thing from happening. *eg

Is this your contribution? *Not particularly interesting as
spam goes.

Yes, Scott, this is my contribution. *And the above is your
"interesting" response. *Thanks for it.

Your welcome. *In the future I look forward to a better effort
from you.
Something that might be worth discussing rather than just
complaining there is nothing of interest for you today.

That isn't what I was doing. *The group (as well as others I read) was
hit was dozens of spam posts.

Oh, so this is what 2pid was prattling about. I didn't see the spam
attack. That probably also explains why I couldn't see whatever photo
2pid posted earlier. It was auto-filtered as spam. :-)

I can see he hasn't looked up the word "hypocrite" yet either.

LOL!

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Soundhaspriority" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

...
"Joy". Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent this kind of
thing from happening. eg

Jenn, I'm not a believer, though I am attracted to the Quaker notion of an
"inner light." I have a strong innate sense of how I feel people should
behave. A lot of it, but not all, coincides with the better parts of
Christian theology. I think most people need some vision of the divine,
true or not, to help them behave in a moral way. They feel a vacuum without
a feeling of responsibility to a superior authority.

I am a believer. In fact, since you mention it, I attend a Quaker
(Friends) meeting. What set me off about Huckabee is his statement
today:

"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution,*but I
believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to
change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to
amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to
change God's standards."

To me, that's a bit startling. Others disagree, of course.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 16, 2:08*am, Jenn wrote:
In article ,

*"Soundhaspriority" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message

...
"Joy". *Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent this kind of
thing from happening. *eg

Jenn, I'm not a believer, though I am attracted to the Quaker notion of an
"inner light." I have a strong innate sense of how I feel people should
behave. A lot of it, but not all, coincides with the better parts of
Christian theology. *I think most people need some vision of the divine,
true or not, to help them behave in a moral way. They feel a vacuum without
a feeling of responsibility to a superior authority.

I am a believer. *In fact, since you mention it, I attend a Quaker
(Friends) meeting. *What set me off about Huckabee is his statement
today:

"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution,*but I
believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to
change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to
amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to
change God's standards."

To me, that's a bit startling. *Others disagree, of course.

Others see that as completely different from Islamists who want to
make Sharia the law of the land.

I don't.

[George M. Middius]

Shhhh! said:

"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution,*but I
believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to
change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to
amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to
change God's standards."

To me, that's a bit startling. *Others disagree, of course.

Others see that as completely different from Islamists who want to
make Sharia the law of the land.

For the past 7 years, we've been saddled with our nation's first Prez who
doesn't know the difference between the laws of "God" and the laws of man.
In fact, Bush is the only Prez who is too drug-addled to understand the
concept of separating church from state.

I don't.

That makes you a prime candidate for "re-education". Pack your bags,
unbeliever!

[Jenn]

In article
,
ScottW wrote:

On Jan 15, 10:45*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,





*"ScottW" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message
.
net
...
In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

gy.
com
...
"Joy". *Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent this kind
of
thing from happening. *eg

Is this your contribution? *Not particularly interesting as
spam goes.

ScottW

Yes, Scott, this is my contribution. *And the above is your
"interesting" response. *Thanks for it.

Your welcome. *In the future I look forward to a better effort
from you.
Something that might be worth discussing rather than just
complaining there is nothing of interest for you today.

ScottW

That isn't what I was doing. *The group (as well as others I read) was
hit was dozens of spam posts.

Not on google or cox.

Well, bully.

Again, anything more interesting on your
mind today?

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges with
Shhhh.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 16, 12:11*pm, Jenn wrote:

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges with
Shhhh.

How's that for gratitude?

We're busy 'saving' RAO.

[Jenn]

In article
,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Jan 16, 12:11*pm, Jenn wrote:

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges with
Shhhh.

How's that for gratitude?

