Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the bad
war.

right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because
he's
an
idiot

What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?

i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.


The first question is certainly valid. The current administration has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration didn't
get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell
doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs.
one
of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a war
for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and certainly
no
justification).

... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible debate
was summarily dismissed.....

--
Wafa free since 2009


Sounds like right-wing wishful thinking on your part. Your response has
no
basis in logic or continuity of the discussion, which makes logical sense
if
you all you have is fear-based jingoism as your last best hope for the
future.

Pffffttt. Have you read his posts? Nothing but cheap shots, based on Al
Franken/Code Pink style rhetoric. He gets a kick out of ****ing people
off, must have the same thing Harry and Donnie have...
--
Wafa free since 2009


I'm talking about your post in my comment. You haven't addressed them. You
just continue to point fingers at someone else and continue with jingoism,
as though that's going to qualify as a logical argument.

Have you read this guys posts.. every line has a grade school insult in
it, he writes like Harry taking cheap shots from under his desk, trying
to kill the pain...

Even Gene, who really falls more on your side of the isle than mine, has
mocked the guy and called him to the carpet several times...

--
Wafa free since 2009

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the
bad
war.

right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because
he's
an
idiot

What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?

i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.


The first question is certainly valid. The current administration
has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility
of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration
didn't
get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell
doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs.
one
of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a
war
for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for
going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and
certainly
no
justification).

... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible
debate
was summarily dismissed.....

--
Wafa free since 2009


Sounds like right-wing wishful thinking on your part. Your response
has
no
basis in logic or continuity of the discussion, which makes logical
sense
if
you all you have is fear-based jingoism as your last best hope for the
future.

Pffffttt. Have you read his posts? Nothing but cheap shots, based on Al
Franken/Code Pink style rhetoric. He gets a kick out of ****ing people
off, must have the same thing Harry and Donnie have...
--
Wafa free since 2009


I'm talking about your post in my comment. You haven't addressed them.
You
just continue to point fingers at someone else and continue with
jingoism,
as though that's going to qualify as a logical argument.

Have you read this guys posts.. every line has a grade school insult in
it, he writes like Harry taking cheap shots from under his desk, trying
to kill the pain...

Even Gene, who really falls more on your side of the isle than mine, has
mocked the guy and called him to the carpet several times...

--
Wafa free since 2009


What's that got to do with me? If you don't want to respond to my comments
about your post, then I'm not sure what the point is of attempting to have a
civil discourse. Let's assume for the moment that Harry is a terrible person
and Gene agrees with you on this. Make a logical argument. I'm willing to
listen.


--
Nom=de=Plume

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:01:57 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the
bad
war.

right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because
he's
an
idiot

What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?

i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.


The first question is certainly valid. The current administration
has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility
of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration
didn't
get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell
doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs.
one
of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a
war
for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for
going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and
certainly
no
justification).

... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible
debate
was summarily dismissed.....

--
Wafa free since 2009


Sounds like right-wing wishful thinking on your part. Your response
has
no
basis in logic or continuity of the discussion, which makes logical
sense
if
you all you have is fear-based jingoism as your last best hope for the
future.

Pffffttt. Have you read his posts? Nothing but cheap shots, based on Al
Franken/Code Pink style rhetoric. He gets a kick out of ****ing people
off, must have the same thing Harry and Donnie have...
--
Wafa free since 2009


I'm talking about your post in my comment. You haven't addressed them.
You
just continue to point fingers at someone else and continue with
jingoism,
as though that's going to qualify as a logical argument.

Have you read this guys posts.. every line has a grade school insult in
it, he writes like Harry taking cheap shots from under his desk, trying
to kill the pain...

Even Gene, who really falls more on your side of the isle than mine, has
mocked the guy and called him to the carpet several times...

--
Wafa free since 2009


What's that got to do with me? If you don't want to respond to my comments
about your post, then I'm not sure what the point is of attempting to have a
civil discourse. Let's assume for the moment that Harry is a terrible person
and Gene agrees with you on this. Make a logical argument. I'm willing to
listen.

