Bin Laden is making videos and is FREE 3 years after attacking the US.
Bush
decided to chase after someone else and leave the Bin Laden family alone.

So you're still buying into that Michael Moore bull****, eh?

The mastermind of the worst attack on the USA is free 3 years later. Bush
diverted all efforts away from Bin Laden.
Bin Laden is very ill and must travel with HEAVY medical gear. Bush/Bin Laden
family ties are a matter of public record, though this is not damning in
itself. What is damning is Bush' actions to avoid catching him.
WAKE UP.

RB

Well like the Prez said three or so years ago. Your either with us or your
for Ganz.

M.

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...

"John Cairns" wrote in message
. com...

"No more Pony" wrote in message
ink.net...
You mean that over half of the US are 'bible
toting right wing facists'?
S.

I think the number they came up with was something like 37%,

is that the same 'they' that conducted the exit polls?

Scotty

I would pick myself over BushCo.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Michael" wrote in message
...
Well like the Prez said three or so years ago. Your either with us or
your for Ganz.

M.

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...

"John Cairns" wrote in message
. com...

"No more Pony" wrote in message
ink.net...
You mean that over half of the US are 'bible
toting right wing facists'?
S.

I think the number they came up with was something like 37%,

is that the same 'they' that conducted the exit polls?

Scotty

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 13:35:19 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

I would pick myself



You have to gay up everything, don't you, Jon-boy?





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

"Horvath" wrote in message
...

You have to gay up everything, don't you, Jon-boy?





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

OzOne wrote in message

What "brand of socialism" would that be Max?

The one where everyone has access to hospitals,free medical,
schools,legal advice and the 38hour week?

For starters, yeah.

Max

OzOne wrote in message

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 03:57:34 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:
This was the point I was attempting to make w/r/t Doug's comment
yesterday:
that liberals think they are more astute than the rest of us unwashed
masses, and that they know what's good for us, despite our preferences.
And
you're right--the arrogant, elitist left wing of the democrat party cost
Kerry the election.

Wow, that's some inferiority complex you're carrying there!

Not in the least. While I stated it, I certainly don't believe an iota of
it. Personally I believe the democrat base has gone way too far to the left
to the detriment of the party. But I hope they keep it up. Since JFK, when
was the last time a New England-type liberal has been elected to the
presidency? How many southern, moderate governors have been elected during
that same period?

Max

"katysails" wrote in message
My take is that there should be no political talk on the
media all election day until after ALL the polls are closed....no
speculation...no gibbering idiots making predictions about as accurate as
weather forecasts....

Whatever would Dan Blather do with himself on election day? He's got all
those silly, inane colloquialisms stored up all year, and with no place to
release them he might explode.

Max

In article , OzOne wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:37:45 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:
Actually it was the "arrogant, elitist left wing of the democrat
party" that gave you away, coupled with
" liberals think they are more astute than the rest of us
unwashedmasses"
that gave you away ;-)

Proud to be an elistist..

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...ulturalelitist

or

http://tinyurl.com/4cmkx

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

OzOne wrote in message

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:34:26 GMT, "Maxprop" scribbled thusly:

OzOne wrote in message

The one where everyone has access to hospitals,free medical,
schools,legal advice and the 38hour week?

For starters, yeah.

I hardly think Oz is a socialist country....

I've never thought of Australia as a socialist country either, but if one
has those things (above), someone has to pay for them. And if the
government is paying for them, then those are social programs right out of
the socialist playbook.

but if it is then those
"majority of Aussies find your brand of socialism repugnant"
got it all wrong when they re elected the current Govt for its 4th
term.

People just love free ****. Some object to being overtaxed to pay for it,
but those who aren't terribly productive don't seem to care much. They vote
for the guy who'll give them the most free stuff. Simple human nature.
Fortunately we, in this country, think such matters through more thoroughly
before voting for the giveaway guys.

Max

OzOne wrote:
You need to travel, see how life exists outside the USA..you might
even like it.

Nah, he wouldn't like it. It's all *socialism* and that's just pure evil
evil evil... unless it's something like a Medicare drug benefit, that he
can personally profit from, then it's OK.

Next question- why are you encouraging cloe-minded boors like Maxprop to
travel aborad, at a time when the USA's image is already sinking fast
and doesn't need a brick dropped on it?

DSK

OzOne wrote in message
...