We're busy 'saving' RAO.

lol I don't mind your exchanges with Scott, I just don't find them to
be terribly interesting, just as I'm sure others don't find my
conversations with Arny to be very interesting. Nor do I mind Scott's
off-topic posts. I just find it "interesting" that he feels the need to
be critical of a small comment of mine like the one I made last night
when he's the King of off-topic content.

[Jenn]

In article
,
ScottW wrote:

On Jan 16, 10:11*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,





*ScottW wrote:
On Jan 15, 10:45*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,

*"ScottW" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message

igy.
net
...
In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

rodi
gy.
com
...
"Joy". *Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent this
kind
of
thing from happening. *eg

Is this your contribution? *Not particularly interesting as
spam goes.

ScottW

Yes, Scott, this is my contribution. *And the above is your
"interesting" response. *Thanks for it.

Your welcome. *In the future I look forward to a better effort
from you.
Something that might be worth discussing rather than just
complaining there is nothing of interest for you today.

ScottW

That isn't what I was doing. *The group (as well as others I read) was
hit was dozens of spam posts.

*Not on google or cox.

Well, bully.

* Again, anything more interesting on your
mind today?

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges with
Shhhh.

I won't argue with that. Still nothing worth sharing apparently.

ScottW

Nothing that would be of interest to anyone here; just a much
anticipated trip to the NAMM show Friday and Saturday.

[Jenn]

In article
,
ScottW wrote:

On Jan 16, 10:55*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Jan 16, 12:11*pm, Jenn wrote:

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges with
Shhhh.

How's that for gratitude?

We're busy 'saving' RAO.

lol *I don't mind your exchanges with Scott, I just don't find them to
be terribly interesting, just as I'm sure others don't find my
conversations with Arny to be very interesting. *Nor do I mind Scott's
off-topic posts. *I just find it "interesting" that he feels the need

Now now...that is so Arny like to put needs where there aren't.

Your needs are shown by your predictable behavior.


Your sensitivity to even minor criticism is quite high.
Why is that?

No, it's not. I gladly accept criticism every day. I perform publicly
a great deal. Criticism comes with the territory and listening to it
with a good spirit is one way one improves. What is find interesting is
when someone goes out of their way to be critical of another, of even
trivial things.

Your post reminds me of the occasional corp e-mail outbursts of
people who want to remind everyone....to not reply all to
corp. wide e-mails. Sometimes they have multiple echoes.

ScottW

[Jenn]

In article
,
ScottW wrote:

On Jan 16, 11:13*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,





*ScottW wrote:
On Jan 16, 10:11*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,

*ScottW wrote:
On Jan 15, 10:45*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,

*"ScottW" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message
.
prod
igy.
net
...
In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

ws.p
rodi
gy.
com
...
"Joy". *Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will prevent
this
kind
of
thing from happening. *eg

Is this your contribution? *Not particularly interesting as
spam goes.

ScottW

Yes, Scott, this is my contribution. *And the above is your
"interesting" response. *Thanks for it.

Your welcome. *In the future I look forward to a better effort
from you.
Something that might be worth discussing rather than just
complaining there is nothing of interest for you today.

ScottW

That isn't what I was doing. *The group (as well as others I read)
was
hit was dozens of spam posts.

*Not on google or cox.

Well, bully.

* Again, anything more interesting on your
mind today?

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges
with
Shhhh.

*I won't argue with that. * Still nothing worth sharing apparently.

ScottW

Nothing that would be of interest to anyone here; just a much
anticipated trip to the NAMM show Friday and Saturday.


What NAMM member company are you affiliated with?

ScottW

Martin Guitars, B-Band pickups, Hal Leonard publishing.

[[email protected]]

On Jan 16, 11:25*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,





*ScottW wrote:
On Jan 16, 10:55*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Jan 16, 12:11*pm, Jenn wrote:

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges with
Shhhh.

How's that for gratitude?

