On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.


--

John H

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.

Probably because they didn't see it either. Now they will scramble to
youtube to find one, or just make one up and post it like when Pelosi
said there were Hitler posters of Obama at the teaparties. Remember,
that, not one picture of anything like that till the day after she got
called to the table for saying it... snerk

It's just German Screwdrivers and Lobsta' boats, shipers at a Bosnean
airport, made up as they are going along, based on the point they need
to make...

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.

OOOps,, meant "snipers"...

On 9/26/09 10:33 AM, Gene wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:06:04 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400,
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Why not? He makes as much sense as Glenn Beck and I don't have to
listen to him weep through the show like the latter crybaby is prone
to do. But, then, I wouldn't be listening to either one of them
expecting FACTS.... and I wouldn't quote either one of them as BEING
factual.

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.

Oh, so now I am a liberal. Couldn't you think of a more inflammatory
epithet? Oh... no, of course you couldn't!

And no, I didn't post anything about it. I don't come here to start a
bunch of political crap.... I'll leave that to you, Harry, JPS, and
wf3h.


Hey! I'm mostly here to laugh at the right-wing assholes. Very few of
the few posts I post initiate political crap!



--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:33:27 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:06:04 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Why not? He makes as much sense as Glenn Beck and I don't have to
listen to him weep through the show like the latter crybaby is prone
to do. But, then, I wouldn't be listening to either one of them
expecting FACTS.... and I wouldn't quote either one of them as BEING
factual.

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.

Oh, so now I am a liberal. Couldn't you think of a more inflammatory
epithet? Oh... no, of course you couldn't!

And no, I didn't post anything about it. I don't come here to start a
bunch of political crap.... I'll leave that to you, Harry, JPS, and
wf3h.

--

John H

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:06:04 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Why not? He makes as much sense as Glenn Beck and I don't have to
listen to him weep through the show like the latter crybaby is prone
to do. But, then, I wouldn't be listening to either one of them
expecting FACTS.... and I wouldn't quote either one of them as BEING
factual.

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.

Oh, so now I am a liberal. Couldn't you think of a more inflammatory
epithet? Oh... no, of course you couldn't!

And no, I didn't post anything about it. I don't come here to start a
bunch of political crap.... I'll leave that to you, Harry, JPS, and
wf3h.

Yeah but... You are a liberal.. A rare honest one with a fairly
objective view, but all in all, I do think you would at least consider
yourself a moderate liberal. Or like me, more of a libertarian although
I fall on the conservative side of that...

Just my opinion...

On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:16:36 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:30:50 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:06:04 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Why not? He makes as much sense as Glenn Beck and I don't have to
listen to him weep through the show like the latter crybaby is prone
to do. But, then, I wouldn't be listening to either one of them
expecting FACTS.... and I wouldn't quote either one of them as BEING
factual.

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.

Oh, so now I am a liberal. Couldn't you think of a more inflammatory
epithet? Oh... no, of course you couldn't!

And no, I didn't post anything about it. I don't come here to start a
bunch of political crap.... I'll leave that to you, Harry, JPS, and
wf3h.

Yeah but... You are a liberal.. A rare honest one with a fairly
objective view, but all in all, I do think you would at least consider
yourself a moderate liberal. Or like me, more of a libertarian although
I fall on the conservative side of that...

Just my opinion...

Frankly, I don't know what I *am* nor do I really care.

When I turned 18.... voting age... in that era... my Dad took me aside
and said, "I'm not going to tell you how to vote, but I vote for the
man, not the party. However, in NC (certainly true, those decades ago)
if you don't *register* as a Democrat, you'll never be able to vote in
a primary.

I registered as a Democrat and did, 34 years ago, vote Democratic. In
the following decades I voted nearly a perfect Republican ticket. In
spite of that, Herring now knows me as a Lieberal. Whatever.

