|
Flipping Flopper
On Dec 31 2008, 9:00*pm, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote: On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:34:47 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote: On Dec 27, 11:38*pm, Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 20:14:41 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote: On Dec 27, 4:02*pm, D Murphy wrote: wrote in news:ede6df2a-5d07-4470-a012- : ÿ Will they be giving back the $28,000? They should buy O'bamas senate seat. That's not nearly enough money. It appears to be $25,000.00 minimum for an appointed state job. State contracts sell for more. Senate seats according to Blago are "****ing golden." We have testimony in Federal court that state jobs and contracts were sold in exchange for donations to Blagojevich's campaign. The natural question would be; who was running that campaign and just how much did the campaign managers know about it. The answer is Blagojevich, Emanuel, Obama, and Wilhelm ran the campaign. I find it hard to believe that any member of this team who ran the budget, hustled donations, bought advertising, and met regularly didn't know what was going on. Did Obama not want to deal for the seat because he figured Blago owed him? Or did he suddenly find some ethics? Time will tell. I know I'm resting easier now that the Obama transition team has finished its investigation into the Obama transition team and much to my surprise found no evidence of "inappropriate" contact with Blago. Case closed. At least until Blago gets convicted and decides to sing like Rezko and the rest. Obama will be into his third year by then. -- Dan CNC Videos - http://tinyurl.com/yzdt6d Hopefully, the feds have made copies of the tapes because once the new administration puts their guy in charge of the FBI... Aren't you the guy who was going to support the new president? -- Regards, Curly He isn't the new president yet. Then are we to believe that on January 21st you'll unreservedly support Obama and lamblast Bush? *Until then, he's a suspec, no? I have no idea what a "suspec" is. Because you are stoopid. -- Regards, Curly ---------------------------------------------------------------------------*--- * * * *20 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------*---- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
Flipping Flopper
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 06:49:15 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote:
On Dec 31 2008, 9:00Â*pm, Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:34:47 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote: On Dec 27, 11:38Â*pm, Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 20:14:41 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote: On Dec 27, 4:02Â*pm, D Murphy wrote: wrote in news:ede6df2a-5d07-4470-a012- : ÿ Will they be giving back the $28,000? They should buy O'bamas senate seat. That's not nearly enough money. It appears to be $25,000.00 minimum for an appointed state job. State contracts sell for more. Senate seats according to Blago are "****ing golden." We have testimony in Federal court that state jobs and contracts were sold in exchange for donations to Blagojevich's campaign. The natural question would be; who was running that campaign and just how much did the campaign managers know about it. The answer is Blagojevich, Emanuel, Obama, and Wilhelm ran the campaign. I find it hard to believe that any member of this team who ran the budget, hustled donations, bought advertising, and met regularly didn't know what was going on. Did Obama not want to deal for the seat because he figured Blago owed him? Or did he suddenly find some ethics? Time will tell. I know I'm resting easier now that the Obama transition team has finished its investigation into the Obama transition team and much to my surprise found no evidence of "inappropriate" contact with Blago. Case closed. At least until Blago gets convicted and decides to sing like Rezko and the rest. Obama will be into his third year by then. -- Dan CNC Videos - http://tinyurl.com/yzdt6d Hopefully, the feds have made copies of the tapes because once the new administration puts their guy in charge of the FBI... Aren't you the guy who was going to support the new president? -- Regards, Curly He isn't the new president yet. Then are we to believe that on January 21st you'll unreservedly support Obama and lamblast Bush? Evading the corner you put yourself in? Â*Until then, he's a suspec, no? I have no idea what a "suspec" is. Because you are stoopid. Yeah, right, your illiterate ramblings are my fault. Just like Bush's titanic ****ups are Obamas fault. Looks like Rudy is another of your aliases, lying hypocrite. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 19 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Flipping Flopper
On Jan 1, 12:33*pm, Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 06:49:15 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote: On Dec 31 2008, 9:00*pm, Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:34:47 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote: On Dec 27, 11:38*pm, Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 20:14:41 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote: On Dec 27, 4:02*pm, D Murphy wrote: wrote in news:ede6df2a-5d07-4470-a012- : ÿ Will they be giving back the $28,000? They should buy O'bamas senate seat. That's not nearly enough money. It appears to be $25,000.00 minimum for an appointed state job. State contracts sell for more. Senate seats according to Blago are "****ing golden." We have testimony in Federal court that state jobs and contracts were sold in exchange for donations to Blagojevich's campaign. The natural question would be; who was running that campaign and just how much did the campaign managers know about it. The answer is Blagojevich, Emanuel, Obama, and Wilhelm ran the campaign. I find it hard to believe that any member of this team who ran the budget, hustled donations, bought advertising, and met regularly didn't know what was going on. Did Obama not want to deal for the seat because he figured Blago owed him? Or did he suddenly find some ethics? Time will tell. I know I'm resting easier now that the Obama transition team has finished its investigation into the Obama transition team and much to my surprise found no evidence of "inappropriate" contact with Blago. Case closed. At least until Blago gets convicted and decides to sing like Rezko and the rest. Obama will be into his third year by then. -- Dan CNC Videos - http://tinyurl.com/yzdt6d Hopefully, the feds have made copies of the tapes because once the new administration puts their guy in charge of the FBI... Aren't you the guy who was going to support the new president? -- Regards, Curly He isn't the new president yet. Then are we to believe that on January 21st you'll unreservedly support Obama and lamblast Bush? Evading the corner you put yourself in? *Until then, he's a suspec, no? I have no idea what a "suspec" is. Because you are stoopid. Yeah, right, your illiterate ramblings are my fault. *Just like Bush's titanic ****ups are Obamas fault. Even an imbecile could have seen I short-stroked the "t." You are dumber than an imbecile. Looks like Rudy is another of your aliases, lying hypocrite. Who is Rudy? |
Flipping Flopper
Cliff wrote in
: No I don't. But there's this search engine called Google and if you use it you can find loads of them. Like this one - http://pardonpower.com/2008/12/can-p...on-he-has.html That looks like bunkum. Says you. I did some searches g. Did your car keys finally turn up? Presidents can revoke pardons and commutations issued by other presidents as well as ones they issued themselves. HTH HTH Wow thanks for enlightening us. -- Dan CNC Videos - http://tinyurl.com/yzdt6d |
Flipping Flopper
Cliff wrote in
: On 27 Dec 2008 21:02:48 GMT, D Murphy wrote: I know I'm resting easier now that the Obama transition team has finished its investigation into the Obama transition team and much to my surprise found no evidence of "inappropriate" contact with Blago. Neither did the federal prosecutor. Fitzgerald never said any such thing. They don't even like each other IIRC. What does "like" have to do with it? -- Dan |
Flipping Flopper
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 02:41:20 +0000, D Murphy wrote:
Cliff wrote in : On 27 Dec 2008 21:02:48 GMT, D Murphy wrote: I know I'm resting easier now that the Obama transition team has finished its investigation into the Obama transition team and much to my surprise found no evidence of "inappropriate" contact with Blago. Neither did the federal prosecutor. Fitzgerald never said any such thing. Yes, Fitzgerald did: “I should be clear that the complaint makes no allegations whatsoever about the president-elect or his conduct†They don't even like each other IIRC. What does "like" have to do with it? Exercise your own deductive reasoning skills. The answer is easy. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 20 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Flipping Flopper
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in news:495db4a9$0
: On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 02:41:20 +0000, D Murphy wrote: Cliff wrote in : On 27 Dec 2008 21:02:48 GMT, D Murphy wrote: I know I'm resting easier now that the Obama transition team has finished its investigation into the Obama transition team and much to my surprise found no evidence of "inappropriate" contact with Blago. Neither did the federal prosecutor. Fitzgerald never said any such thing. Yes, Fitzgerald did: “I should be clear that the complaint makes no allegations whatsoever about the president-elect or his conduct†Nope. All that says is that the indictment is about Blagojevich and makes no claims about Obama. Here is the whole quote: "I should make clear, the complaint makes no allegations about the president-elect whatsoever, his conduct. This part of the scheme lost steam when the person that the governor thought was the president- elect's choice of senator took herself out of the running. But after the deal never happened, this is the governor's reaction, quote, "They're not willing to give me anything but appreciation. Bleep them," close quote. And again, the bleep is a redaction." Later there was this exchange: Q Would you please address one thing? And that is, when Blagojevich walks out of here today, unless I'm mistaken about the constitution of Illinois, he will still be governor. He will still have the power to make the appointment to the Senate seat. He will still have the power whether or not he's going to sign the bill that you are concerned about. Also would you address the fact -- and I know you've referred to this -- would you just address whether or not President-elect Obama was aware that any of these things were taking place? MR. FITZGERALD: Okay. I'm not going to speak for what the president-elect was aware of. We make no allegations that he's aware of anything, and that's as simply as I can put it. And the first part, my understanding is that he is the sitting governor of Illinois today, now, and that is not something we have any say in or control over. So at the end of the day, he will be the sitting governor. Later yet: Q You spoke before about if Senator -- you didn't know -- no awareness that Senator or President-elect Barack Obama knew about this. So is it safe to say he has not been briefed? And can you also tell us if any phone calls were made to President-elect Obama that you intercepted, or to Rahm Emanuel? MR. FITZGERALD: "Okay. I'm not going to go down anything that's not in the complaint. And what I simply said before is, I'm not going to -- I have enough trouble speaking for myself. I'm not going to try and speak in the voice of a president or a president-elect. So I simply pointed out that if you look at the complaint, there's no allegation that the president-elect -- there's no reference in the complaint to any conversations involving the president-elect or indicating that the president-elect was aware of it. And that's all I can say." I see nothing in Fitzgerald's comments that definitively says "Obama's transition team had no inappropriate contact with Blagojevich regarding the Senate seat." Quite the opposite in fact. How could Blagojevich be ****ed about Obama not offering him something in exchange for the seat other than "gratitude" if nobody from Obama's team had talked to Blagojevich about a deal? There is nothing ilegal about being approached with an offer to exchange say an ambassadorship for Blago in exchange for Jarret getting the seat. Nor is the Obama team even required to report it. But one would think a change agent and reformer would report it. So apparently Obama is neither of those things. They don't even like each other IIRC. What does "like" have to do with it? Exercise your own deductive reasoning skills. The answer is easy. In Illinois politics "like" has zip to do with anything. Think about this: Why did Obama work so hard to get Blagojevich elected? -- Dan CNC Videos - http://tinyurl.com/yzdt6d |