We're busy 'saving' RAO.

lol *I don't mind your exchanges with Scott, I just don't find them to
be terribly interesting, just as I'm sure others don't find my
conversations with Arny to be very interesting. *Nor do I mind Scott's
off-topic posts. *I just find it "interesting" that he feels the need

Now now...that is so Arny like to put needs where there aren't.

Your needs are shown by your predictable behavior.



Your sensitivity to even minor criticism is quite high.
Why is that?

No, it's not. *I gladly accept criticism every day. *I perform publicly
a great deal. *Criticism comes with the territory and listening to it
with a good spirit is one way one improves. *What is find interesting is
when someone goes out of their way to be critical of another, of even
trivial things.





Your post reminds me of the occasional corp e-mail outbursts of
people who want to remind everyone....to not reply all to
corp. wide e-mails. * Sometimes they have multiple echoes.

ScottW- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

May I suggest in all kindness that you do not continue one of these
pointless RAO exchanges with the RAO frequent users? I'm saying this
out of respect for your calling. You deserve better.
Ludovic Mirabel

[George M. Middius]

Ludo said:

May I suggest in all kindness that you do not continue one of these
pointless RAO exchanges with the RAO frequent users? I'm saying this
out of respect for your calling. You deserve better.

Time was, Jenn tried to persuade me that dumping scorn on the Krooborg was
deleterious to the health of the group. I think she gave that up. You,
too, can become a Usenet fatalist with very little effort. :-)

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 16, 1:10*pm, ScottW wrote:

*I won't argue with that. * Still nothing worth sharing apparently.

I found Jenn's Huckabee quote very interesting.

Didn't you?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 16, 2:25*pm, ScottW wrote:

What is your contribution to the group Ludo?
Anything?

2pid tries to deflect attention from himself...again.

2pid, if you mean to ask, "Ludo, why don't you spend 6-8 hours per day
perusing blogs like I do and posting cut-and-paste articles here with
no actual content or opinion like I do?" it may be because he doesn't
want to.

If you mean to ask, "Ludo, why don't you match my extremely high level
of audio-related posts here?" it's because he already does. So do I.
So does Bratzi, for that matter.

If you mean to ask, "Ludo, why don't you set yourself up as the
arbitor of other people's posting behavior like I do?" it may be
because, unlike you, Ludo has some self-awareness.

Of course "contibution" is a word, so I'm not quite sure how you're
misusing it in this context.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 16, 2:38*pm, ScottW wrote:

Shhhhh said, " Hi tonsil...My name is foot. * We've met before."

While 2pid said, "Hi Rover! That's your tongue... This is my ass.
You've met before."

There's a slight difference, 2pid. I respond to what you and others
choose to post. You whine about people for what they choose *not* to
post. The other funny thing is that you actually 'think' you're
'contributing'. Guess what? We are both 'contributors'. You and I,
exactly the same in that regard. Exactly. Funny, huh?

Nobody would argue that you do not have a right to prove your low
intelligence by posting whatever you wish, as often as you wish.
Wailing about how most people choose not to 'contribute' like you and
I do is hilarious.

So you didn't tell me: in this context how were you misusing the word
"contribution"?

[Jenn]

In article
,
ScottW wrote:

On Jan 16, 12:04*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,





*ScottW wrote:
On Jan 16, 11:13*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,

*ScottW wrote:
On Jan 16, 10:11*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,

*ScottW wrote:
On Jan 15, 10:45*pm, Jenn
wrote:
In article ,

*"ScottW" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message

ews.
prod
igy.
net
...
In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message
news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS-F07213.17092915012008@newsclstr0
2.ne
ws.p
rodi
gy.
com
...
"Joy". *Perhaps if Huckabee gets his way, God will
prevent
this
kind
of
thing from happening. *eg

Is this your contribution? *Not particularly interesting
as
spam goes.

ScottW

Yes, Scott, this is my contribution. *And the above is your
"interesting" response. *Thanks for it.

