Could the Press Grow a Spine?

Walt:

Be proud of yourself when the second american reolution (back to the
constitution) happens. You played your part in getting Atlas to Shrug.

Steve Swartz



"WalterM140" wrote in message
...
Well I watched "Hardball" last night with Campbell Brown.

She had Bartlett, one of the Bushies on. She asked him a question. He
talked
for a while and she said something like, "you are very articulate, but
that
avoids the question completely." I wish more of the Press would point out
that
the vast majority of the questions asked are just totally avoided on both
sides.

She also showed two clips back to back of VP Cheney caught in a big lie
about
Atta's supposed meeting with Iraqi intelligence in Prague. In the one
clip,
Cheney said it was "confirmed" that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.
About a
year later he said he never said that.

Running the clips back to back showed that he just lied. Bartlett hemmed
and
hawed about that and said the question was still open, but Cheney's words
definitively said it was NOT open -- it was CONFIRMED (in case anyone
missed it
the first time) that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.

These ******* Republicans have got to go.

Walt

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 11:59 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Walt:

Be proud of yourself when the second american reolution (back to the
constitution) happens. You played your part in getting Atlas to Shrug.

Steve Swartz



"WalterM140" wrote in message
...
Well I watched "Hardball" last night with Campbell Brown.

She had Bartlett, one of the Bushies on. She asked him a question. He
talked
for a while and she said something like, "you are very articulate, but
that
avoids the question completely." I wish more of the Press would point out
that
the vast majority of the questions asked are just totally avoided on both
sides.

She also showed two clips back to back of VP Cheney caught in a big lie
about
Atta's supposed meeting with Iraqi intelligence in Prague. In the one
clip,
Cheney said it was "confirmed" that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.
About a
year later he said he never said that.

Running the clips back to back showed that he just lied. Bartlett hemmed
and
hawed about that and said the question was still open, but Cheney's words
definitively said it was NOT open -- it was CONFIRMED (in case anyone
missed it
the first time) that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.

These ******* Republicans have got to go.

Walt



The constitution was intact until Bush was elected.



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

On 24 Jun 2004 14:13:20 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

The constitution was intact until Bush was elected.

Arthur Kramer

OK, Art. Put up. What part of the Constitution is no longer intact?
What has been fractured and by what specific Bush action? Have your
rights been impaired? Are you going to bring up the PATRIOT act? How
has that impacted your freedom. Have you been incarcerated? Censored?
Abused? Religously restricted? Have your taxes been raised? Is your
economy improving after the damage of 9/11? Is unemployment down,
productivity up?

Oh, you'd rather redistribute the wealth of the wage-earners to the
welfare queens and coke dealers.

Stop sloganeering and support your contention.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 08:58:01 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote:

On 24 Jun 2004 14:13:20 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

The constitution was intact until Bush was elected.

Arthur Kramer

OK, Art. Put up. What part of the Constitution is no longer intact?
What has been fractured and by what specific Bush action? Have your
rights been impaired? Are you going to bring up the PATRIOT act? How
has that impacted your freedom. Have you been incarcerated? Censored?
Abused? Religously restricted? Have your taxes been raised? Is your
economy improving after the damage of 9/11? Is unemployment down,
productivity up?

Oh, you'd rather redistribute the wealth of the wage-earners to the
welfare queens and coke dealers.


Here's the difference between a Democrate and Republican. A Democrate
with a million dollars would give the bottom 100 million on the wage
chart each a penny (have to have the equality thing, no favortism
etc.) effectively helping nobody and accomplishing nothing but ****ing
away a million dollars, adding themselves to the welfare-cheese line,
and then bitching because the government isn't supporting him. A
Republican would give $10,000 to ten dirt-poor people and keep the
other $900,000 of his hard-earned cash for himself. How is this
better? Those ten people will be able to actually make their lives
better, the rich guy will stay off the welfare charts AND he's still a
happy camper.





Stop sloganeering and support your contention.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...

Here's the difference between a Democrate and Republican. A Democrate

Hey, you've got a misspelled word there......that'd be R E P U B L I C A N E.
Let's not be giving away that we snoozed in spelling class.

(^-^)))

George Z.

Ummm, Dude- tell me; how exactly does he "keep $900,000 for himself,"
exactly?