You'll have to be very patient and willing to write an awful lot for a
modicum of thought.

Best of luck.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:58:02 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"BAR" wrote in message
m...
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 9:09 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the bad
war..
right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because he's
an
idiot
What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?
i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.
and that is wrong.
What value, strategic or economic, does Afghanistan present to the US
of
A? Why are you willing to waste US lives conquering Afghanistan? What
are you going to do with it once you have conquered it?-
set up a government that is friendly to the US so that afghanistan
never again attacks us.
you're really, REALLY ****ing stupid.
Afghanistan did not attack us.

sure did. the attack was launched from afghanistan. i'm not sure what
planet you're on, but it needs a better earth news service

I must have missed the Afghan army uniforms that the 19 hijackers were
wearing.

Bin Laden used Afghanistan as a base from
which to run his organization. Bin Laden was extremely smart in picking
Afghanistan due to the fact that it is land-locked and surrounded by
countries that are not exactly best friends of the US of A.

ah. so he 'used it as a base'. what did he do? go to avis rent-a-
country?

Yes, he did go to rent-a-country.

christ you're dumber than i thought possible. and i really thought you
were stupid.

You still haven't said what our goal in Afghanistan is and why we are
there.

Georgie should have invaded Saudi Arabia... but he was too busy holding
hands and swapping spit with the king & his family.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h27HRNm_r4U


Good, a liberal who realizes Afghanistan is a waste of time, money,
and lives.
--
John H.

"The truth is that unions are essentially parasitic organizations that
thrive only by draining and ultimately destroying the companies and
industries they control."

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Aug 19, 9:38*pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 6:41 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:

ah. so he 'used it as a base'. what did he do? go to avis rent-a-
country?
Yes, he did go to rent-a-country.

christ you're dumber than i thought possible. and i really thought you
were stupid.
You still haven't said what our goal in Afghanistan is and why we are
there.-

you still haven't said why you favor surrender

I don't favor surrender, I am trying to understand why you are a
warmonger now that Obama is in office.

i am not a warmonger. i am trying to understand why you favor
surrender now that obama is in office

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Aug 19, 10:26*pm, JustWait wrote:


Yup, we are so glad that your party knows all of our motives and
thoughts, needs, and desires... Now maybe you can sit in a closed room
with the Unions and decide what we should all do with our lives, oh, and
of course our money.. Man, thank God you are so much smarter than the
rest of us...

as opposed to dick cheney hiding in a back room with the chairman of
exxon to figure out the energy policy of the US...and getting us into
a war over that very policy

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:15:37 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

In article ,
says...

JustWait wrote:
In article , says...
"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the bad war.
right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because he's an
idiot
What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?
i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.

The first question is certainly valid. The current administration has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration didn't get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs. one of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a war for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for going there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and certainly no
justification).

... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible debate
was summarily dismissed.....

Responsible debate? Do you mean like going to town hall meetings with AK's?
Or do you mean responsible debate like conservatives never, ever do
anything wrong, and everything and anything liberals do IS wrong?

Have you read the harryesque rants of WF3H or whatever his name is.
Nothing but derogatory insults and trolls designed to inflame, not
inform... The kid is not much sharper than Donnie..

But people still respond to him.
--
John H.

"The truth is that unions are essentially parasitic organizations that
thrive only by draining and ultimately destroying the companies and
industries they control."

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the
bad
war.

right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because
he's
an
idiot

What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?

i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.


The first question is certainly valid. The current administration
has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility
of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration
didn't
get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell
doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs.
one
of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a
war
for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for
going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and
certainly
no
justification).

... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible
debate
was summarily dismissed.....

--
Wafa free since 2009


Sounds like right-wing wishful thinking on your part. Your response
has
no
basis in logic or continuity of the discussion, which makes logical
sense
if
you all you have is fear-based jingoism as your last best hope for the
future.

