If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message t... "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message t... "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message t... "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "John Mullen" wrote in message ... Kevin Brooks wrote: "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... (Unnecessary background snipped) When you have your own house in order (i.e., until you recognize that your earlier accusation was false and are big enough to admit it), you can start working on decorrupting the rest of us. My comment to Mary was questioning whether her concerns for disenfranchisement were only in relation to the likely democcratic supporters--her answer indicated that indeed was the case. Hell of a view of democracy IMO... Brooks snip further bellyaching That's amazing! Some people can put a spin onto anything. I suppose being a Tory must mean never having to be wrong. Must be wonderful... John By George, you've hit the nail on the head! Being a George, I would know, wouldn't I? If you followed the thread, I'm sure you noticed how hard he's trying to change the subject to me and what I may have or have not said about other things. All I'm trying to do is to hold his feet to the fire and force him to be responsive to the dialogue he was having with Mary Shafer. I won't be sucked into a debate by him on any other topic until such time as it suits me, if it ever does. It seems to be giving him some heartburn, because he keeps on trying (without success) to get me engaged so that he can walk away from the can of worms Mary Shafer uncovered without addressing any of them. It won't work, but he keeps trying. (^-^))) You are admittedly very good at walking away from things that don't agree with your previous farsical pronouncements, on that I'll agree. Brooks And you still are trying to talk to me instead of Mary Shafer. You get high marks for persistently trying to wiggle out of the hot spot. You have to expand your reading there, George--already been addressed in this same thread. Mary's idea that it was A-OK to kick those absentee ballots out because she thought they were "late" was full of holes--namely, the democrats were contesting them on the basis of other technicalities, and the same state courts that proved to be so sympathetic to Gore in other respects ended up turning down their request to quash them. I guess you don't like that, seeing as how you apparently find the idea of disenfranchising those who tend to vote democrat repulsive, but doing so to servicemembers and others who tend to lean towards the republican side is apparently just peachy. I believe you voiced the concern that my bringing this comparison up was somehow off-topic and inappropriate according to your earlier comment?..... You believe wrong. Show me where I voiced concern over any part of your discussion with her about the election in Florida. I only took part in your discussion after you started ducking being responsive and, even then, it was only limited to pulling your chain about not responding. No, your first post, in response to my FIRST post in the thread, included: "You, OTOH, need to stop changing the subject in order to avoid having to address the points she made." Odd, in that my first post was merely to point out that the alleged disenfranchisement effort attributed to Ms. Harris was not the only such effort during that election in Florida. I did not attack her claims--merely wanted to see how evenhanded she was in accessing the situation. Her subsequent responses indicate that, like you, even-handedness is not a priority. ......Well, it seems that the absentee ballot situation dealt with the same topic Mary was introducing (disenfranchising voters in Florida during 2000), and it is a hell of lot closer to being on-topic than the original post since at least it entered the military side into the equation in some fashion. Now George, have you gathered the gumption required to admit that your earlier accusation that GWB never volunteered for overseas service was incorrect, or are you still going to be all mealy-mouthed on that one? It doesn't require gumption to say anything on any subject on the usenet. You're just trying to drag me into a discussion of positions I've taken in the past based upon personal knowledge of how rated personnel can be grounded at their own instance. I don't see that I can learn anything about that subject from you, since I've forgotten more about it as a retired military pilot that you ever knew. So call me mealy-mouthed if that's what rings your chimes.....it makes no never-mind to me. No, the issue in that discussion was your bold faced claim that Bush never volunteered for overseas duty, period. Which was not the case, as he reportedly did volunteer for Palace Alert. You can't even bring yourself to admit that, can you? Have a nice Holiday Season. Same to you, and may you not be cursed with the same flu that I am currently enjoying (for Tarver's benefit; he apparently needs to learn that even heated Usenet exchanges do not have to drop to the level of wishing death upon our temporary foes). |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message t... "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message t... "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message t... "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "John Mullen" wrote in message ... Kevin Brooks wrote: "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... (Unnecessary background snipped) When you have your own house in order (i.e., until you recognize that your earlier accusation was false and are big enough to admit it), you can start working on decorrupting the rest of us. My comment to Mary was questioning whether her concerns for disenfranchisement were only in relation to the likely democcratic supporters--her answer indicated that indeed was the case. Hell of a view of democracy IMO... Brooks snip further bellyaching That's amazing! Some people can put a spin onto anything. I suppose being a Tory must mean never having to be wrong. Must be wonderful... John By George, you've hit the nail on the head! Being a George, I would know, wouldn't I? If you followed the thread, I'm sure you noticed how hard he's trying to change the subject to me and what I may have or have not said about other things. All I'm trying to do is to hold his feet to the fire and force him to be responsive to the dialogue he was having with Mary Shafer. I won't be sucked into a debate by him on any other topic until such time as it suits me, if it ever does. It seems to be giving him some heartburn, because he keeps on trying (without success) to get me engaged so that he can walk away from the can of worms Mary Shafer uncovered without addressing any of them. It won't work, but he keeps trying. (^-^))) You are admittedly very good at walking away from things that don't agree with your previous farsical pronouncements, on that I'll agree. Brooks And you still are trying to talk to me instead of Mary Shafer. You get high marks for persistently trying to wiggle out of the hot spot. You have to expand your reading there, George--already been addressed in this same thread. Mary's idea that it was A-OK to kick those absentee ballots out because she thought they were "late" was full of holes--namely, the democrats were contesting them on the basis of other technicalities, and the same state courts that proved to be so sympathetic to Gore in other respects ended up turning