Your welcome. *In the future I look forward to a better
effort
from you.
Something that might be worth discussing rather than just
complaining there is nothing of interest for you today.

ScottW

That isn't what I was doing. *The group (as well as others I
read)
was
hit was dozens of spam posts.

*Not on google or cox.

Well, bully.

* Again, anything more interesting on your
mind today?

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges
with
Shhhh.

*I won't argue with that. * Still nothing worth sharing apparently.

ScottW

Nothing that would be of interest to anyone here; just a much
anticipated trip to the NAMM show Friday and Saturday.

What NAMM member company are you affiliated with?

ScottW

Martin Guitars, B-Band pickups, Hal Leonard publishing.

I've got a bunch of Hal Leonard guitar lesson stuff.....
didn't work.

ScottW

For it to work, YOU must work ;-)

I don't do any HL guitar work. I do things in the classical division,
editing, proofreading, etc.

[Jenn]

In article
,
" wrote:

On Jan 16, 11:25*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,





*ScottW wrote:
On Jan 16, 10:55*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Jan 16, 12:11*pm, Jenn wrote:

Everything on my mind today is more interesting than your exchanges
with
Shhhh.

How's that for gratitude?

We're busy 'saving' RAO.

lol *I don't mind your exchanges with Scott, I just don't find them to
be terribly interesting, just as I'm sure others don't find my
conversations with Arny to be very interesting. *Nor do I mind Scott's
off-topic posts. *I just find it "interesting" that he feels the need

Now now...that is so Arny like to put needs where there aren't.

Your needs are shown by your predictable behavior.



Your sensitivity to even minor criticism is quite high.
Why is that?

No, it's not. *I gladly accept criticism every day. *I perform publicly
a great deal. *Criticism comes with the territory and listening to it
with a good spirit is one way one improves. *What is find interesting is
when someone goes out of their way to be critical of another, of even
trivial things.





Your post reminds me of the occasional corp e-mail outbursts of
people who want to remind everyone....to not reply all to
corp. wide e-mails. * Sometimes they have multiple echoes.

ScottW- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

May I suggest in all kindness that you do not continue one of these
pointless RAO exchanges with the RAO frequent users? I'm saying this
out of respect for your calling. You deserve better.
Ludovic Mirabel

Thanks for the kind thoughts. I just find the behavior interesting.

[Jenn]

In article ,
George M. Middius cmndr _ george @ comcast . net wrote:

Ludo said:

May I suggest in all kindness that you do not continue one of these
pointless RAO exchanges with the RAO frequent users? I'm saying this
out of respect for your calling. You deserve better.

Time was, Jenn tried to persuade me that dumping scorn on the Krooborg was
deleterious to the health of the group. I think she gave that up.

I gave up trying. I still have optimism that if everyone stopped
dumping on him, he would return the favor, but I could be wrong, of
course. Defending oneself is another matter, note.

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

Time was, Jenn tried to persuade me that dumping scorn on the Krooborg was
deleterious to the health of the group. I think she gave that up.

I gave up trying. I still have optimism that if everyone stopped
dumping on him, he would return the favor, but I could be wrong, of
course. Defending oneself is another matter, note.

It's different in moral value, but equivalent in efficacy. :-)

[John Atkinson[_2_]]

On Jan 16, 3:26 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
I found Jenn's Huckabee quote very interesting.

I found it odd that someone running for president, who, if
elected, will swear an oath to defend and uphold the
Constitution, is talking about changing it. Guess
he feels he had to throw his core constituency some
red meat.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
"Not deaf "-- the Wall Street Journal

[Harry Lavo]

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
...
On Jan 16, 3:26 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
I found Jenn's Huckabee quote very interesting.

I found it odd that someone running for president, who, if
elected, will swear an oath to defend and uphold the
Constitution, is talking about changing it. Guess
he feels he had to throw his core constituency some
red meat.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
"Not deaf "-- the Wall Street Journal

He obviously feels that a constitutional change would be in order, and that
would make it okay.
Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

[Clyde Slick]

On 16 Ian, 21:32, "Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

[Eeyore]

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

Or Huckabee ?

