Leaving the community

Cecil Chapman wrote:



If there is any hope for our country, it will be when people learn to
abandon their mindless following of party affiliation and do as I (and
others) do; simply vote for the best man/woman for the job.

I did! He won!

JPH

Wow I did too - and he won (must be a conspiracy : )

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 19:58:50 -0600, J Haggerty
wrote:



Cecil Chapman wrote:



If there is any hope for our country, it will be when people learn to
abandon their mindless following of party affiliation and do as I (and
others) do; simply vote for the best man/woman for the job.

I did! He won!

JPH

"Cecil Chapman" wrote in message
m

But don't let intelligence or logic, pry you away from your blissful
ignorance.

It's interesting that the vast majority of the people I hear use this line
(and similar bumper stickers like "Think: It's patriotic.") are quite
liberal. As if they're the only ones capable of reason and logic and
challenging assumptions.

Like oil. It would have been far, far cheaper for us to simply buy the oil
from the "oil for food" program than to invade Iraq if oil were our goal.
For that matter, why not Venezuela? If oil were the goal, Venezuela is
*much* closer to the US and has a less imposing military. *Think* for a
moment and tell me it's logical for us to invade a hostile country half a
globe away for oil when we have oil exporters in our own hemisphere.

No, it sounds Moore like you're toeing the party line.

I hope one day, people like you will learn to challenge
and learn more about what they are told as fact FROM ANY SOURCE,,,
then we will REALLY have a great Nation.

Well, at least we can agree that voters should be educated on the issues and
not just follow the party line.

A mind is truly a terrible thing to waste..........

You just had to throw in that elitist attitude again. Just when you were
showing some reason, too.

Your guy lost. By a significant margin. Get over it and go flying.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

*much* closer to the US and has a less imposing military. *Think* for a
moment and tell me it's logical for us to invade a hostile country half a
globe away for oil when we have oil exporters in our own hemisphere.

Since Iraq didn't even have a missile delivery system, much less the 'WMD's,
I don't even see how they could be viewed as a hostile threat to the U.S.
The hypocrisy I'm trying to point out is; Bush keeps telling us how we are
there to free the Iraqi's from repression (there is NO doubt, that many
dissidents were brutally treated),,, but what about the mass genocide that
is going on RIGHT NOW (and has been going on for some time) in parts of
Africa. Why aren't we saving them? Could it be that there country has no
economic benefits to offer us and that,,, after all,, it is "just" black
skinned people dying over there?

Your guy lost. By a significant margin. Get over it and go flying.

Significant margin? Not quite,,,, 51 to 48 percent is hardly a national
mandate - in fact it reveals a deeply divided country.

Not to worry,,,, Congress is investigating Halliburton as we speak.........
:0)

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 02:35:52 GMT, Cecil Chapman wrote:

Since Iraq didn't even have a missile delivery system, much less the 'WMD's,
I don't even see how they could be viewed as a hostile threat to the U.S.

aren't we a little bit unamerican and unpatriotic now?

The hypocrisy I'm trying to point out is; Bush keeps telling us how we are
there to free the Iraqi's from repression (there is NO doubt, that many
dissidents were brutally treated),,,

just like in Americanistan: those in Guantanamo Bay (hm, no US citizens, so
no problem there ...) and those held after 9/11 (with no physical threat, I
hope, but still ... and: not white but colored, a minority, also no problem
there). And Patriot Act allows the government to remove your rights you
enjoy as a US citizen without appeal. Hellloooo! Anybody home??!??

but what about the mass genocide that
is going on RIGHT NOW (and has been going on for some time) in parts of
Africa.

This is only leftist UN propaganda!

Why aren't we saving them? Could it be that there country has no
economic benefits to offer us and that,,, after all,, it is "just" black
skinned people dying over there?

nah, they don't like the gen-manipulated seeds from the US ...
*******s. they should be happy about what good we bring to the world.

#m

irony found? goooood.

--
Buck Fush!

"Cecil Chapman" wrote in message
. com

Since Iraq didn't even have a missile delivery system, much less the
'WMD's, I don't even see how they could be viewed as a hostile threat
to the U.S.

