Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

"katy" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
Seems pretty mild to me, although it is "derogatory" for sure. I've
certainly endured much worse without coming unglued. Perhaps a chill-pill
is in order?

He doesn't need any more chill...Lake Michigan still hasn't warmed up
enough to be comfortable to sail on for very long without a lot of
clothing...a few days ago the water temps. of Muskegon were still
39F-45F...

They've been 48-52 on every sail this season so far. However, Katy, we're
in the midst of a warm-up. Temps were in the 90s today and should remain
there for a while. Won't take long to warm up the pond with those temps.
NWS said the beachfront water should be in the upper 60s tomorrow.

Max

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Maxprop wrote:
Doug: in all seriousness, re-read your paragraph above and tell me
honestly
that:
1) that's not a very personal, derogatory attack,
2) that you've not labeled me as a far-right, hate-monger,
3) that you've stuck to the issues at hand rather than simply allowing
your
emotions to lash out in anger,
4) that in any of my paragraphs above I've been either as hateful or
derogatory as you were in this last paragraph.

Of course you can't. You simply are unable to abstain from personal
attacks.


1- Is it a "personal attack" if it is completely truthful?

Of course it is, but it's not truthful. I'm far from the extreme
right-winger you claim I am. And I don't preach hatred, nor do I feel it
personally toward you or any of the politicians you've supported. What I do
feel is that having politicians with no direction or plan (democrats) is
about as counterproductive as having them with a very bad plan
(republicans).


2- (just a single example) You think John Kerry is "the most *dangerously*
liberal Presidential candidate *in history"*

Hyperbole and untrue. Please show me where I said "dangerously" or "in
history."

which is a confabulation of the far-right-wing hate-mongers like Rush
Limbaugh.

Is Rush preaching hatred any more than Michael Moore, Al Franken, George
Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Harry Belefonte, and myriad others?? You seem to
be wearing some rather one-sided blinders these days.

That isn't to say that *you* are a far-right-wing hate-monger yourself,
merely that you give more credence to them than to the evidence of the
world around you (I could give far more examples of the same behavior from
you).

What you are implying is that any conservative belief is hate-mongering, and
that's hogwash. There is clearly as much or more hatred coming from the far
left these days, but I've never heard you take them to task. Why is that?

3- that *is* an issue at hand, especially when you justify your
vociferously-expressed political opinions on #2 above.

You've always read far more into my posts than was there. If I were ****ed
you'd not get any response from me. To the contrary, I find debating you
amusing, otherwise I wouldn't do it.


4- Shall I google up a few of your comments for you? And add to the fact
that you are constantly calling me a liberal, which you believe to be a
terrible insult?

Nope. Not even close. If it's an insult, it's your own misinterpretation
of it. Jon is a liberal and so is Oz, and I seriously doubt if they feel
offended when someone calls them that. I call you a liberal primarily
because you vehemently debate the conservatives here (Dave, me) while
completely ignoring the liberals and extreme left-wingers. Your actions
speak volumes; your words appear hollow.


In other words, go work on a Laser. And when you're done, try to not post
about politics if you can't stick to the facts.

I have a better idea--let's do it your way. Let's skip the issues and just
call each other names. Might be even more fun.

Max

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
This is way too personal...

Stick around . . .

Max

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

which is a confabulation of the far-right-wing hate-mongers like Rush
Limbaugh.


Maxprop wrote:
Is Rush preaching hatred any more than Michael Moore, Al Franken, George
Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Harry Belefonte, and myriad others?? You seem to
be wearing some rather one-sided blinders these days.


Not at all.

Quote any place where any of those people said that
conservatives should be locked up, which is about the
mildest thing Rush says about libby-rulls (and other minorites).

If anything, the problem is that violent fanatacism sells,
and the liberal rabble-rousers are all too nice.

For example, which liberal Senator called for the
assassination of a sitting President of the opposite party?

Trick question: none, nor would it be tolerated (it
shouldn't be tolerated from either party IMHO). However NC's
own Jesse Helms on two seperate occasions stated publicly
(once in a speech to a military crowd) that any real patriot
would pick up his gun and shoot Clinton, and be proud of it.
I don't seem to recall the "liberal biased media" making
much of it at the time.