Pffffttt. Have you read his posts? Nothing but cheap shots, based on Al
Franken/Code Pink style rhetoric. He gets a kick out of ****ing people
off, must have the same thing Harry and Donnie have...
--
Wafa free since 2009


I'm talking about your post in my comment. You haven't addressed them.
You
just continue to point fingers at someone else and continue with
jingoism,
as though that's going to qualify as a logical argument.

Have you read this guys posts.. every line has a grade school insult in
it, he writes like Harry taking cheap shots from under his desk, trying
to kill the pain...

Even Gene, who really falls more on your side of the isle than mine, has
mocked the guy and called him to the carpet several times...

--
Wafa free since 2009


What's that got to do with me? If you don't want to respond to my comments
about your post, then I'm not sure what the point is of attempting to have a
civil discourse. Let's assume for the moment that Harry is a terrible person
and Gene agrees with you on this. Make a logical argument. I'm willing to
listen.

You really can't follow a conversation can you?? Pffffttt...

--
Wafa free since 2009

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the
bad
war.

right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because
he's
an
idiot

What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?

i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.


The first question is certainly valid. The current administration
has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility
of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration
didn't
get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell
doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs.
one
of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a
war
for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for
going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and
certainly
no
justification).

... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible
debate
was summarily dismissed.....

--
Wafa free since 2009


Sounds like right-wing wishful thinking on your part. Your response
has
no
basis in logic or continuity of the discussion, which makes logical
sense
if
you all you have is fear-based jingoism as your last best hope for the
future.

Pffffttt. Have you read his posts? Nothing but cheap shots, based on Al
Franken/Code Pink style rhetoric. He gets a kick out of ****ing people
off, must have the same thing Harry and Donnie have...
--
Wafa free since 2009


I'm talking about your post in my comment. You haven't addressed them.
You
just continue to point fingers at someone else and continue with
jingoism,
as though that's going to qualify as a logical argument.

Have you read this guys posts.. every line has a grade school insult in
it, he writes like Harry taking cheap shots from under his desk, trying
to kill the pain...

Even Gene, who really falls more on your side of the isle than mine, has
mocked the guy and called him to the carpet several times...

--
Wafa free since 2009


What's that got to do with me? If you don't want to respond to my comments
about your post, then I'm not sure what the point is of attempting to have a
civil discourse. Let's assume for the moment that Harry is a terrible person
and Gene agrees with you on this. Make a logical argument. I'm willing to
listen.

Oh, yeah.. Gravity.... Buh, bye... Plonk

--
Wafa free since 2009

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 9:38 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 6:41 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
ah. so he 'used it as a base'. what did he do? go to avis rent-a-
country?
Yes, he did go to rent-a-country.
christ you're dumber than i thought possible. and i really thought you
were stupid.
You still haven't said what our goal in Afghanistan is and why we are
there.-
you still haven't said why you favor surrender
I don't favor surrender, I am trying to understand why you are a
warmonger now that Obama is in office.

i am not a warmonger. i am trying to understand why you favor
surrender now that obama is in office

Yes you are a warmonger.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 10:26 pm, JustWait wrote:

Yup, we are so glad that your party knows all of our motives and
thoughts, needs, and desires... Now maybe you can sit in a closed room
with the Unions and decide what we should all do with our lives, oh, and
of course our money.. Man, thank God you are so much smarter than the
rest of us...

as opposed to dick cheney hiding in a back room with the chairman of
exxon to figure out the energy policy of the US...and getting us into
a war over that very policy

Or Hillary Clinton hiding in the back room with Big health care plotting
the take over of 1/7 of the US economy. You seem to forget that the
Clinton's provided the template.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Aug 20, 7:24*am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 9:38 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 6:41 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
ah. so he 'used it as a base'. what did he do? go to avis rent-a-
country?
Yes, he did go to rent-a-country.
christ you're dumber than i thought possible. and i really thought you
were stupid.
You still haven't said what our goal in Afghanistan is and why we are
there.-
you still haven't said why you favor surrender
I don't favor surrender, I am trying to understand why you are a
warmonger now that Obama is in office.