You need to travel, see how life exists outside the USA..you might
even like it.


Wait till after the 'occupation'.
;)

OzOne wrote in message

Ya know Max, that whole reply rates as about the most idiotic I've
seen from you.
Your lack ofunderstanding of how our Medicare, Hospital and school
system works is evident.
Your total lack of understanding of the Australian stuns me.

Your criticism assumes that I actually give a rat's posterior about social
programs in Australia.

You need to travel, see how life exists outside the USA..you might
even like it.

I love to travel. Contrary to your own xenophobic view of me and other
Americans, I love people from other countries. I've made many friends
throughout Europe, Asia, South and Central Americas and a few other msc.
places. My wife and I would love to travel to Africa, but we haven't been
there yet.

Regardless, social programs are social programs, despite whose they are.
You're right--I don't understand the first thing about your social programs,
except that they probably not unlike our own, costing taxpayers huge sums of
money. Our own constitution makes no provision for taking money from one
individual and giving it to another in the form of cash, medical care,
subsidies of various natures, and so on, ad nauseum. But we do it anyway.
So do you and most of the other countries in the First World. And it has
very little to do with compassion or need. It has to do with garnering
votes at election time. You even hinted at that in your original post.

Max

OzOne wrote in message ...


Sorry, I won't do it again......but if more Americans had passports,
you wouldn't be stuck with a chimp as president :-)

It's the ones with passports that voted for W, Mr. Steven Hawking. The
working poor, the union workers, the so-called disenfranchised poor and
minorities, who all voted for Kerry, don't have the means to travel.

You never cease to amaze with your "logic."

Max

"DSK" wrote in message

OzOne wrote:
You need to travel, see how life exists outside the USA..you might
even like it.

Nah, he wouldn't like it. It's all *socialism* and that's just pure evil
evil evil... unless it's something like a Medicare drug benefit, that he
can personally profit from, then it's OK.

Next question- why are you encouraging cloe-minded boors like Maxprop to
travel aborad, at a time when the USA's image is already sinking fast
and doesn't need a brick dropped on it?

You really need to get some perspective, Doug. I've obviously gotten
seriously under your skin by calling you a liberal. So you speak
derogatorily of me in the second person whenever you can. Your sour grapes
are most unbecoming a self-purported intellectual, such as yourself. Can
you spell 'equanimity?'

Max

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:
Regardless, social programs are social programs, despite whose they are.
You're right--I don't understand the first thing about your social programs,
except that they probably not unlike our own, costing taxpayers huge sums of
money. Our own constitution makes no provision for taking money from one
individual and giving it to another in the form of cash, medical care,
subsidies of various natures, and so on, ad nauseum. But we do it anyway.
So do you and most of the other countries in the First World. And it has
very little to do with compassion or need. It has to do with garnering
votes at election time. You even hinted at that in your original post.

Sheesh... welfare has nothing to do with compassion or need, emergency
rooms have no interest in healing people, there should not be a safety
net for the disabled and elderly. What a humanitarian! Why you're just
like your heros Bu**** and Chumpy.

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

"Dave" wrote in message

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 04:47:24 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

People just love free ****. Some object to being overtaxed to pay for
it,
but those who aren't terribly productive don't seem to care much. They
vote
for the guy who'll give them the most free stuff. Simple human nature.
Fortunately we, in this country, think such matters through more
thoroughly
before voting for the giveaway guys.

Well spoke, Max. Perhaps folks are waking up to the fallacy of "I'm gonna
give you something and the other fellah is gonna pay for it."

Doubtful, considering that the democrats depend upon just such a philosophy
in order to get elected. The last election should have taught them
something, but the dem learning curve appears to be uncannily flat these
days.

Max

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

OzOne wrote in message ...


Sorry, I won't do it again......but if more Americans had passports,
you wouldn't be stuck with a chimp as president :-)

It's the ones with passports that voted for W, Mr. Steven Hawking. The
working poor, the union workers, the so-called disenfranchised poor and
minorities, who all voted for Kerry, don't have the means to travel.

Hardly. More likely it's the ones with offshore business and bank
accounts who voted for BushCo. More likely, it's the ones who don't
give a rat's ass about the poor or the environment. Big oil, big
tobacco.

You never cease to amaze with your "logic."

Obviously, you wouldn't know logic if it bit you in your ass.