In short, you're a product of your environment... steeped in
a lot of vigorous but senseless & fact-free screeching &
whining about how everything bad is the liberals fault. So
of course, anything that *isn't* a lot of right-wing
blather seems liberal to you. But it's still a (relatively)
free country, you listen to all that crap because you like
it. And it shows.

DSK

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
which is a confabulation of the far-right-wing hate-mongers like Rush
Limbaugh.


Maxprop wrote:
Is Rush preaching hatred any more than Michael Moore, Al Franken, George
Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Harry Belefonte, and myriad others?? You seem
to be wearing some rather one-sided blinders these days.


Not at all.

Quote any place where any of those people said that conservatives should
be locked up, which is about the mildest thing Rush says about libby-rulls
(and other minorites).

It's obvious you've never listened to him. I've never heard him say that
liberals should be locked up, at least not unless in jest. But it's not a
bad idea. :-)

If anything, the problem is that violent fanatacism sells, and the liberal
rabble-rousers are all too nice.

Really? Who was left-wing actor (maybe Alec Baldwin) who advocated
assassinating Ken Starr? I've never heard Limbaugh, Hannity, Snow, or any
of the other conservative pundits advocating violence. If you believe that
there's no hate speech emanting from the left, you're delusional.

For example, which liberal Senator called for the assassination of a
sitting President of the opposite party?

You tell me.


Trick question: none, nor would it be tolerated (it shouldn't be tolerated
from either party IMHO). However NC's own Jesse Helms on two seperate
occasions stated publicly (once in a speech to a military crowd) that any
real patriot would pick up his gun and shoot Clinton, and be proud of it.
I don't seem to recall the "liberal biased media" making much of it at the
time.

I don't recall that at all, but it doesn't surprise me. Jesse Helms came
from an entirely different period in our country's history. I know of
almost no one who wouldn't label him a crackpot.

In short, you're a product of your environment... steeped in a lot of
vigorous but senseless & fact-free screeching & whining about how
everything bad is the liberals fault.

Is that so? I guess it was all those radical left-wing years that made me
what I am. But while you've brought up the subject, yes, I believe a lot of
what's bad about our society can be directly attributed to
liberal/progressive causes and actions. I used to support (financially) the
ACLU for decades. As they've completely abberated from their original
agenda, I think my money was poorly spent. That's just one example. I'm
sure you don't care to hear more. However I also believe that a lot of what
is wrong with our society can also be attributed to ultra-right wing causes
and agendas as well. The religious right is dictatorial and unforgiving,
and I'm disappointed that the GOP hasn't distanced itself from them. Unlike
you, I can see both sides of the issue.

So of course, anything that *isn't* a lot of right-wing blather seems
liberal to you. But it's still a (relatively) free country, you listen to
all that crap because you like it. And it shows.

Unlike you, I listen to both sides and make up my mind. That I've chosen to
favor some conservative and right-of-center fiscal positions over those on
the left does not automatically make me wrong, despite your viewpoint.

I believe we are overtaxed and our government overspends. I'm opposed to
increasing income taxes, which the democrats will surely do if they capture
the White House and both houses of Congress. I'm in favor of fiscal
responsibility on the part of our leaders, which is why I detest the current
administration. I believe in the US Constitution and feel strongly that it
should be preserved rather than altered or interpreted to the whims of the
party in power. I'd like to see government shrunk dramatically, with some
bureaus done away with entirely, or at least reduced dramatically. I don't
care if gays want to get married--it shouldn't be a political issue--and I
support a woman's rights to decide w/r/t pregnancy, but pray the decision is
life. I support a law-abiding citizen's right to keep and bear arms. I'm
strongly in favor of cleaner air, water; and I oppose the destruction of
federal natural lands. I think current and past administrations have done a
dismal job with the environment and our federal lands. I believe in the
right for individuals to burn the American flag in protest as a freedom of
expression. And I'm opposed to *not* taking the necessary measures to
insure the security our borders and stop or severely limit illegal
immigration. It's my impression that our government is bloated,
inefficient, far too large, and wasteful. I'm clearly a libertarian with
moderate social beliefs.

If those beliefs brand me a right-wing extremist in your viewpoint, you
could only be situated on the extreme far left yourself.

Max

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

Apparently, Cheney was trying to listen, but as usual, screwed it up.