Flipping Flopper
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:06:50 +0000, D Murphy wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in news:495db4a9$0 : On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 02:41:20 +0000, D Murphy wrote: Cliff wrote in : On 27 Dec 2008 21:02:48 GMT, D Murphy wrote: I know I'm resting easier now that the Obama transition team has finished its investigation into the Obama transition team and much to my surprise found no evidence of "inappropriate" contact with Blago. Neither did the federal prosecutor. Fitzgerald never said any such thing. Yes, Fitzgerald did: “I should be clear that the complaint makes no allegations whatsoever about the president-elect or his conduct†Nope. All that says is that the indictment is about Blagojevich and makes no claims about Obama. Here is the whole quote: "I should make clear, the complaint makes no allegations about the president-elect whatsoever, his conduct. This part of the scheme lost steam when the person that the governor thought was the president- elect's choice of senator took herself out of the running. But after the deal never happened, this is the governor's reaction, quote, "They're not willing to give me anything but appreciation. Bleep them," close quote. And again, the bleep is a redaction." Later there was this exchange: Q Would you please address one thing? And that is, when Blagojevich walks out of here today, unless I'm mistaken about the constitution of Illinois, he will still be governor. He will still have the power to make the appointment to the Senate seat. He will still have the power whether or not he's going to sign the bill that you are concerned about. Also would you address the fact -- and I know you've referred to this -- would you just address whether or not President-elect Obama was aware that any of these things were taking place? MR. FITZGERALD: Okay. I'm not going to speak for what the president-elect was aware of. We make no allegations that he's aware of anything, and that's as simply as I can put it. And the first part, my understanding is that he is the sitting governor of Illinois today, now, and that is not something we have any say in or control over. So at the end of the day, he will be the sitting governor. Later yet: Q You spoke before about if Senator -- you didn't know -- no awareness that Senator or President-elect Barack Obama knew about this. So is it safe to say he has not been briefed? And can you also tell us if any phone calls were made to President-elect Obama that you intercepted, or to Rahm Emanuel? MR. FITZGERALD: "Okay. I'm not going to go down anything that's not in the complaint. And what I simply said before is, I'm not going to -- I have enough trouble speaking for myself. I'm not going to try and speak in the voice of a president or a president-elect. So I simply pointed out that if you look at the complaint, there's no allegation that the president-elect -- there's no reference in the complaint to any conversations involving the president-elect or indicating that the president-elect was aware of it. And that's all I can say." I see nothing in Fitzgerald's comments that definitively says "Obama's transition team had no inappropriate contact with Blagojevich regarding the Senate seat." Quite the opposite in fact. How could Blagojevich be ****ed about Obama not offering him something in exchange for the seat other than "gratitude" if nobody from Obama's team had talked to Blagojevich about a deal? There is nothing ilegal about being approached with an offer to exchange say an ambassadorship for Blago in exchange for Jarret getting the seat. Nor is the Obama team even required to report it. But one would think a change agent and reformer would report it. So apparently Obama is neither of those things. They don't even like each other IIRC. What does "like" have to do with it? Exercise your own deductive reasoning skills. The answer is easy. In Illinois politics "like" has zip to do with anything. Generally, sure, but that doesn't prove all are corrupt. Think about this: Why did Obama work so hard to get Blagojevich elected? Did he? Seriously, I'm not blowing you off, I've seen no indication that Obama worked "hard to get Blagojevich elected." -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Flipping Flopper
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in
: Did he? Seriously, I'm not blowing you off, I've seen no indication that Obama worked "hard to get Blagojevich elected." Obama, Emanuel, and David Wilhelm ran his first gubernatorial campaign. Obama came over after his guy lost in the primaries to Blagojevich. Obama also endorsed and spoke for Blagojevich's reelection campaign in 2006, long after it was known the Feds were breathing down his neck. According to Rahm Emanuel, Emanuel, Obama, Blagojevich's campaign co- chair David Wilhelm, and another Blagojevich staffer "were the top strategists of Blagojevich's 2002 gubernatorial victory," meeting weekly to outline campaign strategies. Since all the bad PR from Blagojevich's indictment, Wilhelm says Emanuel "overstated" Obama's role. Before the scandal broke Wilhelm, et al seemed fine with the comment. Quite the opposite in fact. This experience was used as an example to show that Obama had the political savy to win a presidential election. The initial gubernatorial campaign was where the "pay to play" allegations first surfaced aginst Blagojevich. Blago got into a fairly public family feud with his father-in-law Chicago Alderman Mel Reynolds shortly after taking office and Alderman Mel accused him of awarding contracts, state jobs, and positions in his administration in exchange for campaign contributions. Blago set records for gubernatorial campaign fund raising. The feds are particularly interested in the statistical improbabilty that $25,000.00 donors recieved a disproportionate number of state jobs, appointments, and contracts. It's also worth noting that Obama sponsored legislation that made Blagojevich's pay to play schemes involving state hospitals possible. The hospital board members now under indictment contributed large monetary donations to Obama's campaign. None of this means that Obama is guilty of any wrong doing. But I would sure like to see a candid interview between Obama and a journalist who has some in depth knowledge of these scandals and doesn't think that Obama is the second coming. That will never happen. -- Dan CNC Videos - http://tinyurl.com/yzdt6d |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 02:23:36 +0000, D Murphy wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in : Did he? Seriously, I'm not blowing you off, I've seen no indication that Obama worked "hard to get Blagojevich elected." Obama, Emanuel, and David Wilhelm ran his first gubernatorial campaign. Obama came over after his guy lost in the primaries to Blagojevich. In what capacity was Obama involved? Obama also endorsed and spoke for Blagojevich's reelection campaign in 2006, long after it was known the Feds were breathing down his neck. If true, this is not good. Got a cite that shows public knowledge of a federal investigation in progress prior to Obama's involvement? The one in your sig line has nothing to do with the issue. Don't do that lots of people are still on dialup and that was a movie link... According to Rahm Emanuel, Emanuel, Obama, Blagojevich's campaign co- chair David Wilhelm, and another Blagojevich staffer "were the top strategists of Blagojevich's 2002 gubernatorial victory," meeting weekly to outline campaign strategies. Have a cite for this? Since all the bad PR from Blagojevich's indictment, Wilhelm says Emanuel "overstated" Obama's role. Before the scandal broke Wilhelm, et al seemed fine with the comment. Quite the opposite in fact. This experience was used as an example to show that Obama had the political savy to win a presidential election. Politicians often take credit where not due, Obama hasn't to my knowledge but Emanuel well might. Third hand, not an indictment of Obama. The initial gubernatorial campaign was where the "pay to play" allegations first surfaced aginst Blagojevich. Blago got into a fairly public family feud with his father-in-law Chicago Alderman Mel Reynolds shortly after taking office and Alderman Mel accused him of awarding contracts, state jobs, and positions in his administration in exchange for campaign contributions. To my understanding this is also the time Obama began distancing himself from Blagojevich. Never again did they work together directly although they had some parallel agendas and programs. From here on down you've presented an indictment of Blago, nothing contained within pertains to Obama. My take is that when Obama was a political neophyte he attached himself to those who shared some degree of commonality with the intention of furthering programs he believed in with the benefit of later, personal, advantage. This is how politics works. But to this point in time no one has connected Obama with nefarious actions. Later, as Obama saw what went on in Springfield and Chicago, he had recriminations for involvement with a few early characters and distanced himself from any relationship. This is substantiated by the Federal Attorney investigating Blago. Note that I am not, was not, an Obama supporter. I did not vote for him either. I definitely do not agree with his spending programs. Others I support strongly like rebuilding our scientific leadership. I see Obama as an intelligent man who rectifies past mistakes and does not repeat them. But I will certainly be observing any future connection with corruption under the microscope. Blago set records for gubernatorial campaign fund raising. The feds are particularly interested in the statistical improbabilty that $25,000.00 donors recieved a disproportionate number of state jobs, appointments, and contracts. It's also worth noting that Obama sponsored legislation that made Blagojevich's pay to play schemes involving state hospitals possible. The hospital board members now under indictment contributed large monetary donations to Obama's campaign. None of this means that Obama is guilty of any wrong doing. But I would sure like to see a candid interview between Obama and a journalist who has some in depth knowledge of these scandals and doesn't think that Obama is the second coming. That will never happen. As would I but neither of us should expect Obama to put himself at risk even before his Presidency begins. He has a tremendous amount of work ahead, more than any president can possibly cope with. Bush has left an administration full of land mines for his successor. Almost enough to make me wish McCain had won to be the scapegoat. _Almost_. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Obama & Blagojevich
"Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message ... Did he? Seriously, I'm not blowing you off, I've seen no indication that Obama worked "hard to get Blagojevich elected." Data point: This topic has nothing to do with cnc machines, metalworking, survivalism, kooks, or boats. Yet those are the newsgroups you post to. Your discussion is of a political nature, yet you did not include any political groups in your cross-posting spam. When you discuss political topics, they don't belong in alt.machines.cnc,rec.crafts.metalworking,misc.surv ivalism,alt.usenet.kooks,or rec.boats. Your off-topic data points are trending you as a spammer to these newsgroups. See, we were listening to you, it takes more than one data point to produce a trend. Now that you proved your point, please go away. Or are you too stupid to understand data points? |
Obama & Blagojevich
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in