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

"DD730" wrote in message

"I'm gonna give you something and the other fellah is gonna pay for it."

-- John Kerry
-- Al Gore
-- Bill Clinton
-- Michael Dukakis
-- Walter Mondale
-- Jimmy Carter
-- George McGovern
-- Hubert Humphrey
-- Lyndon Johnson
-- John F. Kennedy
-- Adli Stevenson
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt

5 out of 12 won on that program. Says a lot about Americans.

Equally revealing is that since JFK, the only winners have NOT been eastern
liberals, rather southern governors and one southern senator.

Max

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message
Well spoke, Max. Perhaps folks are waking up to the fallacy of "I'm gonna
give you something and the other fellah is gonna pay for it."

Dave means well spoken, but he can't type well.

Doubtful, considering that the democrats depend upon just such a philosophy
in order to get elected. The last election should have taught them
something, but the dem learning curve appears to be uncannily flat these
days.

What I've learned is that there are a lot of people in this country
who don't give a damn about anyone but themselves, not even their
wifes and children.

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:
Equally revealing is that since JFK, the only winners have NOT been eastern
liberals, rather southern governors and one southern senator.

And just as revealing, the Republicans who were elected president since
JFK were Reagan (an alzheimer's victim), Nixon (a crook), and Bush I
(who was out of touch with the voters, but the smartest of this
group), and Bush II (an idiot)


--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:20:37 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

It's the ones with passports that voted for W, Mr. Steven Hawking. The
working poor, the union workers, the so-called disenfranchised poor and
minorities, who all voted for Kerry, don't have the means to travel.

Wait a minute, Max. You left out a few folks. The trial lawyers, the guvmint
workers, the teachers, the Hollywood moguls......

I thought trial lawyers like less gov't... according to BushCo anyway.


--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article , OzOne wrote:
You never cease to amaze me with the intimate voting habits of the
nation....and the bull**** you spout

Oz, you have to understand, Max is an expert when it comes to
bull****. One could claim that he's totally full of ****.

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 11 Nov 2004 15:30:43 -0800, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

"Dave" wrote in message
Well spoke, Max. Perhaps folks are waking up to the fallacy of "I'm gonna
give you something and the other fellah is gonna pay for it."

Dave means well spoken, but he can't type well.

No, I meant what I said. If you had a more literary bent, Jon you would have
recognized the allusion to the sailors' "Well spoke! well spoke!" in Act I
Scene 1 of H.M.S. Pinafore.

Fancy footwork, but it doesn't cut it. You blew it and can't admit it.



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 11 Nov 2004 16:44:12 -0800, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

No, I meant what I said. If you had a more literary bent, Jon you would have
recognized the allusion to the sailors' "Well spoke! well spoke!" in Act I
Scene 1 of H.M.S. Pinafore.

Fancy footwork, but it doesn't cut it. You blew it and can't admit it.

Wrong again, Jon. Matter of fact I used precisely the same phrase, intending
precisely the same allusion, in message id

Right... sure. whatever. You blew it and can't admit it.




--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

Dave wrote:
Well spoke, Max. Perhaps folks are waking up to the fallacy of "I'm gonna
give you something and the other fellah is gonna pay for it."

Maybe, maybe not. An awful lot folks seem to have been fooled recently
by the gift of big tax breaks for millionaires, plus a really expensive
pointless war. Now guess who is going to pay for that.

DSK

Maxprop wrote:
You really need to get some perspective, Doug. I've obviously gotten
seriously under your skin by calling you a liberal.

Not really. But you have proved yourself a serious knee-jerk fascist whacko.

BTW when are you going to produce a quote of my supposedly liberal views?

... So you speak
derogatorily of me in the second person whenever you can.

Not really. I speak of you truthfully, the few times I mention you.

... Your sour grapes
are most unbecoming a self-purported intellectual, such as yourself.

When did I ever "purport" myself to be an intellectual?


... Can
you spell 'equanimity?'

Yes. Why, are you afraid you spelled it wrong?

DSK

"Dave" wrote in message

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:20:37 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

It's the ones with passports that voted for W, Mr. Steven Hawking. The
working poor, the union workers, the so-called disenfranchised poor and
minorities, who all voted for Kerry, don't have the means to travel.

Wait a minute, Max. You left out a few folks. The trial lawyers, the
guvmint
workers, the teachers, the Hollywood moguls......