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

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
which is a confabulation of the far-right-wing hate-mongers like Rush
Limbaugh.


Maxprop wrote:
Is Rush preaching hatred any more than Michael Moore, Al Franken, George
Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Harry Belefonte, and myriad others?? You seem
to be wearing some rather one-sided blinders these days.


Not at all.

Quote any place where any of those people said that conservatives should
be locked up, which is about the mildest thing Rush says about libby-rulls
(and other minorites).

If anything, the problem is that violent fanatacism sells, and the liberal
rabble-rousers are all too nice.

For example, which liberal Senator called for the assassination of a
sitting President of the opposite party?

Trick question: none, nor would it be tolerated (it shouldn't be tolerated
from either party IMHO). However NC's own Jesse Helms on two seperate
occasions stated publicly (once in a speech to a military crowd) that any
real patriot would pick up his gun and shoot Clinton, and be proud of it.
I don't seem to recall the "liberal biased media" making much of it at the
time.

In short, you're a product of your environment... steeped in a lot of
vigorous but senseless & fact-free screeching & whining about how
everything bad is the liberals fault. So of course, anything that *isn't*
a lot of right-wing blather seems liberal to you. But it's still a
(relatively) free country, you listen to all that crap because you like
it. And it shows.

DSK

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

I think you're talking about a work of fiction.

BTW...
Kenneth Starr says he never should have led the investigation that resulted
in the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton.

The former independent counsel, now dean of the Pepperdine University law
school, says "the most fundamental thing that could have been done
differently" was for somebody else to have investigated Clinton's statements
under oath denying he had an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

Starr said his role in a years long investigation of Clinton should have
focused instead on Clinton's role in the failed Arkansas land deal known as
Whitewater.


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

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
which is a confabulation of the far-right-wing hate-mongers like Rush
Limbaugh.


Maxprop wrote:
Is Rush preaching hatred any more than Michael Moore, Al Franken, George
Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Harry Belefonte, and myriad others?? You seem
to be wearing some rather one-sided blinders these days.


Not at all.

Quote any place where any of those people said that conservatives should
be locked up, which is about the mildest thing Rush says about
libby-rulls (and other minorites).

It's obvious you've never listened to him. I've never heard him say that
liberals should be locked up, at least not unless in jest. But it's not a
bad idea. :-)

If anything, the problem is that violent fanatacism sells, and the
liberal rabble-rousers are all too nice.

Really? Who was left-wing actor (maybe Alec Baldwin) who advocated
assassinating Ken Starr? I've never heard Limbaugh, Hannity, Snow, or any
of the other conservative pundits advocating violence. If you believe
that there's no hate speech emanting from the left, you're delusional.

For example, which liberal Senator called for the assassination of a
sitting President of the opposite party?

You tell me.


Trick question: none, nor would it be tolerated (it shouldn't be
tolerated from either party IMHO). However NC's own Jesse Helms on two
seperate occasions stated publicly (once in a speech to a military crowd)
that any real patriot would pick up his gun and shoot Clinton, and be
proud of it. I don't seem to recall the "liberal biased media" making
much of it at the time.

I don't recall that at all, but it doesn't surprise me. Jesse Helms came
from an entirely different period in our country's history. I know of
almost no one who wouldn't label him a crackpot.

In short, you're a product of your environment... steeped in a lot of
vigorous but senseless & fact-free screeching & whining about how
everything bad is the liberals fault.

Is that so? I guess it was all those radical left-wing years that made me
what I am. But while you've brought up the subject, yes, I believe a lot
of what's bad about our society can be directly attributed to
liberal/progressive causes and actions. I used to support (financially)
the ACLU for decades. As they've completely abberated from their original
agenda, I think my money was poorly spent. That's just one example. I'm
sure you don't care to hear more. However I also believe that a lot of
what is wrong with our society can also be attributed to ultra-right wing
causes and agendas as well. The religious right is dictatorial and
unforgiving, and I'm disappointed that the GOP hasn't distanced itself
from them. Unlike you, I can see both sides of the issue.

So of course, anything that *isn't* a lot of right-wing blather seems
liberal to you. But it's still a (relatively) free country, you listen to
all that crap because you like it. And it shows.