: On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 02:23:36 +0000, D Murphy wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote in : Did he? Seriously, I'm not blowing you off, I've seen no indication that Obama worked "hard to get Blagojevich elected." Obama, Emanuel, and David Wilhelm ran his first gubernatorial campaign. Obama came over after his guy lost in the primaries to Blagojevich. In what capacity was Obama involved? Strategist. Which puts him at the heart of the matter. Obama also endorsed and spoke for Blagojevich's reelection campaign in 2006, long after it was known the Feds were breathing down his neck. If true, this is not good. Got a cite that shows public knowledge of a federal investigation in progress prior to Obama's involvement? The one in your sig line has nothing to do with the issue. Don't do that lots of people are still on dialup and that was a movie link... I found a perfect link. It's coverage from the day of Obama's endorsement speech and mentions the ongoing investigation. http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=4466894 According to Rahm Emanuel, Emanuel, Obama, Blagojevich's campaign co- chair David Wilhelm, and another Blagojevich staffer "were the top strategists of Blagojevich's 2002 gubernatorial victory," meeting weekly to outline campaign strategies. Have a cite for this? The quote was given to the New Yorker by Emanuel himself and has been referenced quite a bit. Here is an example from Jake Tapper, White House correspondent from ABC news - http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/12/questions-arise.html Since all the bad PR from Blagojevich's indictment, Wilhelm says Emanuel "overstated" Obama's role. Before the scandal broke Wilhelm, et al seemed fine with the comment. Quite the opposite in fact. This experience was used as an example to show that Obama had the political savy to win a presidential election. Politicians often take credit where not due, Obama hasn't to my knowledge but Emanuel well might. Third hand, not an indictment of Obama. Agreed. But he did work for the campaign and they had mutual friends like fund raiser Tony Rezko. So it would also make sense that Obama had some knowledge of the finances of the campaign. The fact is we'll likely never get the truth. The truth probably benefits nobody involved. The initial gubernatorial campaign was where the "pay to play" allegations first surfaced aginst Blagojevich. Blago got into a fairly public family feud with his father-in-law Chicago Alderman Mel Reynolds shortly after taking office and Alderman Mel accused him of awarding contracts, state jobs, and positions in his administration in exchange for campaign contributions. To my understanding this is also the time Obama began distancing himself from Blagojevich. Never again did they work together directly although they had some parallel agendas and programs. Not at all. If anything Obama distanced himself from Michael Madigan who was the head of the Illinois Democratic party. His daughter Lisa madigan turned over her investigation of Blagojevich to the Feds when she was informed by Fitzgerald that he was investigating the matter which became known as "Operation Board Games." From here on down you've presented an indictment of Blago, nothing contained within pertains to Obama. My take is that when Obama was a political neophyte he attached himself to those who shared some degree of commonality with the intention of furthering programs he believed in with the benefit of later, personal, advantage. This is how politics works. But to this point in time no one has connected Obama with nefarious actions. Nobody has ever indicted Daley either. Nor Blagojevich until very recently. Later, as Obama saw what went on in Springfield and Chicago, he had recriminations for involvement with a few early characters and distanced himself from any relationship. This is substantiated by the Federal Attorney investigating Blago. Obama's wife was Daley's personal assistant. She worked right along side of Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager and John Harris who left Daley to go work for Blagojevich and was indicted along with him. Obama also had a close relationship with Rezko who was blagojevich's main fund raiser. The national media has downplayed Obama's relationship with Rezko as has Obama. But Obama was a regular visitor to Rezko's office which has been documented by an FBI mole. Note that I am not, was not, an Obama supporter. I did not vote for him either. I definitely do not agree with his spending programs. Others I support strongly like rebuilding our scientific leadership. I see Obama as an intelligent man who rectifies past mistakes and does not repeat them. But I will certainly be observing any future connection with corruption under the microscope. That is really all that needs to be done. The media needs to stop giving him a pass and they need to keep a close eye on this administration. They would have to be out of their minds to have even a whiff of corruption come off of their sorry hides at this point. But as the Blagojevich indictment shows, there is a belief that they won't get caught or what they are doing is actually OK. Blago set records for gubernatorial campaign fund raising. The feds are particularly interested in the statistical improbabilty that $25,000.00 donors recieved a disproportionate number of state jobs, appointments, and contracts. It's also worth noting that Obama sponsored legislation that made Blagojevich's pay to play schemes involving state hospitals possible. The hospital board members now under indictment contributed large monetary donations to Obama's campaign. None of this means that Obama is guilty of any wrong doing. But I would sure like to see a candid interview between Obama and a journalist who has some in depth knowledge of these scandals and doesn't think that Obama is the second coming. That will never happen. As would I but neither of us should expect Obama to put himself at risk even before his Presidency begins. He has a tremendous amount of work ahead, more than any president can possibly cope with. Bush has left an administration full of land mines for his successor. Almost enough to make me wish McCain had won to be the scapegoat. _Almost_. I don't think things are nearly as bad as you think. The wars are problematic but are winding down. The recession will be over before anything Obama does has a chance to affect it. The biggest problem will be that Democrats finally have all the power back and will want to push their agenda which will involve spending lots of new spending. Not only is there no money left but there is such an enormous debt that Obama will be unable to make his party happy. He will have to be fiscally conservative. There really is no other choice at this point. -- Dan CNC Videos - http://tinyurl.com/yzdt6d |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:37:01 -0600, Curtly Smellfartin wrote:
"Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message ... Did he? Seriously, I'm not blowing you off, I've seen no indication that Obama worked "hard to get Blagojevich elected." Data point: This topic has nothing to do with cnc machines, metalworking, survivalism, kooks, or boats. Yet those are the newsgroups you post to. Your discussion is of a political nature, yet you did not include any political groups in your cross-posting spam. When you discuss political topics, they don't belong in alt.machines.cnc,rec.crafts.metalworking,misc.surv ivalism,alt.usenet.kooks,or rec.boats. Your off-topic data points are trending you as a spammer to these newsgroups. See, we were listening to you, it takes more than one data point to produce a trend. Now that you proved your point, please go away. Or are you too stupid to understand data points? I notice that you did not trim the distribution list any more than those you bitch about. Speak to the originator and trim the list yourself before blaming others. Nym-shifting troll. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 05:32:50 +0000, D Murphy wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in : On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 02:23:36 +0000, D Murphy wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote in : Did he? Seriously, I'm not blowing you off, I've seen no indication that Obama worked "hard to get Blagojevich elected." Obama, Emanuel, and David Wilhelm ran his first gubernatorial campaign. Obama came over after his guy lost in the primaries to Blagojevich. In what capacity was Obama involved? Strategist. Which puts him at the heart of the matter. Obama also endorsed and spoke for Blagojevich's reelection campaign in 2006, long after it was known the Feds were breathing down his neck. If true, this is not good. Got a cite that shows public knowledge of a federal investigation in progress prior to Obama's involvement? The one in your sig line has nothing to do with the issue. Don't do that lots of people are still on dialup and that was a movie link... I found a perfect link. It's coverage from the day of Obama's endorsement speech and mentions the ongoing investigation. http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=4466894 Well done, yours was the first accurate synopsis of an article that I've read here in a very long time. According to Rahm Emanuel, Emanuel, Obama, Blagojevich's campaign co- chair David Wilhelm, and another Blagojevich staffer "were the top strategists of Blagojevich's 2002 gubernatorial victory," meeting weekly to outline campaign strategies. Have a cite for this? The quote was given to the New Yorker by Emanuel himself and has been referenced quite a bit. Here is an example from Jake Tapper, White House correspondent from ABC news - http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/12/questions-arise.html Again, laudable accuracy. Good job. Since all the bad PR from Blagojevich's indictment, Wilhelm says Emanuel "overstated" Obama's role. Before the scandal broke Wilhelm, et al seemed fine with the comment. Quite the opposite in fact. This experience was used as an example to show that Obama had the political savy to win a presidential election. Politicians often take credit where not due, Obama hasn't to my knowledge but Emanuel well might. Third hand, not an indictment of Obama. Agreed. But he did work for the campaign and they had mutual friends like fund raiser Tony Rezko. So it would also make sense that Obama had some knowledge of the finances of the campaign. The fact is we'll likely never get the truth. The truth probably benefits nobody involved. Precisely. The initial gubernatorial campaign was where the "pay to play" allegations first surfaced aginst Blagojevich. Blago got into a fairly public family feud with his father-in-law Chicago Alderman Mel Reynolds shortly after taking office and Alderman Mel accused him of awarding contracts, state jobs, and positions in his administration in exchange for campaign contributions. To my understanding this is also the time Obama began distancing himself from Blagojevich. Never again did they work together directly although they had some parallel agendas and programs. Not at all. If anything Obama distanced himself from Michael Madigan who was the head of the Illinois Democratic party. His daughter Lisa madigan turned over her investigation of Blagojevich to the Feds when she was informed by Fitzgerald that he was investigating the matter which became known as "Operation Board Games." Given your accuracy above, I'll take your word without demanding cites. From here on down you've presented an indictment of Blago, nothing contained within pertains to Obama. My take is that when Obama was a political neophyte he attached himself to those who shared some degree of commonality with the intention of furthering programs he believed in with the benefit of later, personal, advantage. This is how politics works. But to this point in time no one has connected Obama with nefarious actions. Nobody has ever indicted Daley either. Nor Blagojevich until very recently. You must mean Richard the Second, daddy was always in trouble but I get your point. Mine is that I'm prone to an assumption of innocence when judging what I perceive to be good intentions. Violate your trust and I'm your worst nightmare. Later, as Obama saw what went on in Springfield and Chicago, he had recriminations for involvement with a few early characters and distanced himself from any relationship. This is substantiated by the Federal Attorney investigating Blago. Obama's wife was Daley's personal assistant. She worked right along side of Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager and John Harris who left Daley to go work for Blagojevich and was indicted along with him. Obama also had a close relationship with Rezko who was blagojevich's main fund raiser. The national media has downplayed Obama's relationship with Rezko as has Obama. But Obama was a regular visitor to Rezko's office which has been documented by an FBI mole. Yes, I'm aware of Rezko as well as Aires but have dismissed those contacts until questionable acts arise. Note that I am not, was not, an Obama supporter. I did not vote for him either. I definitely do not agree with his spending programs. Others I support strongly like rebuilding our scientific leadership. I see Obama as an intelligent man who rectifies past mistakes and does not repeat them. But I will certainly be observing any future connection with corruption under the microscope. That is really all that needs to be done. The media needs to stop giving him a pass and they need to keep a close eye on this administration. They would have to be out of their minds to have even a whiff of corruption come off of their sorry hides at this point. But as the Blagojevich indictment shows, there is a belief that they won't get caught or what they are doing is actually OK. Investigative Journalism has been another casualty of the Bush/Cheney