i am not a warmonger. i am trying to understand why you favor
surrender now that obama is in office

Yes you are a warmonger

yes you are a coward

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Aug 20, 7:25*am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 10:26 pm, JustWait wrote:

Yup, we are so glad that your party knows all of our motives and
thoughts, needs, and desires... Now maybe you can sit in a closed room
with the Unions and decide what we should all do with our lives, oh, and
of course our money.. Man, thank God you are so much smarter than the
rest of us...

as opposed to dick cheney hiding in a back room with the chairman of
exxon to figure out the energy policy of the US...and getting us into
a war over that very policy

Or Hillary Clinton hiding in the back room with Big health care plotting
the take over of 1/7 of the US economy. You seem to forget that the
Clinton's provided the template.

we need healthcare since the private sector has failed.

cheney's wholesale whoring of the economy to exxon is a different
matter. but i appreciate your view that exxon speaks ex cathedra.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 20, 7:24 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 9:38 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 6:41 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
ah. so he 'used it as a base'. what did he do? go to avis rent-a-
country?
Yes, he did go to rent-a-country.
christ you're dumber than i thought possible. and i really thought you
were stupid.
You still haven't said what our goal in Afghanistan is and why we are
there.-
you still haven't said why you favor surrender
I don't favor surrender, I am trying to understand why you are a
warmonger now that Obama is in office.
i am not a warmonger. i am trying to understand why you favor
surrender now that obama is in office
Yes you are a warmonger

yes you are a coward

Ok, if it makes you feel better you can believe anything you want.

But, it still doesn't relieve you of the fact that you are a warmonger
and an adherent of situational ethics.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 20, 7:25 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 10:26 pm, JustWait wrote:
Yup, we are so glad that your party knows all of our motives and
thoughts, needs, and desires... Now maybe you can sit in a closed room
with the Unions and decide what we should all do with our lives, oh, and
of course our money.. Man, thank God you are so much smarter than the
rest of us...
as opposed to dick cheney hiding in a back room with the chairman of
exxon to figure out the energy policy of the US...and getting us into
a war over that very policy
Or Hillary Clinton hiding in the back room with Big health care plotting
the take over of 1/7 of the US economy. You seem to forget that the
Clinton's provided the template.

we need healthcare since the private sector has failed.

The private sector hasn't failed. You can walk into any doctors office
and be seen. All you have to do is pull out your wallet and pay for the
services you receive.

Your problem is that you believe your health care should be subsidized
by someone else. You believe that if you want something and you don't
have the ability to pay for it you should be able to steal the money
from someone else to pay for it. You are not better than a thug on the
street who steals from people walking along the sidewalk.




cheney's wholesale whoring of the economy to exxon is a different
matter. but i appreciate your view that exxon speaks ex cathedra.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article , says...
"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the bad war.
right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because he's an
idiot
What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?
i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.
The first question is certainly valid. The current administration has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration didn't get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs. one of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a war for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for going there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and certainly no
justification).
... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible debate
was summarily dismissed.....

Responsible debate? Do you mean like going to town hall meetings with AK's?
Or do you mean responsible debate like conservatives never, ever do
anything wrong, and everything and anything liberals do IS wrong?

Have you read the harryesque rants of WF3H or whatever his name is.
Nothing but derogatory insults and trolls designed to inflame, not
inform... The kid is not much sharper than Donnie..

So that makes it somehow right and true that everything conservative =
good, everything liberal is wrong???

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

JustWait wrote:
In article , says...
"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 1:04 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

The first question is certainly valid. The current administration has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration didn't get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs. one of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a war for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and certainly no
justification).
correct on all counts. now we just have to convince the idiots of the
truth

Actually, we don't. The majority of Americans voted for change, both for
Congress and for the presidency. That change can take place without
compromising the vox populi. I don't believe that their minds can be
changed. It's interesting, actually. I vote and act against my own
self-interest all the time. The same goes for those opposed to true reform.
The difference is that I know I'm doing that. The latter is what fear-based
rhetoric gets done.

