Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

Think I'll join you. This place has become nothing more than a
friggin' romper room with slammer, Harry, and Don acting like vulgar
little punks.

************************************************** *************

Since you are by far one of the worse offenders, this may actually help the
newsgroup.
Don't let the door hit that lard arse on the way out.




It'll certainly improve the smell in here.

hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"hk" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...


My father is an ex-marine. He'd never question another man's
virility.

Careful. There's no such thing as an "ex-Marine"

Eisboch


snerk


I would never expect you to understand.

Eisboch


Understand what, exactly? The old marine mystique? I'm as grateful as
any American for the service of marines and other uniformed personnel in
the last great war.

It isn't a mystique. It is a tradition service and sacrifice.

jps wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:05:56 GMT, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:11:48 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...

My father is an ex-marine. He'd never question another man's
virility.
Careful. There's no such thing as an "ex-Marine"
Damn straight. Which he would know if his father really was a former
Marine.

What, you're now saying that because I called him and ex-marine that
he didn't serve as a Marine?

WTF is the difference between "former" and "ex" asshole.

Are you joining the ranks of idiots that abound in rec.boats?

He is a former Marine, like many others here.

http://www.montney.com/marine/once.htm

Once a Marine - Always a Marine

Being a Marine is a state of mind. It is an experience some have likened
more to a calling than a profession. Being a Marine is not a job – not a
paycheck; it is not an occupational specialty. It is not male or female,
majority or minority; nor is it a rank insignia. Stars, bars, or
chevrons are only indicators of the responsibility or authority we hold
at a given time. Rather, being a Marine comes from the eagle, globe, and
anchor that is tattooed on the soul of every one of us who wears the
Marine Corps uniform. It is a searing mark in our innermost being which
comes after the rite of passage through boot camp or Officer Candidates
School when a young man or woman is allowed for the first time to say,
“I’m a United States Marine.” And unlike physical or psychological
scars, which, over time, tend to heal and fade in intensity, the eagle,
globe, and anchor only grow more defined – more intense – the longer you
are a Marine. "Once a Marine, always a Marine."

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:01:17 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 06:50:23 -0800, jps wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:09:41 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


wrote in message
...

Your responses are not based on true facts.. you are even worse.
Funny, with over 200 seperate investigations into the Bush
Administration in the last two years (when they should have been
investigating William Jefferson, and taking care of business) there
was no impeachment of Bush... hummmmm, wonder if any other president
was impeached recently?

--------------------------------------------

There's an interesting dilemma facing Obama when he takes office.
Here's his problem:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office
of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

If Bush and/or Cheney are guilty (as many have alleged including some in
this NG) of actions that are in violation of the Constitution, then Obama,
by virtue of his oath, is obligated to seek indictments against Bush, Cheney
or both. To not do so means Obama himself is in violation of the oath he
is about to take.

This is not my legal opinion. I am not qualified. It's the legal opinion
of several qualified legal scholars.

He's been pressured for an answer as to his intentions in this regard and
has been evasive in his answers. He speaks of "looking forward" not
backward or passes the buck off to his future attorney general in an obtuse,
cloudy statement. Right.

Anyone care to make a wager as to whether he will actually try to go after
Bush/Cheney?

If he doesn't, isn't he guilty himself?

Eisboch

And you're citing who, that paragon of virtue Gerald Ford? He didn't
just not prosecute Nixon, he pardoned him.

What would you think of Obama if he pardoned Bush?

Wouldn't that put him in the clear, legally?

That's the path the R's would take. Nice 'n clean, legally.

Let's see whether Bush grants Libby a full pardon before leaving
office. It wouldn't surprise me if he pardoned clueless Cheney too.

Cheney's latest statements would have you believe that Gitmo should
stay open for torture because it's such a nice, clean facility.

Anyone here who comes from a military background should be aghast and
sorely disappointed at how this administration has treated veterans
and servicemen and women. Lip service and then a thorough screwing is
what they got from Bush and the republicans in congress.

As a veteran, with a disability, who does use the VA hospital, I can say
without reservation that the liberal party line, which you seem unable to
get away from, is full of ****.

But, that's your style.

You're a sampling of one. What about all the poor kids who've lost
limbs, eyes, hearing who suffer from poisoning and PTSD who cannot get
the therapy and compensation they need.

How about when the military deducted pay for meals while healing from
war wounds. Was that a shining moment for the military?

How about stop losses where guys are put out there for 3 or 4 tours
and then told they can't leave?

Not since the civil war have our troops been so poorly treated and
used.

On Jan 14, 9:29*pm, jps wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:01:17 -0500, John H
wrote:





On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 06:50:23 -0800, jps wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:09:41 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

wrote in message
....

Your responses are not based on true facts.. you are even worse.
Funny, with over 200 seperate investigations into the Bush
Administration in the last two years (when they should have been
investigating William Jefferson, and taking care of business) there
was no impeachment of Bush... hummmmm, wonder if any other president
was impeached recently?

--------------------------------------------

There's an interesting dilemma facing Obama when he takes office.
Here's his problem:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office
of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

If Bush and/or Cheney are guilty (as many have alleged including some in
this NG) of actions that are in violation of the Constitution, then Obama,
by virtue of his oath, is obligated to seek indictments against Bush, Cheney
or both. * To not do so means Obama himself is in violation of the oath he
is about to take.

This is not my legal opinion. *I am not qualified. *It's the legal opinion
of several qualified legal scholars.

He's been pressured for an answer as to his intentions in this regard and
has been evasive in his answers. *He speaks of "looking forward" not
backward or passes the buck off to his future attorney general in an obtuse,
cloudy statement. *Right.