administration. Hopefully the web, and usenet, will pick up some of the slack lost. Huffington Post is one good source, there are others. Bush used my good will, and that of millions of others, to nefarious purposes. I will haunt the lying mother****er until the end of his days, which I hope will very, very, long and painful. You're right that we must let politicians know that we are not going to take this bull**** any longer. I do my part by speaking against the known bad guys, picketing a busy intersection when in the United States, letter writing, sending editorials, etc. Bush, never again! Blago set records for gubernatorial campaign fund raising. The feds are particularly interested in the statistical improbabilty that $25,000.00 donors recieved a disproportionate number of state jobs, appointments, and contracts. It's also worth noting that Obama sponsored legislation that made Blagojevich's pay to play schemes involving state hospitals possible. The hospital board members now under indictment contributed large monetary donations to Obama's campaign. None of this means that Obama is guilty of any wrong doing. But I would sure like to see a candid interview between Obama and a journalist who has some in depth knowledge of these scandals and doesn't think that Obama is the second coming. That will never happen. As would I but neither of us should expect Obama to put himself at risk even before his Presidency begins. He has a tremendous amount of work ahead, more than any president can possibly cope with. Bush has left an administration full of land mines for his successor. Almost enough to make me wish McCain had won to be the scapegoat. _Almost_. I don't think things are nearly as bad as you think. And I think things are worse than anyone knows. The wars are problematic but are winding down. Not so, Obama will remove troops from Iraq but has already commented on sending 20,000 more to Afghanistan. The recession will be over before anything Obama does has a chance to affect it. Not possible, there are too many skeletons in the closet, too much cash being printed out of nothingness, an inevitability of rampant inflation, and the economy continues deteriorate. Not until markets are de- leveraged will we have even an opportunity to stabilize. The biggest problem will be that Democrats finally have all the power back and will want to push their agenda which will involve spending lots of new spending. Not only is there no money left but there is such an enormous debt that Obama will be unable to make his party happy. He will have to be fiscally conservative. There really is no other choice at this point. The biggest problem from my perspective is that no one is any position of power is even capable of, let alone speaking of, returning our civil liberties. The tools that Bush/Cheney put into action will be abused by future administrations until they are permanently, undeniably, lawfully, revoked or rescinded. Like the Patriot Act. Not only the BUsh administration but every single signatory must be tried for treason. And thanks again for an intelligent, honest, dialog even if we don't see eye-to-eye it is refreshing to speak with you. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Obama & Blagojevich
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in
: Obama also had a close relationship with Rezko who was blagojevich's main fund raiser. The national media has downplayed Obama's relationship with Rezko as has Obama. But Obama was a regular visitor to Rezko's office which has been documented by an FBI mole. Yes, I'm aware of Rezko as well as Aires but have dismissed those contacts until questionable acts arise. I think Aires is a case where Obama had to rub elbows with undesirable types in order to garner political support in his district. Rezko is a different deal. Aires could be considered morally corrupt by some. Last I knew we still had freedom of speech and as far as his crimes go, he had his day in court. I'm not real big on moral crusaders one way or the other. Rezko on the other hand is a corrupt middleman. He puts the money together with the influence and seeks personal enrichment along the way. If some reports are to be believed he is allegedly one of the architects of the "combine." Which is a group of corrupt Democrats and Republicans. It was a brilliant move for him really. Twice the opportunity to make money. Note that I am not, was not, an Obama supporter. I did not vote for him either. I definitely do not agree with his spending programs. Others I support strongly like rebuilding our scientific leadership. I see Obama as an intelligent man who rectifies past mistakes and does not repeat them. But I will certainly be observing any future connection with corruption under the microscope. That is really all that needs to be done. The media needs to stop giving him a pass and they need to keep a close eye on this administration. They would have to be out of their minds to have even a whiff of corruption come off of their sorry hides at this point. But as the Blagojevich indictment shows, there is a belief that they won't get caught or what they are doing is actually OK. Investigative Journalism has been another casualty of the Bush/Cheney administration. Hopefully the web, and usenet, will pick up some of the slack lost. Huffington Post is one good source, there are others. Journalism is a casualty of TV and the internet. Newspapers haven't figured out how to make money in this new era of information and it's the lack of money that's killing journalism. They simply can't afford to have people investigate a story for a month or more. Bush used my good will, and that of millions of others, to nefarious purposes. I will haunt the lying mother****er until the end of his days, which I hope will very, very, long and painful. You're right that we must let politicians know that we are not going to take this bull**** any longer. I do my part by speaking against the known bad guys, picketing a busy intersection when in the United States, letter writing, sending editorials, etc. Bush, never again! I never cared much for him but I don't think he's evil or corrupt either. My take is that he's a somewhat dimwitted moral crusader. Like I said earlier, I don't have much use for crusaders of any stripe. He's corrupt in the sense that he believes his morals trump all. But Rezko tried to buy his influence and get Fitzgerald booted out of Chicago and got nowhere. I'll bet that if he offered some moral imperative rather than cash, Fitzgerald would be long gone. The fact that Fitzgerald put away a Republican governer didn't even influence Bush. If anything it strengthened his resolve. If Rezko could have shown Fitzgerald to be pro abortion or against the war, then he'd be gone. Blago set records for gubernatorial campaign fund raising. The feds are particularly interested in the statistical improbabilty that $25,000.00 donors recieved a disproportionate number of state jobs, appointments, and contracts. It's also worth noting that Obama sponsored legislation that made Blagojevich's pay to play schemes involving state hospitals possible. The hospital board members now under indictment contributed large monetary donations to Obama's campaign. None of this means that Obama is guilty of any wrong doing. But I would sure like to see a candid interview between Obama and a journalist who has some in depth knowledge of these scandals and doesn't think that Obama is the second coming. That will never happen. As would I but neither of us should expect Obama to put himself at risk even before his Presidency begins. He has a tremendous amount of work ahead, more than any president can possibly cope with. Bush has left an administration full of land mines for his successor. Almost enough to make me wish McCain had won to be the scapegoat. _Almost_. I don't think things are nearly as bad as you think. And I think things are worse than anyone knows. The wars are problematic but are winding down. Not so, Obama will remove troops from Iraq but has already commented on sending 20,000 more to Afghanistan. Afghanistan was set in motion when Bush was still a coke snorting party animal. Read up on Charlie Wilson speaking of Texans that ****ed things up. Or he did the right thing and we failed to follow through depending on your perspective. The recession will be over before anything Obama does has a chance to affect it. Not possible, there are too many skeletons in the closet, too much cash being printed out of nothingness, an inevitability of rampant inflation, and the economy continues deteriorate. Not until markets are de- leveraged will we have even an opportunity to stabilize. The real bankruptcy is still a 15-20 years away. Despite all the rhetoric the underpinnings of the US economy are still sound. The government and its debt are shakey. The two are not necesarily tied together. The biggest problem will be that Democrats finally have all the power back and will want to push their agenda which will involve spending lots of new spending. Not only is there no money left but there is such an enormous debt that Obama will be unable to make his party happy. He will have to be fiscally conservative. There really is no other choice at this point. The biggest problem from my perspective is that no one is any position of power is even capable of, let alone speaking of, returning our civil liberties. The tools that Bush/Cheney put into action will be abused by future administrations until they are permanently, undeniably, lawfully, revoked or rescinded. Yup. And every day we lose a little more. On top the the Republicans paranoia you have the Democrats who believe that you should be on camera every moment you are outside. They also want to track your car with GPS and dictate what you can listen to on radio and TV. Like the Patriot Act. Not only the BUsh administration but every single signatory must be tried for treason. Better to just repeal it and not get all idealistic about it. And thanks again for an intelligent, honest, dialog even if we don't see eye-to-eye it is refreshing to speak with you. No sweat. I'm not really into the name calling deal anyway which seems to be the main driver of some peoples behaviour. -- Dan CNC Videos - http://tinyurl.com/yzdt6d |
Obama & Blagojevich
"D Murphy" wrote in message ... Curly Surmudgeon wrote in : Obama also had a close relationship with Rezko who was blagojevich's main fund raiser. The national media has downplayed Obama's relationship with Rezko as has Obama. But Obama was a regular visitor to Rezko's office which has been documented by an FBI mole. Yes, I'm aware of Rezko as well as Aires but have dismissed those contacts until questionable acts arise. I think Aires is a case where Obama had to rub elbows with undesirable types in order to garner political support in his district. Rezko is a different deal. Aires could be considered morally corrupt by some. Last I knew we still had freedom of speech and as far as his crimes go, he had his day in court. I'm not real big on moral crusaders one way or the other. Rezko on the other hand is a corrupt middleman. He puts the money together with the influence and seeks personal enrichment along the way. If some reports are to be believed he is allegedly one of the architects of the "combine." Which is a group of corrupt Democrats and Republicans. It was a brilliant move for him really. Twice the opportunity to make money. Note that I am not, was not, an Obama supporter. I did not vote for him either. I definitely do not agree with his spending programs. Others I support strongly like rebuilding our scientific leadership. I see Obama as an intelligent man who rectifies past mistakes and does not repeat them. But I will certainly be observing any future connection with corruption under the microscope. That is really all that needs to be done. The media needs to stop giving him a pass and they need to keep a close eye on this administration. They would have to be out of their minds to have even a whiff of corruption come off of their sorry hides at this point. But as the Blagojevich indictment shows, there is a belief that they won't get caught or what they are doing is actually OK. Investigative Journalism has been another casualty of the Bush/Cheney administration. Hopefully the web, and usenet, will pick up some of the slack lost. Huffington Post is one good source, there are others. Journalism is a casualty of TV and the internet. Newspapers haven't figured out how to make money in this new era of information and it's the lack of money that's killing journalism. They simply can't afford to have people investigate a story for a month or more. Bush used my good will, and that of millions of others, to nefarious purposes. I will haunt the lying mother****er until the end of his days, which I hope will very, very, long and painful. You're right that we must let politicians know that we