Yup, we are so glad that your party knows all of our motives and
thoughts, needs, and desires... Now maybe you can sit in a closed room
with the Unions and decide what we should all do with our lives, oh, and
of course our money.. Man, thank God you are so much smarter than the
rest of us...


You all claim to know all of the liberal's motives and thoughts, needs
and desires.......

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

In article ,
says...

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article , says...
"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the bad war.
right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because he's an
idiot
What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?
i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.
The first question is certainly valid. The current administration has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration didn't get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs. one of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a war for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for going there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and certainly no
justification).
... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible debate
was summarily dismissed.....

Responsible debate? Do you mean like going to town hall meetings with AK's?
Or do you mean responsible debate like conservatives never, ever do
anything wrong, and everything and anything liberals do IS wrong?

Have you read the harryesque rants of WF3H or whatever his name is.
Nothing but derogatory insults and trolls designed to inflame, not
inform... The kid is not much sharper than Donnie..

So that makes it somehow right and true that everything conservative =
good, everything liberal is wrong???

Nope, you are putting words in my mouth again. All I suggested is that
the guy is not worth talking to as he is not here for that. He is like
Harry and Donnie, looking to be an internet hero with bumpersticker
mentality...

--
Wafa free since 2009

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

In article ,
says...

JustWait wrote:
In article , says...
"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 1:04 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

The first question is certainly valid. The current administration has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration didn't get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs. one of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a war for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and certainly no
justification).
correct on all counts. now we just have to convince the idiots of the
truth

Actually, we don't. The majority of Americans voted for change, both for
Congress and for the presidency. That change can take place without
compromising the vox populi. I don't believe that their minds can be
changed. It's interesting, actually. I vote and act against my own
self-interest all the time. The same goes for those opposed to true reform.
The difference is that I know I'm doing that. The latter is what fear-based
rhetoric gets done.

Yup, we are so glad that your party knows all of our motives and
thoughts, needs, and desires... Now maybe you can sit in a closed room
with the Unions and decide what we should all do with our lives, oh, and
of course our money.. Man, thank God you are so much smarter than the
rest of us...


You all claim to know all of the liberal's motives and thoughts, needs
and desires.......

Well, we have a pretty good idea based on history and being informed..
Either way, I don't want them shoved down my throat with my HALF of the
country not having any say. The Nuclear option is being discussed in
Washington as we speak... Jam it through cause we are stupid, right,
America..

--
Wafa free since 2009

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article , says...
"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the bad war.
right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan because he's an
idiot
What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has accomplished?
i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.
The first question is certainly valid. The current administration has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration didn't get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs. one of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a war for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for going there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and certainly no
justification).
... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible debate
was summarily dismissed.....

Responsible debate? Do you mean like going to town hall meetings with AK's?
Or do you mean responsible debate like conservatives never, ever do
anything wrong, and everything and anything liberals do IS wrong?
Have you read the harryesque rants of WF3H or whatever his name is.
Nothing but derogatory insults and trolls designed to inflame, not
inform... The kid is not much sharper than Donnie..

So that makes it somehow right and true that everything conservative =
good, everything liberal is wrong???

Nope, you are putting words in my mouth again. All I suggested is that
the guy is not worth talking to as he is not here for that. He is like
Harry and Donnie, looking to be an internet hero with bumpersticker
mentality...



Naw. I'm here to laugh at idiots like you, loogy and most of the rest of
the righties. I don't often run into your sort of retardos in the real
world.

You boys just can't anything right.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:13:36 -0400, BAR wrote:


Your problem is that you believe your health care should be subsidized
by someone else. You believe that if you want something and you don't
have the ability to pay for it you should be able to steal the money
from someone else to pay for it. You are not better than a thug on the
street who steals from people walking along the sidewalk.

I thought we were talking health care insurance. You know, spreading the
risk around to prevent any one person having a financial catastrophe. If
you have insurance, and your house burns down, are you also a thug
stealing from people on the sidewalk?