I wasn't attempting to be all-inclusive; only to point up the fallacy of
Oz's contention that conservative Americans don't travel abroad. Of course
Oz is still convinced that only those with IQs below 35 voted for W.

Max

OzOne wrote in message

You never cease to amaze me with the intimate voting habits of the
nation....and the bull**** you spout

Don't let it get your panties in a wad, Oz. You don't live here. We like
this country just fine, despite your antipathy.

As for bull**** spouting, you'd certainly recognize it as readily as anyone,
having had such extensive personal experience.

Max

"DSK" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:
You really need to get some perspective, Doug. I've obviously gotten
seriously under your skin by calling you a liberal.

Not really. But you have proved yourself a serious knee-jerk fascist
whacko.

Only from your viewpoint of retaliatory vitriol. Whether I think you truly
are a liberal is irrelevant--what is relevant is that I enjoy the hell out
of yanking your chain, your rancorous responses are so predictable. I hope
your puppet strings never break.

I further hope you never burst a cerebral arteriole, your face must be so
livid and bloated as you pound out a response to my accusations.

BTW when are you going to produce a quote of my supposedly liberal views?

Why should I. See my first paragraph above.

... So you speak
derogatorily of me in the second person whenever you can.

Not really. I speak of you truthfully, the few times I mention you.

People who know me (not those of you who chest thump on Usenet) would
disagree with your assessment. But that, too, is irrelevant. You are the
"King" of the derogatory ad hominem attack, and it does amuse me.

... Your sour grapes
are most unbecoming a self-purported intellectual, such as yourself.

When did I ever "purport" myself to be an intellectual?

Every time you touch the keys, contradicting this person's contention,
expanding on that person's knowledge of an historic event, bloviating with
reckless abandon. You are a legend in your own mind.

... Can
you spell 'equanimity?'

Yes. Why, are you afraid you spelled it wrong?

We're making progress. Now, can you define it, or better yet, apply it to
yourself?

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Sheesh... welfare has nothing to do with compassion or need, emergency
rooms have no interest in healing people, there should not be a safety
net for the disabled and elderly. What a humanitarian! Why you're just
like your heros Bu**** and Chumpy.

As such programs are applied by democrat candidates, compassion and/or need
have little to do with anything. They are a means to an end for such
politicians--to get elected. Of course the rhetoric emanating from their
mouths would lead one to believe they are the most sensitive and
compassionate beings in the galaxy. Of course we all know how politicians
lie to get elected, don't we. :-)

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message
Well spoke, Max. Perhaps folks are waking up to the fallacy of "I'm
gonna
give you something and the other fellah is gonna pay for it."

Dave means well spoken, but he can't type well.

Ganz, for you to point up others' misspelling and typos is akin to bin Laden
accusing others of terrorism.

Doubtful, considering that the democrats depend upon just such a
philosophy
in order to get elected. The last election should have taught them
something, but the dem learning curve appears to be uncannily flat these
days.

What I've learned is that there are a lot of people in this country
who don't give a damn about anyone but themselves, not even their
****wifes**** and children.

Dave: should we? Ah, it's not worth the trouble.

Jon: Compassion comes in all forms in this country. Some "compassionate"
people want to give the needy what they need. Other "compassionate" people
want to help the needy obtain what they need through their own
resourcefulness and abilities. Both are compassionate, but the philosophy
of aid is quite different, often diametrically opposed. Just because one
philosophy or the other doesn't fall within your paradigm of humanity
doesn't mean it's wrong.

Birds ultimately throw their young out of the nest in order to force them to
learn to fly and become self-sufficient. They could just continue to bring
them worms, at least until the parents die, but that wouldn't accomplish
much in the long run, would it?

Max

In article .net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Sheesh... welfare has nothing to do with compassion or need, emergency
rooms have no interest in healing people, there should not be a safety
net for the disabled and elderly. What a humanitarian! Why you're just
like your heros Bu**** and Chumpy.

As such programs are applied by democrat candidates, compassion and/or need
have little to do with anything. They are a means to an end for such
politicians--to get elected. Of course the rhetoric emanating from their
mouths would lead one to believe they are the most sensitive and
compassionate beings in the galaxy. Of course we all know how politicians
lie to get elected, don't we. :-)

Were you born stupid or did something happen to you along the way?
What difference does it make who administers the welfare for it to be
a compassionate act?