Graham

[Clyde Slick]

On 16 Ian, 23:43, Eeyore
wrote:
Clyde Slick wrote:
*"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

Or Huckabee ?


I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

Isn't that Ron Paul, aka the anti-Gay crusader?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 17, 5:42*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On 16 Ian, 23:43, Eeyore
wrote:

Clyde Slick wrote:
*"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

Or Huckabee ?

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

The attitude of someone who wants to replace the law of the land with
"god's law" is identical, regardless of which religion it is. That's a
point that neither you or your dog-loving buddy understand. Both are
very dangerous.

Which do you find more likely in the short-term to "take over" in the
US? In combat, military officers are preparing to meet the challenges
expected in the the next 24-48 hours while keeping an eye on what to
expect in 48-72+ hours. In your learned opinion, have the
Islamofacists become so all-powerful that they are the immediate
threat? Or are there other, more immediate, threats?

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Ian, 10:12, George M. Middius cmndr _ george @ comcast . net
wrote:
Clyde Slick said:

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

Isn't that Ron Paul, aka the anti-Gay crusader?

Huckabee want s to eliminate all income taxes and replace them with a
natioanl consumer tax.
No need for the IRS if that happens.
It's a good idea, if made a little bit progressive.
exclude food and clothing, and give a refund of $1,000 for each adult.

I have nothing against taxes in gnereal, just the way we collect them
now.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Ian, 12:01, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jan 17, 5:42*am, Clyde Slick wrote:

On 16 Ian, 23:43, Eeyore
wrote:

Clyde Slick wrote:
*"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

Or Huckabee ?

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

The attitude of someone who wants to replace the law of the land with
"god's law" is identical, regardless of which religion it is. That's a
point that neither you or your dog-loving buddy understand. Both are
very dangerous.


I agree, bit the Islamofascists are waaaay ahead on that concept.


Which do you find more likely in the short-term to "take over" in the
US? In combat, military officers are preparing to meet the challenges
expected in the the next 24-48 hours while keeping an eye on what to
expect in 48-72+ hours. In your learned opinion, have the
Islamofacists become so all-powerful that they are the immediate
threat?

LOL!!! not in 24 hours, but they are a more immediate danger.

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

Isn't that Ron Paul, aka the anti-Gay crusader?

Huckabee want s to eliminate all income taxes and replace them with a
natioanl consumer tax.

Bravo! I'd like to hear him say that and, of course, distance himself from
the Bible thumpers.

I have nothing against taxes in gnereal, just the way we collect them
now.

I have a problem with the way the ****uplicans spend the tax money.

[Eeyore]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

Clyde Slick wrote:
Eeyore wrote
Clyde Slick wrote:
"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

Or Huckabee ?

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

The attitude of someone who wants to replace the law of the land with
"god's law" is identical, regardless of which religion it is.

Indeed. As far as Muslims are concerned Sharia Law IS God's Law.

Graham

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 17, 12:56*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On 17 Ian, 12:01, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Jan 17, 5:42*am, Clyde Slick wrote:

On 16 Ian, 23:43, Eeyore
wrote:

Clyde Slick wrote:
*"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

Or Huckabee ?

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

The attitude of someone who wants to replace the law of the land with
"god's law" is identical, regardless of which religion it is. That's a
point that neither you or your dog-loving buddy understand. Both are
very dangerous.

I agree, bit the Islamofascists are waaaay ahead on that concept.

Which do you find more likely in the short-term to "take over" in the
US? In combat, military officers are preparing to meet the challenges
expected in the the next 24-48 hours while keeping an eye on what to
expect in 48-72+ hours. In your learned opinion, have the
Islamofacists become so all-powerful that they are the immediate
threat?