are not going to take this bull**** any longer. I do my part by speaking against the known bad guys, picketing a busy intersection when in the United States, letter writing, sending editorials, etc. Bush, never again! I never cared much for him but I don't think he's evil or corrupt either. My take is that he's a somewhat dimwitted moral crusader. Like I said earlier, I don't have much use for crusaders of any stripe. He's corrupt in the sense that he believes his morals trump all. But Rezko tried to buy his influence and get Fitzgerald booted out of Chicago and got nowhere. I'll bet that if he offered some moral imperative rather than cash, Fitzgerald would be long gone. The fact that Fitzgerald put away a Republican governer didn't even influence Bush. If anything it strengthened his resolve. If Rezko could have shown Fitzgerald to be pro abortion or against the war, then he'd be gone. Blago set records for gubernatorial campaign fund raising. The feds are particularly interested in the statistical improbabilty that $25,000.00 donors recieved a disproportionate number of state jobs, appointments, and contracts. It's also worth noting that Obama sponsored legislation that made Blagojevich's pay to play schemes involving state hospitals possible. The hospital board members now under indictment contributed large monetary donations to Obama's campaign. None of this means that Obama is guilty of any wrong doing. But I would sure like to see a candid interview between Obama and a journalist who has some in depth knowledge of these scandals and doesn't think that Obama is the second coming. That will never happen. As would I but neither of us should expect Obama to put himself at risk even before his Presidency begins. He has a tremendous amount of work ahead, more than any president can possibly cope with. Bush has left an administration full of land mines for his successor. Almost enough to make me wish McCain had won to be the scapegoat. _Almost_. I don't think things are nearly as bad as you think. And I think things are worse than anyone knows. The wars are problematic but are winding down. Not so, Obama will remove troops from Iraq but has already commented on sending 20,000 more to Afghanistan. Afghanistan was set in motion when Bush was still a coke snorting party animal. Read up on Charlie Wilson speaking of Texans that ****ed things up. Or he did the right thing and we failed to follow through depending on your perspective. The recession will be over before anything Obama does has a chance to affect it. Not possible, there are too many skeletons in the closet, too much cash being printed out of nothingness, an inevitability of rampant inflation, and the economy continues deteriorate. Not until markets are de- leveraged will we have even an opportunity to stabilize. The real bankruptcy is still a 15-20 years away. Despite all the rhetoric the underpinnings of the US economy are still sound. The government and its debt are shakey. The two are not necesarily tied together. The biggest problem will be that Democrats finally have all the power back and will want to push their agenda which will involve spending lots of new spending. Not only is there no money left but there is such an enormous debt that Obama will be unable to make his party happy. He will have to be fiscally conservative. There really is no other choice at this point. The biggest problem from my perspective is that no one is any position of power is even capable of, let alone speaking of, returning our civil liberties. The tools that Bush/Cheney put into action will be abused by future administrations until they are permanently, undeniably, lawfully, revoked or rescinded. Yup. And every day we lose a little more. On top the the Republicans paranoia you have the Democrats who believe that you should be on camera every moment you are outside. They also want to track your car with GPS and dictate what you can listen to on radio and TV. Like the Patriot Act. Not only the BUsh administration but every single signatory must be tried for treason. Better to just repeal it and not get all idealistic about it. And thanks again for an intelligent, honest, dialog even if we don't see eye-to-eye it is refreshing to speak with you. No sweat. I'm not really into the name calling deal anyway which seems to be the main driver of some peoples behaviour. -- Dan Ayres did not have his day in court. Why he is free. |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 22:37:01 -0600, "Curtly Smellfartin"
wrote: "Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message ... Did he? Seriously, I'm not blowing you off, I've seen no indication that Obama worked "hard to get Blagojevich elected." Data point: This topic has nothing to do with cnc machines, metalworking, survivalism, kooks, or boats. Yet those are the newsgroups you post to. Your discussion is of a political nature, yet you did not include any political groups in your cross-posting spam. When you discuss political topics, they don't belong in alt.machines.cnc,rec.crafts.metalworking,misc.sur vivalism,alt.usenet.kooks,or rec.boats. Your off-topic data points are trending you as a spammer to these newsgroups. See, we were listening to you, it takes more than one data point to produce a trend. Now that you proved your point, please go away. Or are you too stupid to understand data points? All praise gummer & the lying winger crowds!!! Found those "WMDs" yet? -- Cliff |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 07:25:53 +0000, D Murphy wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in : Obama also had a close relationship with Rezko who was blagojevich's main fund raiser. The national media has downplayed Obama's relationship with Rezko as has Obama. But Obama was a regular visitor to Rezko's office which has been documented by an FBI mole. Yes, I'm aware of Rezko as well as Aires but have dismissed those contacts until questionable acts arise. I think Aires is a case where Obama had to rub elbows with undesirable types in order to garner political support in his district. Rezko is a different deal. Aires could be considered morally corrupt by some. Last I knew we still had freedom of speech and as far as his crimes go, he had his day in court. I'm not real big on moral crusaders one way or the other. Rezko on the other hand is a corrupt middleman. He puts the money together with the influence and seeks personal enrichment along the way. If some reports are to be believed he is allegedly one of the architects of the "combine." Which is a group of corrupt Democrats and Republicans. It was a brilliant move for him really. Twice the opportunity to make money. True, he will most likely spend time in the public hotel too. Note that I am not, was not, an Obama supporter. I did not vote for him either. I definitely do not agree with his spending programs. Others I support strongly like rebuilding our scientific leadership. I see Obama as an intelligent man who rectifies past mistakes and does not repeat them. But I will certainly be observing any future connection with corruption under the microscope. That is really all that needs to be done. The media needs to stop giving him a pass and they need to keep a close eye on this administration. They would have to be out of their minds to have even a whiff of corruption come off of their sorry hides at this point. But as the Blagojevich indictment shows, there is a belief that they won't get caught or what they are doing is actually OK. Investigative Journalism has been another casualty of the Bush/Cheney administration. Hopefully the web, and usenet, will pick up some of the slack lost. Huffington Post is one good source, there are others. Journalism is a casualty of TV and the internet. Newspapers haven't figured out how to make money in this new era of information and it's the lack of money that's killing journalism. They simply can't afford to have people investigate a story for a month or more. Partially but Bush/Cheney gutted _investigative_ journalism in a full frontal assault. Bush used my good will, and that of millions of others, to nefarious purposes. I will haunt the lying mother****er until the end of his days, which I hope will very, very, long and painful. You're right that we must let politicians know that we are not going to take this bull**** any longer. I do my part by speaking against the known bad guys, picketing a busy intersection when in the United States, letter writing, sending editorials, etc. Bush, never again! I never cared much for him but I don't think he's evil or corrupt either. My take is that he's a somewhat dimwitted moral crusader. Like I said earlier, I don't have much use for crusaders of any stripe. He's corrupt in the sense that he believes his morals trump all. But Rezko tried to buy his influence and get Fitzgerald booted out of Chicago and got nowhere. Evil? Empty term. Bush is/was a puppet, as you say a "dimwitted moral crusader" but if America is a nation of law then Bush and his cronys must brought to justice or we will suffer further onslaughts against freedom. I'll bet that if he offered some moral imperative rather than cash, Fitzgerald would be long gone. The fact that Fitzgerald put away a Republican governer didn't even influence Bush. If anything it strengthened his resolve. If Rezko could have shown Fitzgerald to be pro abortion or against the war, then he'd be gone. Blago set records for gubernatorial campaign fund raising. The feds are particularly interested in the statistical improbabilty that $25,000.00 donors recieved a disproportionate number of state jobs, appointments, and contracts. It's also worth noting that Obama sponsored legislation that made Blagojevich's pay to play schemes involving state hospitals possible. The hospital board members now under indictment contributed large monetary donations to Obama's campaign. None of this means that Obama is guilty of any wrong doing. But I would sure like to see a candid interview between Obama and a journalist who has some in depth knowledge of these scandals and doesn't think that Obama is the second coming. That will never happen. As would I but neither of us should expect Obama to put himself at risk even before his Presidency begins. He has a tremendous amount of work ahead, more than any president can possibly cope with. Bush has left an administration full of land mines for his successor. Almost enough to make me wish McCain had won to be the scapegoat. _Almost_. I don't think things are nearly as bad as you think. And I think things are worse than anyone knows. The wars are problematic but are winding down. Not so, Obama will remove troops from Iraq but has already commented on sending 20,000 more to Afghanistan. Afghanistan was set in motion when Bush was still a coke snorting party animal. Read up on Charlie Wilson speaking of Texans that ****ed things up. Or he did the right thing and we failed to follow through depending on your perspective. I'm of the latter opinion. No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant. Bush ****ed that up too, squandering world-wide sympathy, involving our military into a ground war, giving moslems another cause to hate us, squandering precious national resources and a death-spiral. The recession will be over before anything Obama does has a chance to affect it. Not possible, there are too many skeletons in the closet, too much cash being printed out of nothingness, an inevitability of rampant inflation, and the economy continues deteriorate. Not until markets are de- leveraged will we have even an opportunity to stabilize. The real bankruptcy is still a 15-20 years away. Despite all the rhetoric the underpinnings of the US economy are still sound. The government and its debt are shakey. The two are not necesarily tied together. One word, "derivatives." The biggest problem will be that Democrats finally have all the power back and will want to push their agenda which will involve spending lots of new spending. Not only is there no money left but there is such an enormous debt that Obama will be unable to make his party happy. He will have to be fiscally conservative. There really is no other choice at this point. The biggest problem from my perspective is that no one is any position of power is even capable of, let alone speaking of, returning our civil liberties. The tools that Bush/Cheney put into action will be abused by future administrations until they are permanently, undeniably, lawfully, revoked or rescinded. Yup. And every day we lose a little more. On top the the Republicans paranoia you have the Democrats who believe that you should be on camera every moment you are outside. They also want to track your car with GPS and dictate what you can listen to on radio and TV. You got it. Want OnStar? Like the Patriot Act. Not only the BUsh administration but every single signatory must be tried for treason. Better to just repeal it and not get all idealistic about it. No, that invites more of the same behavior. The criminal behavior pattern of politicians must be broken. Bringing them to trial is the legal avenue. And thanks again for an intelligent, honest, dialog even if we don't see eye-to-eye it is refreshing to speak with you. No sweat. I'm not really into the name calling deal anyway which seems to be the main driver of some peoples behaviour. I sometimes lose patience and devolve into their petty games. It's nice to have an honest conversation without the trolls. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Obama & Blagojevich
Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
[snip] I'm of the latter opinion. No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant. Bush ****ed that up too, squandering world-wide sympathy, involving our military into a ground war, giving moslems another cause to hate us, squandering precious national resources and a death-spiral. That would have been a threshold we would have deeply regretted crossing, and in the worst possible region of the world in which to cross it. The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. But, in any case, as a technical matter, they would not have gotten the job done in Tora Bora. Moreover, world opinion would have shifted even more rapidly and irrevocably against us, and the entire Islamic world, including those who are kinda, sorta with us, would have risen as one in opposition. All they had to have done was commit sufficient resources to Afghanistan in the first place, and then employ them intelligently and in a timely manner, and they'd most likely have bagged ObL. Instead, American forces were used to push him towards the Pakistani border, and unreliable indigenous forces were the only ones positioned to prevent him from slipping across. Foolish. It struck me at the time that they must not have really wanted to catch him. Jeff |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote:
The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. Jeff Dumb. |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Jan 5, 7:08*pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. *I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. * Jeff Dumb. These are Harry's circle jerkers, they just make it up as they go along.. Whining about OBL as if he is still relevant or even alive....snerk These guys are talk radio and google hero's they are not really strong thinkers, just posers trying to fit in at the local coffee shop;) |
Obama & Blagojevich
|
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote: [snip] I'm of the latter opinion. No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant. Bush ****ed that up too, squandering world-wide sympathy, involving our military into a ground war, giving moslems another cause to hate us, squandering precious national resources and a death-spiral. That would have been a threshold we would have deeply regretted crossing, I disagree, reasons below. and in the worst possible region of the world in which to cross it. The best place to make such a stand. The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. But, in any case, as a technical matter, they would not have gotten the job done in Tora Bora. I said "nuke," singular. One medium sized nuke, 20 megaton for example, would have vaporized the entire mountain and turned the region into a sheet of glass. Not only would it have nailed bin laden, we knew he was there at the time, and obliterated his command hq, but sent a signal to those who only know raw force. Simultaneously we would have removed all our troops and bases from around the world removing the reason Islam hates us. Moreover, world opinion would have shifted even more rapidly and irrevocably against us, and the entire Islamic world, including those who are kinda, sorta with us, would have risen as one in opposition. Naah, on 9/12 we had world opinion with us. A few might have made public statements decrying the use but world opinion would have been, "America finally grew a set of balls, let's not **** with them!" All they had to have done was commit sufficient resources to Afghanistan in the first place, and then employ them intelligently and in a timely manner, and they'd most likely have bagged ObL. "...Most likely have bagged obl..." Close isn't good enough. You don't know the history of Afghanistan, it beat the entire British Empire and Soviet Union. With our supply lines a ground war is insane. Instead, American forces were used to push him towards the Pakistani border, and unreliable indigenous forces were the only ones positioned to prevent him from slipping across. Foolish. It struck me at the time that they must not have really wanted to catch him. Jeff Osama outwitted the entire Bush administration. Those who believe a ground war of attrition will ever win in Afghanistan don't understand history. The idea is not to kill pawns but to kill the queen. Headless, an enemy dies. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Obama & Blagojevich
Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote: [snip] I'm of the latter opinion. No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant. Bush ****ed that up too, squandering world-wide sympathy, involving our military into a ground war, giving moslems another cause to hate us, squandering precious national resources and a death-spiral. That would have been a threshold we would have deeply regretted crossing, I disagree, reasons below. and in the worst possible region of the world in which to cross it. The best place to make such a stand. The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. But, in any case, as a technical matter, they would not have gotten the job done in Tora Bora. I said "nuke," singular. One medium sized nuke, 20 megaton for example, would have vaporized the entire mountain and turned the region into a sheet of glass. Not only would it have nailed bin laden, we knew he was there at the time, and obliterated his command hq, but sent a signal to those who only know raw force. A 20 megaton nuke is larger than anything in our current inventory, and many times larger than any EPW (Earth Penetrating Weapon) now available or even planned. An airburst weapon would be useless against hardened targets like caves and bunkers, unless they were very shallow and the burst was very large pretty close. It's effectiveness against surface targets would be somewhat limited by terrain. It would, however, kill and sicken millions in places like Pakistan and China. The consequences would be unacceptable, particularly just to try, and fail, to kill one man. An EPW would require precise targeting data, and if we had such precise and timely data, we wouldn't have needed a nuke. EPWs are precision weapons for fixed targets like runways and underground command posts, not mobile targets hiding in any number of caves or other places. Their range of effect is quite limited. "Vaporized" mountains are the stuff of pure fantasy. Simultaneously we would have removed all our troops and bases from around the world removing the reason Islam hates us. Saudi Arabia would be a good start. They don't need us to defend them, and our bases there don't help us defend their ability to ship oil to us, either. Moreover, world opinion would have shifted even more rapidly and irrevocably against us, and the entire Islamic world, including those who are kinda, sorta with us, would have risen as one in opposition. Naah, on 9/12 we had world opinion with us. A few might have made public statements decrying the use but world opinion would have been, "America finally grew a set of balls, let's not **** with them!" All they had to have done was commit sufficient resources to Afghanistan in the first place, and then employ them intelligently and in a timely manner, and they'd most likely have bagged ObL. "...Most likely have bagged obl..." Close isn't good enough. You don't know the history of Afghanistan, it beat the entire British Empire and Soviet Union. With our supply lines a ground war is insane. You'd think invading two separate countries and overthrowing two regimes, one of which had nothing to do with 9/11, would be sufficient to make that point. I do know the history of the region rather well, and you are conflating a single, limited operation into the larger, continuing war there. Instead, American forces were used to push him towards the Pakistani border, and unreliable indigenous forces were the only ones positioned to prevent him from slipping across. Foolish. It struck me at the time that they must not have really wanted to catch him. Jeff Osama outwitted the entire Bush administration. Those who believe a ground war of attrition will ever win in Afghanistan don't understand history. Correct. The idea is not to kill pawns but to kill the queen. Headless, an enemy dies. If you think the problem is limited to ObL and whoever his current henchmen happen to be, then you need to seriously broaden your perspective. Jeff |
Obama & Blagojevich
"Cliff" wrote in message ... Found those "WMDs" yet? Found that birth certificate yet? |
Obama & Blagojevich
"Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "Cliff" wrote in message ... Found those "WMDs" yet? Found that birth certificate yet? Unlike Jesus, it wasn't lost. Following this train of thought offers real insight into the cultural pshyco;ogy that has produced todays result. There are LOTS of things a body could fault Obama for but citizenship ain't one of them. JC |
Obama & Blagojevich
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message ... "Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "Cliff" wrote in message ... Found those "WMDs" yet? Found that birth certificate yet? Unlike Jesus, it wasn't lost. I'm pretty sure there is sufficient documentation of Jesus's birth :) So, have you found that birth certificate yet? |
Obama & Blagojevich
"Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "John R. Carroll" wrote in message ... "Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "Cliff" wrote in message ... Found those "WMDs" yet? Found that birth certificate yet? Unlike Jesus, it wasn't lost. I'm pretty sure there is sufficient documentation of Jesus's birth :) Go ahead and produce it. JC |
Obama & Blagojevich
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message ... "Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "John R. Carroll" wrote in message ... "Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "Cliff" wrote in message ... Found those "WMDs" yet? Found that birth certificate yet? Unlike Jesus, it wasn't lost. I'm pretty sure there is sufficient documentation of Jesus's birth :) Go ahead and produce it. How original. I asked you first. |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:05:29 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote: [snip] I'm of the latter opinion. No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant. Bush ****ed that up too, squandering world-wide sympathy, involving our military into a ground war, giving moslems another cause to hate us, squandering precious national resources and a death-spiral. That would have been a threshold we would have deeply regretted crossing, I disagree, reasons below. and in the worst possible region of the world in which to cross it. The best place to make such a stand. The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. But, in any case, as a technical matter, they would not have gotten the job done in Tora Bora. I said "nuke," singular. One medium sized nuke, 20 megaton for example, would have vaporized the entire mountain and turned the region into a sheet of glass. Not only would it have nailed bin laden, we knew he was there at the time, and obliterated his command hq, but sent a signal to those who only know raw force. A 20 megaton nuke is larger than anything in our current inventory, According to published reports. I know for a fact that we had much bigger weapons than published in the '60's and see no reason that should have changed one iota. In fact it's probable that weapons exist that the President does not know of, like the neutron bomb. If they don't exist then the components do and one can be hastily assembled. and many times larger than any EPW (Earth Penetrating Weapon) now available or even planned. An airburst weapon would be useless against hardened targets like caves and bunkers, unless they were very shallow and the burst was very large pretty close. It's effectiveness against surface targets would be somewhat limited by terrain. It would, however, kill and sicken millions in places like Pakistan and China. The consequences would be unacceptable, particularly just to try, and fail, to kill one man. Perfect. This is not a campaign to bag OBL, it is a message to the entire world that our policy has changed. Both parties seem to like that word, lets use it. We are "changing" from a