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

Not really. But you have proved yourself a serious knee-jerk fascist
whacko.

Maxprop wrote:
Only from your viewpoint of retaliatory vitriol.

Vitriol? Hardly. Just pointing out the facts.

... Whether I think you truly
are a liberal is irrelevant--what is relevant is that I enjoy the hell out
of yanking your chain, your rancorous responses are so predictable. I hope
your puppet strings never break.

I further hope you never burst a cerebral arteriole, your face must be so
livid and bloated as you pound out a response to my accusations.

Not likely. I could not care less.



BTW when are you going to produce a quote of my supposedly liberal views?


Why should I.

In other words, you're full of ****. You're just a pro-Bush
Bobsprit/BittyBill.

DSK

OzOne wrote in message

Max, your spouting is rarely accompanied by anything other than your
opinion.

Could you tell me how you came to this statement

" Theworking poor, the union workers, the so-called disenfranchised
poor and
minorities, who all voted for Kerry,"

Kerry pandered to the above groups. Pandered? Hell, he spent mega-millions
courting union members/workers in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan. He
practically lived there. And the dems have always pandered to the working
poor and the truly poor, promising increases in the minimum wage, welfare
perks, socialized health care, and other entitlements. As for minorities, W
garnered a larger percentage of black and Hispanic voters this go-round than
in 2000. He got roughly 11%, up from roughly 7%, according to several media
sources.

The above is not opinion, rather fact. I have no interest in wasting time
searching out a resource for you to verify this, but it doesn't take an
Einstein to know that what I've contended is true. Some of the above has
been detailed by numerous media sources, but of course you probably wouldn't
see them, hanging off the bottom of the globe as you are.

BS? One man's BS is another's axiom. That applies to you, too.

Max

OzOne wrote in message

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 05:03:46 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:


"Dave" wrote in message

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:20:37 GMT, "Maxprop"
said:

It's the ones with passports that voted for W, Mr. Steven Hawking.
The
working poor, the union workers, the so-called disenfranchised poor
and
minorities, who all voted for Kerry, don't have the means to travel.

Wait a minute, Max. You left out a few folks. The trial lawyers, the
guvmint
workers, the teachers, the Hollywood moguls......

I wasn't attempting to be all-inclusive; only to point up the fallacy of
Oz's contention that conservative Americans don't travel abroad. Of
course
Oz is still convinced that only those with IQs below 35 voted for W.

Max

Max, considering that only about 22% of US citizens have passports,
I'd think that it would be fair to assume that few Americans travel
abroad.

That's one in five. How does that compare with other countries?

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Were you born stupid or did something happen to you along the way?
What difference does it make who administers the welfare for it to be
a compassionate act?

You really should read Bill O'Reilly's book, "Who's Looking Out For You."

It's full of mountains of truth, much unpleasant, but truth nonetheless. If
you truly believe the government is looking out for the poor, the
disadvantaged, or even YOU, you are unquestionably more stupid than I've
suspected heretofore.

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Gee dad, I didn't ****ing ask you did I.

This is Usenet, you ignorant putz. You didn't have to.

Jon: Compassion comes in all forms in this country. Some
"compassionate"
people want to give the needy what they need. Other "compassionate"
people
want to help the needy obtain what they need through their own
resourcefulness and abilities. Both are compassionate, but the
philosophy
of aid is quite different, often diametrically opposed. Just because one
philosophy or the other doesn't fall within your paradigm of humanity
doesn't mean it's wrong.

What the hell are you talking about? The only thing BushCo is
compassionate about is his big-business friends. He bends over for
them all the time, but is only interested in reeming the rest of us.

What a brilliant answer. The above paragraph had nothing to do with Bush.
You are so monofixated with hatred toward Bush that you are unable to
separate philosophical discussions from W.

Birds ultimately throw their young out of the nest in order to force them
to
learn to fly and become self-sufficient. They could just continue to
bring
them worms, at least until the parents die, but that wouldn't accomplish
much in the long run, would it?

What a load of crap!

If you have kids, I pity them. No doubt you'll house, clothe, feed, and
finance them until you and your spouse run out of money, patience, or time.
And ultimately they'll be worthless leaches on society. Good work, idiot.

Max

wrote in message

ALL Americans with an IQ below 35 voted for Bush.

It surprises me to learn you, too, voted for him. Interesting.

Max