In other words, advertising by paid shills.


Maxprop wrote:
Really? Got any proof of that, or are you just regurgitating the mindless,
baseless left-wing prattle?

Is it "baseless left wing prattle" that O'Neill's own statements about
his service in Viet Nam... and Camobodia... corroborate Kerry's, up
until the time O'Neill went on Nixon's payroll, whereup he changed his
story?

No, it's pretty much easy to verify fact.


You're lack of perspective is transparent, Mr. Left Wing.


Yeah, it's kind of like your serious effort to inform yourself, by
soacking up a lot of advertising and right-wing talk radio.



... I prefer to get info from
direct sources. That's one of the nice things about this modern era.


Let me see if I've got this right: you pay little attention "to the media"
but read local newspapers. Hmm. Most definitions include newspapers within
the term "media." And websites? Oh yeah, no bias there. LOL.

I guess www.rnc.org and www.georgewbush.com are "biased"?

For some reason, when I read the info on these sites, I see a lot of
campaign promises very similar to what was said in 1999 and 2000, none
of which has come to pass. Very little elucidation of the achievements
of the past 3 3/4 years. A fair amount of attack against "the other guys."



If he's elected, you'll discover just how much more "conservative" than W he
is. Too late, I might add. As for #1, be prepared for a Kerry
administration to propose numerous changes to the Constitution.

The President can't change the Constitution.

As for what Kerry might do, we've already seen what Bush *has* done.
Kerry can undo that, Bush certainly will not.



... If you were
truly conservative, you'd fear the guy as much as I do

That's ridiculous. What you mean is "If you'd had as much shrill fascist
whacko shrieking in your ears as I have, you'd be paranoid about anybody
who doesn't constantly rant about how much they hate liberals."


4. A belief that government should provide exactly what the Constitution
says it should: national defense (your #3) and a representation of the will
of the people. Not much else.

I guess that's why the Bush Adminstration has undone almost all
Constitutional freedoms. He has made it possible for gov't agencies to
spy on citizens without a warrant, to take citizens property, to hold
citizens in jail for no reason (although the Supreme Court slapped his
hand for trying to do so indefinitely), give tax money to churches,
require citizens to testify against themselves... and most importantly,
has put into effect executive orders keeping gov't secrets, period.


... Kerry believes government should provide
just about everything everyone needs, including health care, welfare, and
jobs.

Uh huh. Did Kerry or one of his campaign reps say this? I strongly doubt
it. Once again, you're passing judgement on Coke based on Pepsi
advertising.

Actually you're full of ****.

I guess that's why I have given good info from reliable sources, and
you're just making shrill accusations and calling names. You don't even
know the difference between "conservatism" and "strict
constitutionalism" (not that you apparently believe in either one).



... I know precisely what both campaigns are
saying about their candidates. I know what each candidate is saying about
himself. But you're truly the pot calling the kettle black, citing mostly
the bilgewater from the left-wing.

I haven't cited anything from either "wing." Why do you fascist whackos
have to call every unpleasant fact "left-wing"?



And you're patting yourself on the back for being "smart."


No, I'm not, actually. I'm only defending my bilateral viewpoint w/r/t the
issues and the men. You, OTOH, have only regurgitated left-wing propaganda.

Like what? That O'Neill's statements have him contradicting himself?
That he was paid by Nixon to discredit his political opponents,
including Kerry? Must be nice to get two paychecks for one job BTW.

My statements about the Bush Administration with regard to the
COnstitution are unfortunately verifiable fact, too.


Making such accusations only denegrates your own credibility. Your
arrogance is impressive. But I think most of us are used to it--it's been
your byline for years.

So, we've already got Bobsprit and a part-time Navsprit, now you want to
jump on the bandwagon and become Maxsprit?


Certainly those countries are "viable, successful, and economically
prosperous."


And they are essentially democratic countries with largely capitalistic
economies.

Excuse me? Sweden is officially a socialist country. Japan's majority
party is called Liberal Democrats and they avow a large number of
socialist principles.

On and on it goes, you simply can't face the facts.


.... You bluster, boast, and
self-congratulate (spittle flying everywhere), but have little in the way of
veracity in your arguments.

Depends on what planet you live on.

Here on Earth, my statements are easily verifiable.

In Fascist Whacko La-La Land, you may be right... but that doesn't do
the rest of us any good.



And if you truly embraced conservatism, you'd understand that Kerry and
Edwards pose the greatest threat to that ideal since McGovern.

Actually, I think guys like you who see political disagreement as a
"threat" are a bigger threat.

I happen to like democracy, and hope to keep it.

DSK