colonial, interventionist, nation to one that respects the sovereignty of others. **** with us and we will eliminate your entire gene line. An EPW would require precise targeting data, and if we had such precise and timely data, we wouldn't have needed a nuke. EPWs are precision weapons for fixed targets like runways and underground command posts, not mobile targets hiding in any number of caves or other places. Their range of effect is quite limited. I don't want to penetrate a mountain, I want a very big post-it on the forehead of every foreign leader. "Vaporized" mountains are the stuff of pure fantasy. See above. Simultaneously we would have removed all our troops and bases from around the world removing the reason Islam hates us. Saudi Arabia would be a good start. They don't need us to defend them, and our bases there don't help us defend their ability to ship oil to us, either. Only a bare start, I speak of a majority of our troops overseas. Moreover, world opinion would have shifted even more rapidly and irrevocably against us, and the entire Islamic world, including those who are kinda, sorta with us, would have risen as one in opposition. Naah, on 9/12 we had world opinion with us. A few might have made public statements decrying the use but world opinion would have been, "America finally grew a set of balls, let's not **** with them!" All they had to have done was commit sufficient resources to Afghanistan in the first place, and then employ them intelligently and in a timely manner, and they'd most likely have bagged ObL. "...Most likely have bagged obl..." Close isn't good enough. You don't know the history of Afghanistan, it beat the entire British Empire and Soviet Union. With our supply lines a ground war is insane. You'd think invading two separate countries and overthrowing two regimes, one of which had nothing to do with 9/11, would be sufficient to make that point. I do know the history of the region rather well, and you are conflating a single, limited operation into the larger, continuing war there. Perhaps you misunderstand my reasoning. I am not sending a message to the al qaeda barbarians but to the entire world. To achieve peace we must cease causing strife for others. When we stop screwing with others we can demand peace. Instead, American forces were used to push him towards the Pakistani border, and unreliable indigenous forces were the only ones positioned to prevent him from slipping across. Foolish. It struck me at the time that they must not have really wanted to catch him. Jeff Osama outwitted the entire Bush administration. Those who believe a ground war of attrition will ever win in Afghanistan don't understand history. Correct. Except Obama has already stated that he's stepping up the war in Afghanistan by an initial 20,000 troops. The idea is not to kill pawns but to kill the queen. Headless, an enemy dies. If you think the problem is limited to ObL and whoever his current henchmen happen to be, then you need to seriously broaden your perspective. Jeff No one has inquired, and I've not detailed my preference, before so I'm not surprised you misunderstood. This should dispel that cloud. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:57:02 -0600, Libby Loo wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message ... "Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "John R. Carroll" wrote in message ... "Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "Cliff" wrote in message ... Found those "WMDs" yet? Found that birth certificate yet? Unlike Jesus, it wasn't lost. I'm pretty sure there is sufficient documentation of Jesus's birth :) Go ahead and produce it. How original. I asked you first. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me.../obamas-birth- certificate-part-ii/ Your turn to present the birth certificate of Jesus Christ. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Obama & Blagojevich
Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:05:29 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote: [snip] I'm of the latter opinion. No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant. Bush ****ed that up too, squandering world-wide sympathy, involving our military into a ground war, giving moslems another cause to hate us, squandering precious national resources and a death-spiral. That would have been a threshold we would have deeply regretted crossing, I disagree, reasons below. and in the worst possible region of the world in which to cross it. The best place to make such a stand. The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. But, in any case, as a technical matter, they would not have gotten the job done in Tora Bora. I said "nuke," singular. One medium sized nuke, 20 megaton for example, would have vaporized the entire mountain and turned the region into a sheet of glass. Not only would it have nailed bin laden, we knew he was there at the time, and obliterated his command hq, but sent a signal to those who only know raw force. A 20 megaton nuke is larger than anything in our current inventory, According to published reports. I know for a fact that we had much bigger weapons than published in the '60's and see no reason that should have changed one iota. In fact it's probable that weapons exist that the President does not know of, like the neutron bomb. If they don't exist then the components do and one can be hastily assembled. and many times larger than any EPW (Earth Penetrating Weapon) now available or even planned. An airburst weapon would be useless against hardened targets like caves and bunkers, unless they were very shallow and the burst was very large pretty close. It's effectiveness against surface targets would be somewhat limited by terrain. It would, however, kill and sicken millions in places like Pakistan and China. The consequences would be unacceptable, particularly just to try, and fail, to kill one man. Perfect. This is not a campaign to bag OBL, Your writing "No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant" was what I was responding to. it is a message to the entire world that our policy has changed. Both parties seem to like that word, lets use it. We are "changing" from a colonial, interventionist, nation to one that respects the sovereignty of others. Causing massive amounts of radiological fallout spreading across the borders of multiple nations is rather likely to be taken by them as disrespectful of their sovereignty, if not an outright act of war. **** with us and we will eliminate your entire gene line. Not really possible, although I think the occasional massively, brutally disproportionate over-reaction to provocation is likely to have a most salutary effect on the future calculations of one's enemies. An EPW would require precise targeting data, and if we had such precise and timely data, we wouldn't have needed a nuke. EPWs are precision weapons for fixed targets like runways and underground command posts, not mobile targets hiding in any number of caves or other places. Their range of effect is quite limited. I don't want to penetrate a mountain, I want a very big post-it on the forehead of every foreign leader. "Vaporized" mountains are the stuff of pure fantasy. See above. See above. Your words; not mine. Simultaneously we would have removed all our troops and bases from around the world removing the reason Islam hates us. Saudi Arabia would be a good start. They don't need us to defend them, and our bases there don't help us defend their ability to ship oil to us, either. Only a bare start, I speak of a majority of our troops overseas. Moreover, world opinion would have shifted even more rapidly and irrevocably against us, and the entire Islamic world, including those who are kinda, sorta with us, would have risen as one in opposition. Naah, on 9/12 we had world opinion with us. A few might have made public statements decrying the use but world opinion would have been, "America finally grew a set of balls, let's not **** with them!" All they had to have done was commit sufficient resources to Afghanistan in the first place, and then employ them intelligently and in a timely manner, and they'd most likely have bagged ObL. "...Most likely have bagged obl..." Close isn't good enough. You don't know the history of Afghanistan, it beat the entire British Empire and Soviet Union. With our supply lines a ground war is insane. You'd think invading two separate countries and overthrowing two regimes, one of which had nothing to do with 9/11, would be sufficient to make that point. I do know the history of the region rather well, and you are conflating a single, limited operation into the larger, continuing war there. Perhaps you misunderstand my reasoning. I am not sending a message to the al qaeda barbarians but to the entire world. To achieve peace we must cease causing strife for others. When we stop screwing with others we can demand peace. A multi-national, post-nuclear radiological disaster isn't "screwing with others"? Instead, American forces were used to push him towards the Pakistani border, and unreliable indigenous forces were the only ones positioned to prevent him from slipping across. Foolish. It struck me at the time that they must not have really wanted to catch him. Jeff Osama outwitted the entire Bush administration. Those who believe a ground war of attrition will ever win in Afghanistan don't understand history. Correct. Except Obama has already stated that he's stepping up the war in Afghanistan by an initial 20,000 troops. In for a penny, in for a pound . . . The idea is not to kill pawns but to kill the queen. Headless, an enemy dies. If you think the problem is limited to ObL and whoever his current henchmen happen to be, then you need to seriously broaden your perspective. Jeff No one has inquired, and I've not detailed my preference, See above. Jeff |
Obama & Blagojevich
Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:05:29 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote: [snip] I'm of the latter opinion. No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant. Bush ****ed that up too, squandering world-wide sympathy, involving our military into a ground war, giving moslems another cause to hate us, squandering precious national resources and a death-spiral. That would have been a threshold we would have deeply regretted crossing, I disagree, reasons below. and in the worst possible region of the world in which to cross it. The best place to make such a stand. The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. But, in any case, as a technical matter, they would not have gotten the job done in Tora Bora. I said "nuke," singular. One medium sized nuke, 20 megaton for example, would have vaporized the entire mountain and turned the region into a sheet of glass. Not only would it have nailed bin laden, we knew he was there at the time, and obliterated his command hq, but sent a signal to those who only know raw force. A 20 megaton nuke is larger than anything in our current inventory, According to published reports. I know for a fact that we had much bigger weapons than published in the '60's and see no reason that should have changed one iota. In fact it's probable that weapons exist that the President does not know of, like the neutron bomb. If they don't exist then the components do and one can be hastily assembled. and many times larger than any EPW (Earth Penetrating Weapon) now available or even planned. An airburst weapon would be useless against hardened targets like caves and bunkers, unless they were very shallow and the burst was very large pretty close. It's effectiveness against surface targets would be somewhat limited by terrain. It would, however, kill and sicken millions in places like Pakistan and China. The consequences would be unacceptable, particularly just to try, and fail, to kill one man. Perfect. This is not a campaign to bag OBL, it is a message to the entire world that our policy has changed. Both parties seem to like that word, lets use it. We are "changing" from a colonial, interventionist, nation to one that respects the sovereignty of others. **** with us and we will eliminate your entire gene line. An EPW would require precise targeting data, and if we had such precise and timely data, we wouldn't have needed a nuke. EPWs are precision weapons for fixed targets like runways and underground command posts, not mobile targets hiding in any number of caves or other places. Their range of effect is quite limited. I don't want to penetrate a mountain, I want a very big post-it on the forehead of every foreign leader. "Vaporized" mountains are the stuff of pure fantasy. See above. Simultaneously we would have removed all our troops and bases from around the world removing the reason Islam hates us. Saudi Arabia would be a good start. They don't need us to defend them, and our bases there don't help us defend their ability to ship oil to