LOL!!! not in 24 hours, but they are a more immediate danger.

The point was that you array your forces to meet the immediate danger,
while keeping an eye on and preparing for the "over the hill" danger.
In combat, it's the next 24 hours you are concerned with. "Over the
hill" is 48+ hours.

We disagree on the imminent danger. I do not think the Islamofacists
are the immediate danger in the US. I think they fall under the "over
the hill" danger. I think the folks like Huckabee are a much more
immediate threat to our society.

BTW, a few terrorist attacks, while indeed frightful, will not topple
the US. As I've said many times, if someone wants to hit us, they
likely will. No defense is 100% effective, "at least" while
maintaining individual freedom.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 17, 1:56*pm, Eeyore
wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:





Clyde Slick wrote:
Eeyore wrote
Clyde Slick wrote:
*"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

Or Huckabee ?

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

The attitude of someone who wants to replace the law of the land with
"god's law" is identical, regardless of which religion it is.

Indeed. As far as Muslims are concerned Sharia Law IS God's Law.

And as far as folks like Huckabee are concerned, god's law can be
found in the bible (more specifically in the old testament it seems).
There is no difference between someone like Huckabee and an
Islamofacist in that regard.

[dizzy]

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

And as far as folks like Huckabee are concerned, god's law can be
found in the bible (more specifically in the old testament it seems).
There is no difference between someone like Huckabee and an
Islamofacist in that regard.

These radicals religious aholes are the scourge of the Earth.

[Soundhaspriority]

"John Atkinson" wrote...

On Jan 16, 3:26 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
I found Jenn's Huckabee quote very interesting.

I found it odd that someone running for president, who, if
elected, will swear an oath to defend and uphold the
Constitution, is talking about changing it.

There is a process for changing the constitution set out in the
constitution.

Don't be a dolt. Oh, I forgot, yer a jernelist.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Ian, 20:22, George M. Middius cmndr _ george @ comcast . net
wrote:
Clyde Slick said:

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS
Isn't that Ron Paul, aka the anti-Gay crusader?
Huckabee want s to eliminate all income taxes and replace them with a
natioanl consumer tax.

Bravo! I'd like to hear him say that and, of course, distance himself from
the Bible thumpers.

I have nothing against taxes in gnereal, just the way we collect them
now.

I have a problem with the way the ****uplicans spend the tax money.

Either way, Dem or Rep, its great for business in and around D.C.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Ian, 21:25, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:

We disagree on the imminent danger. I do not think the Islamofacists
are the immediate danger in the US. I think they fall under the "over
the hill" danger. I think the folks like Huckabee are a much more
immediate threat to our society.

BTW, a few terrorist attacks, while indeed frightful, will not topple
the US. As I've said many times, if someone wants to hit us, they
likely will. No defense is 100% effective, "at least" while
maintaining individual freedom.-

I don't think Huckabee is about to topple the US.
But, religious agendais only part of the reason I
don't support him. Who wants a President whose anme
sounds like Huckleberry Hound and looks too much like Gomer Pyle?

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Ian, 21:27, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jan 17, 1:56*pm, Eeyore
wrote:





"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

Clyde Slick wrote:
Eeyore wrote
Clyde Slick wrote:
*"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Remember Sinclair Lewis "when facism comes to America, it will come in the
guise of religion".

was he thinking of an imam?

Or Huckabee ?

I am alittle more scared of the Islamofascists.
All Huckabee wants tio destroy is the IRS

The attitude of someone who wants to replace the law of the land with
"god's law" is identical, regardless of which religion it is.

Indeed. As far as Muslims are concerned Sharia Law IS God's Law.

And as far as folks like Huckabee are concerned, god's law can be
found in the bible (more specifically in the old testament it seems).
There is no difference between someone like Huckabee and an
Islamofacist in that regard.-

"At least" its a little bit better law than found in that other book.
'Cept for the part about the virgins.