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

thunder wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:13:36 -0400, BAR wrote:


Your problem is that you believe your health care should be subsidized
by someone else. You believe that if you want something and you don't
have the ability to pay for it you should be able to steal the money
from someone else to pay for it. You are not better than a thug on the
street who steals from people walking along the sidewalk.

I thought we were talking health care insurance. You know, spreading the
risk around to prevent any one person having a financial catastrophe. If
you have insurance, and your house burns down, are you also a thug
stealing from people on the sidewalk?

If you do not have a mortgage on your home are you compelled to have
insurance on your home?

If you own your automobile outright are you compelled to have
comprehensive insurance?

If you can afford to pay for your medical needs on a pay as you go basis
why should you be required to buy insurance?

Whatever happened to my body my choice?

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

thunder wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:13:36 -0400, BAR wrote:


Your problem is that you believe your health care should be subsidized
by someone else. You believe that if you want something and you don't
have the ability to pay for it you should be able to steal the money
from someone else to pay for it. You are not better than a thug on the
street who steals from people walking along the sidewalk.

I thought we were talking health care insurance. You know, spreading the
risk around to prevent any one person having a financial catastrophe. If
you have insurance, and your house burns down, are you also a thug
stealing from people on the sidewalk?


BAR is simply naive.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

BAR wrote:


Whatever happened to my body my choice?


I'm sorry...where in the Constitution is that phrase found?
Please be specific.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

In article ,
says...

thunder wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:13:36 -0400, BAR wrote:


Your problem is that you believe your health care should be subsidized
by someone else. You believe that if you want something and you don't
have the ability to pay for it you should be able to steal the money
from someone else to pay for it. You are not better than a thug on the
street who steals from people walking along the sidewalk.

I thought we were talking health care insurance. You know, spreading the
risk around to prevent any one person having a financial catastrophe. If
you have insurance, and your house burns down, are you also a thug
stealing from people on the sidewalk?

If you do not have a mortgage on your home are you compelled to have
insurance on your home?

If you own your automobile outright are you compelled to have
comprehensive insurance?

If you can afford to pay for your medical needs on a pay as you go basis
why should you be required to buy insurance?

Whatever happened to my body my choice?

It's no longer convenient. It was a bumper sticker, that's all. They
never really meant it for everybody, it was pointed toward one
particular voter block.

--
Wafa free since 2009

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

BAR wrote:
thunder wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:13:36 -0400, BAR wrote:


Your problem is that you believe your health care should be subsidized
by someone else. You believe that if you want something and you don't
have the ability to pay for it you should be able to steal the money
from someone else to pay for it. You are not better than a thug on the
street who steals from people walking along the sidewalk.

I thought we were talking health care insurance. You know, spreading
the risk around to prevent any one person having a financial
catastrophe. If you have insurance, and your house burns down, are
you also a thug stealing from people on the sidewalk?

If you do not have a mortgage on your home are you compelled to have
insurance on your home?

If you own your automobile outright are you compelled to have
comprehensive insurance?

If you can afford to pay for your medical needs on a pay as you go basis
why should you be required to buy insurance?

Whatever happened to my body my choice?

That sounds like a Krausism that he uses when he talks about abortion
rights.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Aug 20, 8:13*am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 20, 7:25 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 10:26 pm, JustWait wrote:
Yup, we are so glad that your party knows all of our motives and
thoughts, needs, and desires... Now maybe you can sit in a closed room
with the Unions and decide what we should all do with our lives, oh, and
of course our money.. Man, thank God you are so much smarter than the
rest of us...
as opposed to dick cheney hiding in a back room with the chairman of
exxon to figure out the energy policy of the US...and getting us into
a war over that very policy
Or Hillary Clinton hiding in the back room with Big health care plotting
the take over of 1/7 of the US economy. You seem to forget that the
Clinton's provided the template.

we need healthcare since the private sector has failed.

The private sector hasn't failed.

really? we have the most expensive healthcare in the world and our
life expectancy is the same as any other advanced country

so when you buy a car do you tell the dealer you want to pay twice
what anyone else pays? is that how you measure 'success'?