Anyone care to make a wager as to whether he will actually try to go after
Bush/Cheney?

If he doesn't, isn't he guilty himself?

Eisboch

And you're citing who, that paragon of virtue Gerald Ford? *He didn't
just not prosecute Nixon, he pardoned him.

What would you think of Obama if he pardoned Bush?

Wouldn't that put him in the clear, legally?

That's the path the R's would take. *Nice 'n clean, legally.

Let's see whether Bush grants Libby a full pardon before leaving
office. *It wouldn't surprise me if he pardoned clueless Cheney too.

Cheney's latest statements would have you believe that Gitmo should
stay open for torture because it's such a nice, clean facility.

Anyone here who comes from a military background should be aghast and
sorely disappointed at how this administration has treated veterans
and servicemen and women. *Lip service and then a thorough screwing is
what they got from Bush and the republicans in congress.

As a veteran, with a disability, who does use the VA hospital, I can say
without reservation that the liberal party line, which you seem unable to
get away from, is full of ****.

But, that's your style.

You're a sampling of one. *What about all the poor kids who've lost
limbs, eyes, hearing who suffer from poisoning and PTSD who cannot get
the therapy and compensation they need.

How about when the military deducted pay for meals while healing from
war wounds. *Was that a shining moment for the military?

How about stop losses where guys are put out there for 3 or 4 tours
and then told they can't leave?

Not since the civil war have our troops been so poorly treated and
used.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I go out of my way to stop and talk to vets I meet. I have not met one
who is not proud to have served, I have some Iraq vets in my family
too. I think you need to get out and meet some instead of listening to
the likes of Obermann and Jon Stewart.. They are not honest
representatives, you really should inform yourselves before you go
spewing the party line of bull****.. So far in the last few weeks you
have been back you have proven you are really not interested in
facts.. Harry loves you, that should tell you something...pffffttt....
BTW, Tom may have felt sorry for what he said, but he never said he
was wrong...

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:46:43 -0800 (PST),
wrote:



I go out of my way to stop and talk to vets I meet. I have not met one
who is not proud to have served, I have some Iraq vets in my family
too.

I don't know why they wouldn't be proud to serve their country, as
anyone would. However, they don't necessarily think they're doing
what's right for our country. While soldiering, they don't question
the orders but they do question why the hell they're there in the
first place.

My nephew is an army airborne medic. He's about to be deployed for
the 3rd time, this time to Afghanistan. I hear it from the inside.

Our support of the troops is abysmal apart from rah rah and stickers
on our cars. They've been used and abused and deserve better.

Ripping families apart and stop lossing people who've given more than
their measure isn't something to be proud of.

Deducting money for meals while in the hospital is an insult. Army
hospitals in disrepair with mold and **** growing in the same
facilities where our countrymen are healing is an embarassment.

It's not until the cameras and reporters get there that anything
happens.

This administration is nothing but lip service for Americans and hand
outs to business.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:46:43 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

BTW, Tom may have felt sorry for what he said, but he never said he
was wrong...

It shows how dense you are that you'd devalue an apology from someone
you admire. Tom didn't condition his apology and you have no right
to speak on his behalf.

Are you a man of honor or a small-minded picklehead?

You owe Tom an apology.

On Jan 14, 10:30*pm, jps wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:46:43 -0800 (PST),

wrote:
BTW, Tom may have felt sorry for what he said, but he never said he
was wrong...

It shows how dense you are that you'd devalue an apology from someone
you admire. * Tom didn't condition his apology and you have no right
to speak on his behalf.

Are you a man of honor or a small-minded picklehead?

You owe Tom an apology.

Nope, just reading for content.

wrote:
On Jan 14, 10:30 pm, jps wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:46:43 -0800 (PST),

wrote:
BTW, Tom may have felt sorry for what he said, but he never said he
was wrong...
It shows how dense you are that you'd devalue an apology from someone
you admire. Tom didn't condition his apology and you have no right
to speak on his behalf.

Are you a man of honor or a small-minded picklehead?

You owe Tom an apology.

Nope, just reading for content.



Doubtful...if there were a rating system for reading comprehension
skills, your number would be close to zero.

On Jan 14, 10:25*pm, jps wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:46:43 -0800 (PST),

wrote:
I go out of my way to stop and talk to vets I meet. I have not met one
who is not proud to have served, I have some Iraq vets in my family
too.

I don't know why they wouldn't be proud to serve their country, as
anyone would. *However, they don't necessarily think they're doing
what's right for our country. *While soldiering, they don't question
the orders but they do question why the hell they're there in the
first place.

My nephew is an army airborne medic. *He's about to be deployed for
the 3rd time, this time to Afghanistan. *I hear it from the inside.

Our support of the troops is abysmal apart from rah rah and stickers
on our cars. *They've been used and abused and deserve better.

Ripping families apart and stop lossing people who've given more than
their measure isn't something to be proud of.

Deducting money for meals while in the hospital is an insult. *Army
hospitals in disrepair with mold and **** growing in the same
facilities where our countrymen are healing is an embarassment.

It's not until the cameras and reporters get there that anything
happens.

This administration is nothing but lip service for Americans and hand
outs to business.

Both my Brother and Sister in law have been deployed, I hear it from
the inside too.. But don't worry, Obama is going to address all of the
important issues, he wants to abolish the "don't ask, don't tell" in
the first week of his administration and isn't taking the troops out
after all. We will see if he does anything of any signifigance in
relation to the facilities.. BTW, the facilities did not fall apart in
one administration... Either way, I think I have wasted enough time
with you, like the others here already figured out.. you are not an
honest man, asking about my honor, pfffffttt...