I hear this stuff from Comrade Art and the other Mikhail Moores of the
world.

I've heard of only a very small number of wealthy people who hid their money
in mattresses or buried them in the back yard; oddly enough, most of them
were either espoused socialists or some other brand of kook.

Steve Swartz



"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 08:58:01 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote:

On 24 Jun 2004 14:13:20 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

The constitution was intact until Bush was elected.

Arthur Kramer

OK, Art. Put up. What part of the Constitution is no longer intact?
What has been fractured and by what specific Bush action? Have your
rights been impaired? Are you going to bring up the PATRIOT act? How
has that impacted your freedom. Have you been incarcerated? Censored?
Abused? Religously restricted? Have your taxes been raised? Is your
economy improving after the damage of 9/11? Is unemployment down,
productivity up?

Oh, you'd rather redistribute the wealth of the wage-earners to the
welfare queens and coke dealers.


Here's the difference between a Democrate and Republican. A Democrate
with a million dollars would give the bottom 100 million on the wage
chart each a penny (have to have the equality thing, no favortism
etc.) effectively helping nobody and accomplishing nothing but ****ing
away a million dollars, adding themselves to the welfare-cheese line,
and then bitching because the government isn't supporting him. A
Republican would give $10,000 to ten dirt-poor people and keep the
other $900,000 of his hard-earned cash for himself. How is this
better? Those ten people will be able to actually make their lives
better, the rich guy will stay off the welfare charts AND he's still a
happy camper.





Stop sloganeering and support your contention.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 13:53:26 -0400, "Leslie Swartz"
wrote:

Ummm, Dude- tell me; how exactly does he "keep $900,000 for himself,"
exactly?

Uhm easy "dude". If I'm a millionaire and decide to donate 10k to ten
people and keep the rest in my bank account. To your typical
democrat (for some reason it looked odd without an "e" on the end)
that's not fair.

Scott:

Sorry for calling you "Dude" (if indeed you took offense). However, to
assume that wealth in the hands of the wealthy is static is ludicrous. The
assumption that anyone but a liberal would just sit on $900,000 is very
"Dude-Like." The $900,000 would be invested- creating additional value for
the economy.

The wealthy didn't get wealthy by ascribing to socialist nostrums. Unless
they inherited it; like most wealthy liberal socialists (but I repeat
myself- three times!).

Steve Swartz


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 13:53:26 -0400, "Leslie Swartz"
wrote:

Ummm, Dude- tell me; how exactly does he "keep $900,000 for himself,"
exactly?

Uhm easy "dude". If I'm a millionaire and decide to donate 10k to ten
people and keep the rest in my bank account. To your typical
democrat (for some reason it looked odd without an "e" on the end)
that's not fair.

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 6/24/2004 7:58 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 24 Jun 2004 14:13:20 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

The constitution was intact until Bush was elected.

Arthur Kramer

OK, Art. Put up. What part of the Constitution is no longer intact?
What has been fractured and by what specific Bush action? Have your
rights been impaired? Are you going to bring up the PATRIOT act? How
has that impacted your freedom. Have you been incarcerated? Censored?
Abused? Religously restricted? Have your taxes been raised? Is your
economy improving after the damage of 9/11? Is unemployment down,
productivity up?

Oh, you'd rather redistribute the wealth of the wage-earners to the
welfare queens and coke dealers.

Stop sloganeering and support your contention.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8


The patriot act tears the constitution to shreds giving dictatorial power to
the neocons. Madison is spinning in his grave and Washington is in tears. The
bill of rights no longer exists. The 14th amendment will be the next to go.And
the Fereral governement was never bigger and more powerful than it is today
under the neocons.



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 6/24/2004 7:58 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 24 Jun 2004 14:13:20 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:


The patriot act tears the constitution to shreds giving dictatorial power
to
the neocons. Madison is spinning in his grave and Washington is in tears.
The
bill of rights no longer exists. The 14th amendment will be the next to
go.And
the Fereral governement was never bigger and more powerful than it is
today
under the neocons.



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS

Oooh, the bogey man is coming to get you! Did you know they have medication
for paranoia these days?

And has anyone else noticed the increased use of the term "neocon" by the
desperate left to describe anyone they don't like, which in my opinion is an
example of the prejudicial language fallacy.

Jarg