You can walk into any doctors office
and be seen. All you have to do is pull out your wallet and pay for the
services you receive.

ah. i suppose you keep $100,000 in your wallet? must be a big freakin'
wallet.


Your problem is that you believe your health care should be subsidized
by someone else.

everybody's health care is subsidized by someone else. if you have
health insurance and dont get sick you're subsidizing someone else

you right wingers just aren't that bright, are you? you have your
'ozzie and harriet' view of society and, by golly, everything's
peachy.


You believe that if you want something and you don't
have the ability to pay for it you should be able to steal the money
from someone else to pay for it. You are not better than a thug on the
street who steals from people walking along the sidewalk.

so when do you think your mom's gonna tell you that the easter bunny
doesn't exist?

any other fairy tales you want to spin while you're here?

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Aug 20, 9:30*am, BAR wrote:
thunder wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:13:36 -0400, BAR wrote:

Your problem is that you believe your health care should be subsidized
by someone else. You believe that if you want something and you don't
have the ability to pay for it you should be able to steal the money
from someone else to pay for it. You are not better than a thug on the
street who steals from people walking along the sidewalk.

I thought we were talking health care insurance. *You know, spreading the
risk around to prevent any one person having a financial catastrophe. *If
you have insurance, and your house burns down, are you also a thug
stealing from people on the sidewalk?

If you do not have a mortgage on your home are you compelled to have
insurance on your home?

If you own your automobile outright are you compelled to have
comprehensive insurance?

If you can afford to pay for your medical needs on a pay as you go basis
why should you be required to buy insurance?


another right wing fairy tale. he believes that the middle class is so
rich it can afford a mortgage AND to pay out of pocket for critical
medical care.

no wonder rich folks like idiots like him. he'll say ANYTHING, no
matter HOW ridiculous, as long as the rich pat him on the head like
the puppy he is.

and he changes his own newspaper, too!

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article , says...
"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 1:04 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

The first question is certainly valid. The current administration has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of responsbility of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration didn't get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice vs. one of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a war for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and certainly no
justification).
correct on all counts. now we just have to convince the idiots of the
truth
Actually, we don't. The majority of Americans voted for change, both for
Congress and for the presidency. That change can take place without
compromising the vox populi. I don't believe that their minds can be
changed. It's interesting, actually. I vote and act against my own
self-interest all the time. The same goes for those opposed to true reform.
The difference is that I know I'm doing that. The latter is what fear-based
rhetoric gets done.
Yup, we are so glad that your party knows all of our motives and
thoughts, needs, and desires... Now maybe you can sit in a closed room
with the Unions and decide what we should all do with our lives, oh, and
of course our money.. Man, thank God you are so much smarter than the
rest of us...

You all claim to know all of the liberal's motives and thoughts, needs
and desires.......

Well, we have a pretty good idea based on history and being informed..
Either way, I don't want them shoved down my throat with my HALF of the
country not having any say. The Nuclear option is being discussed in
Washington as we speak... Jam it through cause we are stupid, right,
America..

Then you'd agree we have a pretty good idea of what the conservatives
wants, too then, right? So, history under Bush tells us that you all
want bigger government, a huge deficit, war, secrecy in government, etc.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:


Whatever happened to my body my choice?


I'm sorry...where in the Constitution is that phrase found?
Please be specific.

Roe vs. Wade, 1973. I'm sure you are familiar with the Supreme Court's
ruling on this issue.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:


Whatever happened to my body my choice?


I'm sorry...where in the Constitution is that phrase found?
Please be specific.

Roe vs. Wade, 1973. I'm sure you are familiar with the Supreme Court's
ruling on this issue.


You think Roe v. Wade is in the Constitution? Did you learn that in the
marines?

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

"JustWait" wrote in message

What's that got to do with me? If you don't want to respond to my
comments about your post, then I'm not sure what the point is of
attempting to
have a civil discourse. Let's assume for the moment that Harry is a
terrible
person and Gene agrees with you on this. Make a logical argument. I'm
willing to
listen.

