An Olive Branch

Jay Honeck wrote:
In my opinion being dyslexic goes a LONG way towards explaining his
lack of reading ability and difficulty with the english language. For
dyslexics, reading is especially difficult, it's "hard work" ;-).
As always, Corky, your observations are refreshing and spot on. This DOES
make sense.

Of course, that would only explain his problems with the teleprompter.
He also stumbles, and often looks confused, when he's being asked a
question off the cuff. He may be intelligent enough, when given enough
time to think about things, but a President should be able to speak
intelligently about subjects, with little or no preparation, without
stumbling like an idiot. There's still the 7 minutes he waited after the
2nd plane hit the towers. What if it had been the beginning of a nuclear
attack?

And one other thing I thought of (un-related)... Doesn't it bother anyone
that the Bush campaign REQUIRED people to sign an oath of allegiance
before allowing them into his rallies. Actually, that one issue would
have prevented me from voting for him. That was absolutely deplorable.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

And one other thing I thought of (un-related)... Doesn't it bother anyone
that the Bush campaign REQUIRED people to sign an oath of allegiance
before allowing them into his rallies. Actually, that one issue would
have prevented me from voting for him. That was absolutely deplorable.

That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.

He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and the
untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
possible.

Sadly, with the country at war, there are more nutcases than usual who have
pronounced their willingness to assassinate the president. Recording the
names and phone numbers of everyone admitted to a rally (and running
security checks on them) was just the most visible way they kept Bush safe
throughout the campaign -- and the Democrats played that up big politically.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article iWCid.365126$D%.160998@attbi_s51,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

And one other thing I thought of (un-related)... Doesn't it bother anyone
that the Bush campaign REQUIRED people to sign an oath of allegiance
before allowing them into his rallies. Actually, that one issue would
have prevented me from voting for him. That was absolutely deplorable.

That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.

He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and the
untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
possible.

Sadly, with the country at war, there are more nutcases than usual who have
pronounced their willingness to assassinate the president. Recording the
names and phone numbers of everyone admitted to a rally (and running
security checks on them) was just the most visible way they kept Bush safe
throughout the campaign -- and the Democrats played that up big politically.


Just reading the subject lines in some of the newsgroups confirms Jay's
last paragraph. We see nutcases calling for assassination, impeachment,
all kinds of vicious names, etc.

Also, the recent campaign brought out the worst in both sides of the
election, with a lot of hard feelings to go around. It is enough to push
some unstable personalities over the edge.

Jay Honeck wrote:
That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.

He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and the
untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
possible.

That's no excuse. Having grown up in the Maryland suburbs of DC, I've
always been "aware" of Presidential security. They were feeding you a
lie. It was a disgusting tactic for a political rally.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

That's no excuse. Having grown up in the Maryland suburbs of DC, I've
always been "aware" of Presidential security. They were feeding you a
lie. It was a disgusting tactic for a political rally.

Well, now, do I think that a political party is above using a "security
excuse" provided to them by the Secret Service to make sure that they have a
positive event?

Nope.

I'm shocked...SHOCKED, that there are politics going on here!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
Well, now, do I think that a political party is above using a "security
excuse" provided to them by the Secret Service to make sure that they have a
positive event?
Nope.
I'm shocked...SHOCKED, that there are politics going on here!
;-)

Thank you.


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

"Jay Masino" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.

He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and
the
untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
possible.

That's no excuse. Having grown up in the Maryland suburbs of DC, I've
always been "aware" of Presidential security.

It was a very different situation then. After the two attacks on Ford,
Reagan in 1981 and the occurances during Clinton's term (the airplane and
the guy with the SKS) they HAVE to be more careful.

They were feeding you a
lie. It was a disgusting tactic for a political rally.

And you're full of ****.

Matt Barrow wrote:
They were feeding you a
lie. It was a disgusting tactic for a political rally.

And you're full of ****.

Nice come back.



--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

Ya know! That's a good point,,, an assassin would NEVER lie with his/her
signature on an oath of allegiance just to get closer to the president. JAY
do you read what you write,,,,, are you saying that some idiot who wanted to
get close to the president to do him harm wouldn't LIE on the allegiance
'form'? That's probably why criminals 'never' rob people on Christmas,
they wouldn't want to rob people on a Christian holiday, because it would be
wrong..... (of course, I'm being facetious here, Jay).
--
--
=-----
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 -