Unlike you, I listen to both sides and make up my mind. That I've chosen
to favor some conservative and right-of-center fiscal positions over those
on the left does not automatically make me wrong, despite your viewpoint.

I believe we are overtaxed and our government overspends. I'm opposed to
increasing income taxes, which the democrats will surely do if they
capture the White House and both houses of Congress. I'm in favor of
fiscal responsibility on the part of our leaders, which is why I detest
the current administration. I believe in the US Constitution and feel
strongly that it should be preserved rather than altered or interpreted to
the whims of the party in power. I'd like to see government shrunk
dramatically, with some bureaus done away with entirely, or at least
reduced dramatically. I don't care if gays want to get married--it
shouldn't be a political issue--and I support a woman's rights to decide
w/r/t pregnancy, but pray the decision is life. I support a law-abiding
citizen's right to keep and bear arms. I'm strongly in favor of cleaner
air, water; and I oppose the destruction of federal natural lands. I
think current and past administrations have done a dismal job with the
environment and our federal lands. I believe in the right for individuals
to burn the American flag in protest as a freedom of expression. And I'm
opposed to *not* taking the necessary measures to insure the security our
borders and stop or severely limit illegal immigration. It's my
impression that our government is bloated, inefficient, far too large,
and wasteful. I'm clearly a libertarian with moderate social beliefs.

If those beliefs brand me a right-wing extremist in your viewpoint, you
could only be situated on the extreme far left yourself.

Max

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I think you're talking about a work of fiction.

Wrong again, Jon. I was watching when it was said on one of the late night
talk show--can't recall if it was Leno or Letterman, but that's what he
said. The other detail I'm not sure of was whether it was Alec Baldwin or
Charles Grodin.

BTW...
Kenneth Starr says he never should have led the investigation that
resulted in the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton.

I agree with him, if that's what he said. It was a witch hunt, costing
millions, accomplishing nothing.

The former independent counsel, now dean of the Pepperdine University law
school, says "the most fundamental thing that could have been done
differently" was for somebody else to have investigated Clinton's
statements under oath denying he had an affair with White House intern
Monica Lewinsky.

Starr said his role in a years long investigation of Clinton should have
focused instead on Clinton's role in the failed Arkansas land deal known
as Whitewater.

Waaaaaaaaay too much money and wasted time is being spent on partisan
political witch hunts and attacks in Washington these days. Our federal
legislators aren't exactly doing what we sent them there to do. Then again,
when they do nothing at all, we seem to reap the greatest benefits. g

As for vitriol and anger coming from both extremes, I ask only that you take
a hard, objective (yeah, like that's gonna happen g) look at *both*
fringes. If you do you'll see the hate-speech and rancor emanating equally
from both poles. There are no rights and wrongs in this, only varying
degrees of stupidity.

Max

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

Quote any place where any of those people said that conservatives should
be locked up, which is about the mildest thing Rush says about libby-rulls
(and other minorites).

Maxprop wrote:
It's obvious you've never listened to him.

This is an excellent example of how wrong you are, and how
quick to make insulting assumptions about those who disagree
with you.

I listen (sort of) to Rush Limbaugh for many hours a week.
The radio in the shop where I work (sometimes) is tuned to a
station that carries his show.




If anything, the problem is that violent fanatacism sells, and the liberal
rabble-rousers are all too nice.


Really? Who was left-wing actor (maybe Alec Baldwin) who advocated
assassinating Ken Starr?

And in your mind, this is the same as a high ranking
politicial advocating the assassination of a sitting President?


.... I've never heard Limbaugh, Hannity, Snow, or any
of the other conservative pundits advocating violence.

Well then, you've never listened.

.... If you believe that
there's no hate speech emanting from the left, you're delusional.


I hear the claim made from the right quite often.
There may be some "hate speech" coming from the far-left
wing, but it certainly doesn't have it own syndicated shows
& cable channels... and what little I've heard is rather
mild compared to such things as "Liberals = Traitors."

So, wrong again... hate speech from the left is less in
scale & in scope.

Besides, two wrongs don't make a right, as I believe Jon
tried to point out to you.




.... Jesse Helms came
from an entirely different period in our country's history. I know of
almost no one who wouldn't label him a crackpot.