Oh, yeah.. Gravity.... Buh, bye... Plonk

I feel fortunate!


--
Nom=de=Plume

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 19, 7:58 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:22 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:08 pm, J i m wrote:
wf3h wrote:
go back to your fertilzer/fuel oil bombs.
How's the one's war in Afganistain going?
he's making progress in cleaning up bush's **** up
I thought that Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was
the
bad
war.

right. but bush was on the point of losing afghanistan
because
he's
an
idiot

What is our goal in Afghanistan? What do we think we are going
to
accomplish that no one else in recorded history has
accomplished?

i'm guessing you think afghanistan has never been conquered.

and that is wrong.


The first question is certainly valid. The current
administration
has
answered this several times. The problem was lack of
responsbility
of
ownership of the original invasion. The previous administration
didn't
get
it right, because they didn't follow the well-established Powell
doctrine,
not in Afganistan nor in Iraq, the latter being a war of choice
vs.
one
of
necessity. We're paying the price for the neglect right now in
both
places... the former for not really making the commitment (and a
war
for
which we had a lot of support and justification), the second for
going
there
in the first place (where we had practically no support and
certainly
no
justification).

... and he declared. "No sentence shall be written without a
bumper
sticker phrase included.. And thus, it was so, and responsible
debate
was summarily dismissed.....

--
Wafa free since 2009


Sounds like right-wing wishful thinking on your part. Your response
has
no
basis in logic or continuity of the discussion, which makes logical
sense
if
you all you have is fear-based jingoism as your last best hope for
the
future.

Pffffttt. Have you read his posts? Nothing but cheap shots, based on
Al
Franken/Code Pink style rhetoric. He gets a kick out of ****ing
people
off, must have the same thing Harry and Donnie have...
--
Wafa free since 2009


I'm talking about your post in my comment. You haven't addressed them.
You
just continue to point fingers at someone else and continue with
jingoism,
as though that's going to qualify as a logical argument.

Have you read this guys posts.. every line has a grade school insult in
it, he writes like Harry taking cheap shots from under his desk, trying
to kill the pain...

Even Gene, who really falls more on your side of the isle than mine,
has
mocked the guy and called him to the carpet several times...

--
Wafa free since 2009


What's that got to do with me? If you don't want to respond to my
comments
about your post, then I'm not sure what the point is of attempting to
have a
civil discourse. Let's assume for the moment that Harry is a terrible
person
and Gene agrees with you on this. Make a logical argument. I'm willing to
listen.

You really can't follow a conversation can you?? Pffffttt...

--
Wafa free since 2009


As I suspected, you're just a troll. Sorry to have wasted your time with me.
I don't play.

Out...


--
Nom=de=Plume

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:


Whatever happened to my body my choice?


I'm sorry...where in the Constitution is that phrase found?
Please be specific.

Roe vs. Wade, 1973. I'm sure you are familiar with the Supreme Court's
ruling on this issue.


You think Roe v. Wade is in the Constitution? Did you learn that in the
marines?

The SCOTUS does.

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

You are required to have minimal auto insurance. That's set by the gov't.
While the differences in health and auto insurance are vast, nevertheless,
the gov't forces you to buy it.

If you don't have a mortgage on your home and you don't have liability
insurance, you're a sitting duck for a lawsuit that will bankrupt you. Is it
worth it?

If you can pay your medical expenses as they come up, go with God. Most
people, when faced with a high treatment cost, can't do that. I knew a guy
who was a multi-millionaire. His wife got cancer, and he had to sell
everything to pay for her expenses. He still went belly up. She lived.

Despite the fear-mongering, no one is talking about taking away your choice
to not have have insurance.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Fighting the Bozoma Thugocracy
 

On Aug 20, 8:08*am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:


yes you are a coward

Ok, if it makes you feel better you can believe anything you want.

But, it still doesn't relieve you of the fact that you are a warmonger
and an adherent of situational ethics.

says the simpering coward who relishes the sight of burning buildings
in american cities.