us, either. Only a bare start, I speak of a majority of our troops overseas. Moreover, world opinion would have shifted even more rapidly and irrevocably against us, and the entire Islamic world, including those who are kinda, sorta with us, would have risen as one in opposition. Naah, on 9/12 we had world opinion with us. A few might have made public statements decrying the use but world opinion would have been, "America finally grew a set of balls, let's not **** with them!" All they had to have done was commit sufficient resources to Afghanistan in the first place, and then employ them intelligently and in a timely manner, and they'd most likely have bagged ObL. "...Most likely have bagged obl..." Close isn't good enough. You don't know the history of Afghanistan, it beat the entire British Empire and Soviet Union. With our supply lines a ground war is insane. You'd think invading two separate countries and overthrowing two regimes, one of which had nothing to do with 9/11, would be sufficient to make that point. I do know the history of the region rather well, and you are conflating a single, limited operation into the larger, continuing war there. Perhaps you misunderstand my reasoning. I am not sending a message to the al qaeda barbarians but to the entire world. To achieve peace we must cease causing strife for others. When we stop screwing with others we can demand peace. Instead, American forces were used to push him towards the Pakistani border, and unreliable indigenous forces were the only ones positioned to prevent him from slipping across. Foolish. It struck me at the time that they must not have really wanted to catch him. Jeff Osama outwitted the entire Bush administration. Those who believe a ground war of attrition will ever win in Afghanistan don't understand history. Correct. Except Obama has already stated that he's stepping up the war in Afghanistan by an initial 20,000 troops. The idea is not to kill pawns but to kill the queen. Headless, an enemy dies. If you think the problem is limited to ObL and whoever his current henchmen happen to be, then you need to seriously broaden your perspective. Jeff No one has inquired, and I've not detailed my preference, before so I'm not surprised you misunderstood. This should dispel that cloud. Now I know you are crazy. And totally unconcerned with anyone's rights... I guess I can discount all that high fallootin' talk about rights and such you've been spouting lately. Dan |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 22:55:56 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:05:29 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote: On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote: Curly Surmudgeon wrote: [snip] I'm of the latter opinion. No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant. Bush ****ed that up too, squandering world-wide sympathy, involving our military into a ground war, giving moslems another cause to hate us, squandering precious national resources and a death-spiral. That would have been a threshold we would have deeply regretted crossing, I disagree, reasons below. and in the worst possible region of the world in which to cross it. The best place to make such a stand. The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. But, in any case, as a technical matter, they would not have gotten the job done in Tora Bora. I said "nuke," singular. One medium sized nuke, 20 megaton for example, would have vaporized the entire mountain and turned the region into a sheet of glass. Not only would it have nailed bin laden, we knew he was there at the time, and obliterated his command hq, but sent a signal to those who only know raw force. A 20 megaton nuke is larger than anything in our current inventory, According to published reports. I know for a fact that we had much bigger weapons than published in the '60's and see no reason that should have changed one iota. In fact it's probable that weapons exist that the President does not know of, like the neutron bomb. If they don't exist then the components do and one can be hastily assembled. and many times larger than any EPW (Earth Penetrating Weapon) now available or even planned. An airburst weapon would be useless against hardened targets like caves and bunkers, unless they were very shallow and the burst was very large pretty close. It's effectiveness against surface targets would be somewhat limited by terrain. It would, however, kill and sicken millions in places like Pakistan and China. The consequences would be unacceptable, particularly just to try, and fail, to kill one man. Perfect. This is not a campaign to bag OBL, Your writing "No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. End of problem. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy, government involvement or solely bin Laden, none matter when Osama took credit. At that point he signed his own death warrant" was what I was responding to. Yes, both are true and I the confusion is probably my fault. it is a message to the entire world that our policy has changed. Both parties seem to like that word, lets use it. We are "changing" from a colonial, interventionist, nation to one that respects the sovereignty of others. Causing massive amounts of radiological fallout spreading across the borders of multiple nations is rather likely to be taken by them as disrespectful of their sovereignty, if not an outright act of war. Pakistan deserves it for harboring al qaeda. **** with us and we will eliminate your entire gene line. Not really possible, although I think the occasional massively, brutally disproportionate over-reaction to provocation is likely to have a most salutary effect on the future calculations of one's enemies. Which is the point. An EPW would require precise targeting data, and if we had such precise and timely data, we wouldn't have needed a nuke. EPWs are precision weapons for fixed targets like runways and underground command posts, not mobile targets hiding in any number of caves or other places. Their range of effect is quite limited. I don't want to penetrate a mountain, I want a very big post-it on the forehead of every foreign leader. "Vaporized" mountains are the stuff of pure fantasy. See above. See above. Your words; not mine. Simultaneously we would have removed all our troops and bases from around the world removing the reason Islam hates us. Saudi Arabia would be a good start. They don't need us to defend them, and our bases there don't help us defend their ability to ship oil to us, either. Only a bare start, I speak of a majority of our troops overseas. Moreover, world opinion would have shifted even more rapidly and irrevocably against us, and the entire Islamic world, including those who are kinda, sorta with us, would have risen as one in opposition. Naah, on 9/12 we had world opinion with us. A few might have made public statements decrying the use but world opinion would have been, "America finally grew a set of balls, let's not **** with them!" All they had to have done was commit sufficient resources to Afghanistan in the first place, and then employ them intelligently and in a timely manner, and they'd most likely have bagged ObL. "...Most likely have bagged obl..." Close isn't good enough. You don't know the history of Afghanistan, it beat the entire British Empire and Soviet Union. With our supply lines a ground war is insane. You'd think invading two separate countries and overthrowing two regimes, one of which had nothing to do with 9/11, would be sufficient to make that point. I do know the history of the region rather well, and you are conflating a single, limited operation into the larger, continuing war there. Perhaps you misunderstand my reasoning. I am not sending a message to the al qaeda barbarians but to the entire world. To achieve peace we must cease causing strife for others. When we stop screwing with others we can demand peace. A multi-national, post-nuclear radiological disaster isn't "screwing with others"? Perhaps they'll rein in their outlaw neighbors. Instead, American forces were used to push him towards the Pakistani border, and unreliable indigenous forces were the only ones positioned to prevent him from slipping across. Foolish. It struck me at the time that they must not have really wanted to catch him. Jeff Osama outwitted the entire Bush administration. Those who believe a ground war of attrition will ever win in Afghanistan don't understand history. Correct. Except Obama has already stated that he's stepping up the war in Afghanistan by an initial 20,000 troops. In for a penny, in for a pound . . . The idea is not to kill pawns but to kill the queen. Headless, an enemy dies. If you think the problem is limited to ObL and whoever his current henchmen happen to be, then you need to seriously broaden your perspective. Jeff No one has inquired, and I've not detailed my preference, See above. Jeff -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Days More of George Walker Bush Plundering the Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
Obama & Blagojevich
"Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message ... On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:57:02 -0600, Libby Loo wrote: "John R. Carroll" wrote in message ... "Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "John R. Carroll" wrote in message ... "Libby Loo" wrote in message ... "Cliff" wrote in message ... Found those "WMDs" yet? Found that birth certificate yet? Unlike Jesus, it wasn't lost. I'm pretty sure there is sufficient documentation of Jesus's birth :) Go ahead and produce it. How original. I asked you first. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me.../obamas-birth- certificate-part-ii/ Your turn to present the birth certificate of Jesus Christ. -- Regards, Curly As Alfred E Obama said, "Weeee doan neeed no steeeeenkeeeeeng birth certificate!" Steve |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:45:52 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote:
The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. Better to use them against the Beltway and the Liberal areas of California, such as Hollywood. They are far more dangerous enemies of the United States. "Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every quality that morons esteem in their heroes."" |
Obama & Blagojevich
On 05 Jan 2009 23:17:42 GMT, Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
No troops, one small nuke on Tora Bora the day Osama took credit. Actually, I don't recall him ever doing so. He was just not displeased with events. To this day the US has still not filed charges against him nor presented any actual evidence AFAIK. He's not even on the FBI's wanted list for the events of 9-11 last I knew. -- Cliff |
gummr's Pleasure Palace
On 05 Jan 2009 23:17:42 GMT, Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
(WAS " Obama & Blagojevich") Yup. And every day we lose a little more. On top the the Republicans paranoia you have the Democrats who believe that you should be on camera every moment you are outside. They also want to track your car with GPS and dictate what you can listen to on radio and TV. You got it. Want OnStar? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...earch&aq=f&oq= They can now listen in to things via your cell phones. They can turn on the microphone without you knowing. Everything else will look normal. -- Cliff |
Obama & Blagojevich
On 06 Jan 2009 01:05:23 GMT, Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
The Neocons are just itching to begin deploying so-called tactical nukes, maybe against Iran. I'm rather surprised they haven't yet. But, in any case, as a technical matter, they would not have gotten the job done in Tora Bora. I said "nuke," singular. One medium sized nuke, 20 megaton for example, would have vaporized the entire mountain and turned the region into a sheet of glass. Nope. BTW, a "20 megaton" is not a "medium sized nuke". The Hiroshima bomb was ~ a 20 Kiloton one. Kilo, not mega. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba [ The Tsar Bomba was a three-stage hydrogen bomb with a yield of about 50 megatons. This is equivalent to ten times the amount of all the explosives used in World War II combined, including the Little Boy and Fat Man, the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. ] "the largest, most powerful nuclear weapon ever detonated. Developed by the Soviet Union" -- Cliff |
Obama & Blagojevich
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:05:29 -0600, Jeff Mc wrote:
Simultaneously we would have removed all our troops and bases from around the world removing the reason Islam hates us. Saudi Arabia would be a good start. They don't need us to defend them, and our bases there don't help us defend their ability to ship oil to us, either. The Saudis long ago tossed the US out. -- Cliff |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com