He was a powerful senior Republican. He was also a man who
stood by his principles... while I disgree strongly with
many of those principles, I can respect him for that.
Senator Helms was not out to line his own pockets nor did he
bend his ethics for expedience.



...... I used to support (financially) the
ACLU for decades. As they've completely abberated from their original
agenda, I think my money was poorly spent.

Well, there you go again. The ACLU has not changed it's
purpose nor principles for many many decades, if ever. Maybe
you just weren't paying attention.



.... That's just one example. I'm
sure you don't care to hear more.

?? Go ahead, I'm not in a hurry.




Unlike you, I listen to both sides and make up my mind.

Since you have no idea what I listen to, this is just more
Bobsprit-like blather.




I believe we are overtaxed and our government overspends.

well, duh

... I'm opposed to
increasing income taxes, which the democrats will surely do if they capture
the White House and both houses of Congress.

Right, what this country needs is a good 5 cent cigar, and
more tax cuts for the rich.



.... I'm in favor of fiscal
responsibility on the part of our leaders, which is why I detest the current
administration.

Then why did you campaign for them so frantically?



.... I believe in the US Constitution and feel strongly that it
should be preserved rather than altered or interpreted to the whims of the
party in power.

Agreed

... I'd like to see government shrunk dramatically, with some
bureaus done away with entirely, or at least reduced dramatically.

Agreed again, but I suspect we'd disagree on specifics

.... I don't
care if gays want to get married--

My feelings on the subject can be pretty much summed up by
the mock protest sign "STOP Gay Marriage.... haven't they
suffered enough already?"



.... I support a law-abiding citizen's right to keep and bear arms.

Yeah but you're not a cool "closet" gun owner like me


... I'm
strongly in favor of cleaner air, water;

Who isn't?
The question is, are you in favor of environmental
regulations that are functional and actively enforced.


.... I'm clearly a libertarian with
moderate social beliefs.


You're clearly self-deluded. Not really a problem though,
except that you're so aggressively vocal about what you
think others believe.

I don't have a problem with any citizen voting as he thinks
best. That's what democracy is about. I *do* have a problem
with people who insist that a 51% majority is an entitlement
to install a dictatorial plutocracy with fascist tendencies
(this is not an insult, just going by the dictionary
definition of those words... look it up). I *do* have a
problem with crooked voting machines, and gerrymandering,
and lots of other electoral tricks... and so should every
other citizen!

I don't have a problem with free speech. But it's a big
problem when a lot of people... especially people who are
backed by big money... make a habit of shouting "FIRE" in
crowded theaters.

Rush Limbaugh once said "Freedom of speech means I can
demand that anybody who disagrees with me to shut the hell
up." Kinda funny as a semi-clever play on words, but as a
political principal, it stinks.

Doug King

Bloody "D" Day Anniv.
 

And this is important because it was an actor who's name you can
remember???? More important than when Cheney said, "Go f*ck yourself" to a
Senator on the floor of the Senate?

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

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I think you're talking about a work of fiction.

Wrong again, Jon. I was watching when it was said on one of the late
night talk show--can't recall if it was Leno or Letterman, but that's what
he said. The other detail I'm not sure of was whether it was Alec Baldwin
or Charles Grodin.

BTW...
Kenneth Starr says he never should have led the investigation that
resulted in the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton.

I agree with him, if that's what he said. It was a witch hunt, costing
millions, accomplishing nothing.

The former independent counsel, now dean of the Pepperdine University law
school, says "the most fundamental thing that could have been done
differently" was for somebody else to have investigated Clinton's
statements under oath denying he had an affair with White House intern
Monica Lewinsky.

Starr said his role in a years long investigation of Clinton should have
focused instead on Clinton's role in the failed Arkansas land deal known
as Whitewater.

Waaaaaaaaay too much money and wasted time is being spent on partisan
political witch hunts and attacks in Washington these days. Our federal
legislators aren't exactly doing what we sent them there to do. Then
again, when they do nothing at all, we seem to reap the greatest benefits.
g

As for vitriol and anger coming from both extremes, I ask only that you
take a hard, objective (yeah, like that's gonna happen g) look at *both*
fringes. If you do you'll see the hate-speech and rancor emanating
equally from both poles. There are no rights and wrongs in this, only
varying degrees of stupidity.

Max