I voted for Bush in his first term... I voted against him in the
second term and I voted against the
Republican/Judeo-Christian/Conservative block in the last election. I
would have voted against Fascism in any form whether I was Italian,
German, Romanian, or Spanish.

I voted against the Democrats when they fell into lockstep behind all
of the left-wing-nut splinter groups. Simply? They didn't represent me
or my values. I'll have and will do the same as the Republicans
alienate me in the same way.

I *think* I am an independent. Certainly, no party represents my
interests over their own.

Frankly, it scares me that so many people are so eager to drink the
red or blue kool aid....... their guy says something? their party
says something? that guy on radio says something? They said it, thus
the enlightened believe it and that's that..... No fact checking???
Why??? That used to be the sign of an educated person, now we have
standardized test to prove education...... Oh...Crap...! Another
failure!

Think about it......!

And I don't fit any of your easily categorized boxes, sorry.....

Oh, Gene. You got called a liberal by me because you usually seem to
be on the same side of the fence as Harold the Magnificent. You're the
second person to be upset with being called a liberal. Is that a bad
name now? Heck, I don't mind being called conservative even though I
voted once for Clinton and once for Obama!

Actually, I'm an independent - like Chuck was.
--

John H

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:16:36 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:30:50 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:06:04 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Why not? He makes as much sense as Glenn Beck and I don't have to
listen to him weep through the show like the latter crybaby is prone
to do. But, then, I wouldn't be listening to either one of them
expecting FACTS.... and I wouldn't quote either one of them as BEING
factual.

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.

Oh, so now I am a liberal. Couldn't you think of a more inflammatory
epithet? Oh... no, of course you couldn't!

And no, I didn't post anything about it. I don't come here to start a
bunch of political crap.... I'll leave that to you, Harry, JPS, and
wf3h.

Yeah but... You are a liberal.. A rare honest one with a fairly
objective view, but all in all, I do think you would at least consider
yourself a moderate liberal. Or like me, more of a libertarian although
I fall on the conservative side of that...

Just my opinion...

Frankly, I don't know what I *am* nor do I really care.

When I turned 18.... voting age... in that era... my Dad took me aside
and said, "I'm not going to tell you how to vote, but I vote for the
man, not the party. However, in NC (certainly true, those decades ago)
if you don't *register* as a Democrat, you'll never be able to vote in
a primary.

I registered as a Democrat and did, 34 years ago, vote Democratic. In
the following decades I voted nearly a perfect Republican ticket. In
spite of that, Herring now knows me as a Lieberal. Whatever.

I voted for Bush in his first term... I voted against him in the
second term and I voted against the
Republican/Judeo-Christian/Conservative block in the last election. I
would have voted against Fascism in any form whether I was Italian,
German, Romanian, or Spanish.

I voted against the Democrats when they fell into lockstep behind all
of the left-wing-nut splinter groups. Simply? They didn't represent me
or my values. I'll have and will do the same as the Republicans
alienate me in the same way.

I *think* I am an independent. Certainly, no party represents my
interests over their own.

Frankly, it scares me that so many people are so eager to drink the
red or blue kool aid....... their guy says something? their party
says something? that guy on radio says something? They said it, thus
the enlightened believe it and that's that..... No fact checking???
Why??? That used to be the sign of an educated person, now we have
standardized test to prove education...... Oh...Crap...! Another
failure!

Think about it......!

And I don't fit any of your easily categorized boxes, sorry.....

Oh, Gene. You got called a liberal by me because you usually seem to
be on the same side of the fence as Harold the Magnificent. You're the
second person to be upset with being called a liberal. Is that a bad
name now? Heck, I don't mind being called conservative even though I
voted once for Clinton and once for Obama!

Actually, I'm an independent - like Chuck was.

No, Chuck was far more left than Gene. He was also somewhat of an
ideologue, where Gene seems to really look at all of the info. Even
though I consider him left of center, I would vote for him in a
heartbeat... I mean, if he ran for something