down their request to quash them. I guess you don't like that, seeing as how you apparently find the idea of disenfranchising those who tend to vote democrat repulsive, but doing so to servicemembers and others who tend to lean towards the republican side is apparently just peachy. I believe you voiced the concern that my bringing this comparison up was somehow off-topic and inappropriate according to your earlier comment?..... You believe wrong. Show me where I voiced concern over any part of your discussion with her about the election in Florida. I only took part in your discussion after you started ducking being responsive and, even then, it was only limited to pulling your chain about not responding. No, your first post, in response to my FIRST post in the thread, included: "You, OTOH, need to stop changing the subject in order to avoid having to address the points she made." Odd, in that my first post was merely to point out that the alleged disenfranchisement effort attributed to Ms. Harris was not the only such effort during that election in Florida. I did not attack her claims--merely wanted to see how evenhanded she was in accessing the situation. Her subsequent responses indicate that, like you, even-handedness is not a priority. ......Well, it seems that the absentee ballot situation dealt with the same topic Mary was introducing (disenfranchising voters in Florida during 2000), and it is a hell of lot closer to being on-topic than the original post since at least it entered the military side into the equation in some fashion. Now George, have you gathered the gumption required to admit that your earlier accusation that GWB never volunteered for overseas service was incorrect, or are you still going to be all mealy-mouthed on that one? It doesn't require gumption to say anything on any subject on the usenet. You're just trying to drag me into a discussion of positions I've taken in the past based upon personal knowledge of how rated personnel can be grounded at their own instance. I don't see that I can learn anything about that subject from you, since I've forgotten more about it as a retired military pilot that you ever knew. So call me mealy-mouthed if that's what rings your chimes.....it makes no never-mind to me. No, the issue in that discussion was your bold faced claim that Bush never volunteered for overseas duty, period. Which was not the case, as he reportedly did volunteer for Palace Alert. You can't even bring yourself to admit that, can you? As I recall, I think I said something to the effect that when he had the opportunity to volunteer for a combat assignment, he chose to go the other way. Palace Alert notwithstanding, I still think I had it right. BTW, I must admit that I had never heard of that program, whatever it was. I imagine that, if it was that important, a chronology of when some of his F-102 squadron mates started volunteering and leaving for transition into combat model aircraft and/or Far East assignments, when he volunteered for Palace Alert (whatever that was), and when he allowed his flight physical to expire and failed to get it renewed, might get it all sorted out. Personally, I don't really care enough about it to invest my time and effort into the project, but if it suits you, feel free. Have a nice Holiday Season. Same to you, and may you not be cursed with the same flu that I am currently enjoying (for Tarver's benefit; he apparently needs to learn that even heated Usenet exchanges do not have to drop to the level of wishing death upon our temporary foes). Fortunately, I got my flu shot early in the season and have managed to avoid it up to now. I hope you get over your miseries pretty quick so that you'll be able to enjoy what's left of the Holiday Season. As for Tarver, he's what I consider to be a prize schmuck and is a charter member of my killfile. Needless to say, I don't put any stock in his opinions or statements, and we haven't spoken in years.....it does wonders for my blood pressure. You might consider doing the same. George Z. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message t... snip stuf we will never agree on Have a nice Holiday Season. Same to you, and may you not be cursed with the same flu that I am currently enjoying (for Tarver's benefit; he apparently needs to learn that even heated Usenet exchanges do not have to drop to the level of wishing death upon our temporary foes). Fortunately, I got my flu shot early in the season and have managed to avoid it up to now. I hope you get over your miseries pretty quick so that you'll be able to enjoy what's left of the Holiday Season. As for Tarver, he's what I consider to be a prize schmuck and is a charter member of my killfile. Needless to say, I don't put any stock in his opinions or statements, and we haven't spoken in years.....it does wonders for my blood pressure. You might consider doing the same. My wife got the shot and so far (knock on my little wooden head) it has kept her safe, even after having to put up with my distress over the past five days. So despite the hype about the shot not being for the exactly correct strain, it seems to be of some use and you may not have a lot to worry about. It has forced changes to the Christmas plans--both our respective parents are getting on in years and don't need to be exposed to it, even though they all also had the shots. As to Tarver...sometimes he is comical, in a sad way I guess, but now that I am posting with OE as opposed to using Google, I can at long last plonk his butt. Maybe I'll make that my Christmas present to myself. Brooks George Z. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
1. The counties involved are VERY heavily Democrat.
Seminole and Martin, the two counties whose absentee ballots were contested by the Gore camp, voted Republican in 2000. Brooks I was referring only to the problems at the actual polls. I should have been more specific. Ed "The French couldn't hate us any more unless we helped 'em out in another war." --Will Rogers (Delete text after dot com for e-mail reply.) |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Howdy!
In article , RobbelothE wrote: As a Florida resident, I offer these observations: ....with a bias quite evident by your language misuse... 1. The counties involved are VERY heavily Democrat. 2. The punch card ballots were approved by the local county Democrat party. 3. The supervisors of elections in those counties were Democrat. 4. The Democrat approved punch card ballots didn't seem to be a problem in previous elections.\ 5. The same people who had trouble dealing with punch card ballots qualified for drivers' licenses and seem to be able to drive a car without much problem. Ummm...what is this "Democrat" party? I'm not familiar with them. I do know of a "Democratic" party. ....makes me go "hmmm...this guy is not being very subtle about his biases..." yours, Michael -- Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly | White Wolf and the Phoenix Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff | http://www.radix.net/~herveus/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush's guard record | JDKAHN | Home Built | 13 | October 3rd 04 09:38 PM |
"W" is JFK's son and Bush revenge killed Kennedy in 1963 | Ross C. Bubba Nicholson | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | August 28th 04 10:36 PM |
i HATE bush - i HATE bush - i HATE bush - i HATE bush - i HATE bush - i HATE bush - i HATE bush - | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 0 | October 29th 03 11:21 AM |