I was very careful in not saying they were a threat to the US. I did call
it a "hostile country". With over 1100 US soldiers dead, it's obvious there
are elements there who did not welcome us with open arms.

The hypocrisy I'm trying to point out is; Bush keeps
telling us how we are there to free the Iraqi's from repression
(there is NO doubt, that many dissidents were brutally treated),,,
but what about the mass genocide that is going on RIGHT NOW (and has
been going on for some time) in parts of Africa.

This so-called hypocrisy is a long-standing liberal argument - and applies
to Democrat administrations as much as Republican. It does have a certain
appeal. After all, if we could stop the ethnic cleansing in the former
Yugoslavia, why not in Rwanda? If we deposed a brutal dictator in Panama,
why not Liberia? If we can take over Baghdad, why not Khartoum?

Why aren't we saving them? Could it be that there country has no economic
benefits
to offer us and that,,, after all,, it is "just" black skinned
people dying over there?

If Sudan were a major trading partner with the US or our allies, I have no
doubt we'd be paying much closer attention to the situation there. However,
to say that we went into Iraq "for the oil" is simply specious - and to
suggest they're "'just' black-skinned people dying" is nothing more than a
lame attempt to play on "white guilt".

Yes, it's a sad fact that our geopolitical decisions - like all nations -
are driven by geopolitical concerns like who are our trading partners and
who are our allies.

As for Iraq, I happen to agree with the idea that having a stable republican
(note the small "r") government in place would be a stabilizing influence on
the region. Bush made some really bad arguments for going in - and I was
one of those saying "why now?" when he was making his case. However, we're
there now and we can't just leave it a mess.

In the meantime, if Sudan's situation weighs so heavily on your mind, I'm
sure the subjects of the brutality wouldn't mind your showing up with a
rifle in your hand...

Significant margin? Not quite,,,, 51 to 48 percent is hardly a
national mandate - in fact it reveals a deeply divided country.

Again, I chose my words carefully. A three percent margin isn't a "large"
margin, but is nonetheless "significant" - especially considering this is
the first Presidential election in 16 years where the winner received more
than 50% of the popular vote.

Not to worry,,,, Congress is investigating Halliburton as we
speak.........

hmph

Where were the investigations when Clinton awarded the multi-billion dollar
"no-bid contract" to none other than Haliburton?

Look up the facts on the award, why it was awarded and how they followed the
rules, then tell me what was wrong with that. This lame attempt to link the
award to Cheney's Vice Presidency is a red herring.

Now, if you want to talk about overcharges or other wrongdoing, that's open
for discussion. The award itself was legitimate.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 09:29:04 -0500, "John T" wrote in
::

I was very careful in not saying they were a threat to the US. I did call
it a "hostile country". With over 1100 US soldiers dead, it's obvious there
are elements there who did not welcome us with open arms.

If the USA is to wage war against all "hostile countries," we will
soon find ourselves bankrupt. Face it, baby Bush chose to exercise
his war powers to avenge the assassination attempt on his father, to
make sure that the anthrax provided Sadam by Rumsfeld during daddy
Bush's reign was neutralized, and to create "war president" status to
assure a Republican victory in the election.

Now we and our progeny can pay for his folly for generations to come.
:-(


Get your head out of the sand, and see this motion pictu
http://www.bushsbrain.com/reviews.htm

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 09:29:04 -0500, John T wrote:

As for Iraq, I happen to agree with the idea that having a stable republican
(note the small "r") government in place would be a stabilizing influence on
the region.


they haven't had such a thing for how long? 3000 years? and now you truly
believe that they want one? and you believe that they more likely want one
if it is shoved up their asses?

#m

--
Buck Fush!

"Martin Hotze" wrote in message


they haven't had such a thing for how long? 3000 years? and now you
truly believe that they want one? and you believe that they more
likely want one if it is shoved up their asses?

They'll institute the government of their choice. See, that's the
difference between what we intend versus what you perceive. Would it be
preferrable that a government is elected that is our new best friend in the
Middle East? Sure. Is that likely to happen? Only time will tell.

If they *choose* to elect another dictator, at least we can walk away saying
"we gave them their choice".

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

They'll institute the government of their choice.

And if we don't like it, they will choose again until we do.

Jose
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.