An OT question
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 10:50:32 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 23:16:28 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 01:42:10 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 22:06:50 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:25:41 -0400, wrote:


As distasteful as it is, those wackos apparently have the right to
protest.


At a certain point the reach the level of "fire in a crowded theater".



The Supreme Court spoke on this subject. They have the right to do it.


As I said, bikers have become sissies. I would expect Rolling Thunder
to explain they also have the right to get their ass kicked if they
don't take their protest down the road.

They don't have such a right. That's a threat.


Duh ... BIKERS. They are supposed to be a little threatening.

LOL Well, some are some aren't I guess.

An OT question
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:48:04 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:47:45 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 13:35:47 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:33:40 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:52:09 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:31:43 -0600, Canuck57 wrote:

On 18/03/2011 2:10 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:48:24 -0400, John
wrote:

Last night I heard Oprah saying the war in Afghanistan had very little impact on
her because there was little to remind her it was going on.

That made me wonder...why don't we see the pictures of the dead, their caskets,
etc, like we did when Bush was president.

We used to see their pictures on NBC and other newscasts, and even in the big
papers. Now we see nothing of the sort.

Anyone?

Are you stupid or just lying? Bush was the one who banned photography
of the caskets. Obama rescinded that.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20090226/index.htm

emdeplume, kick you butt off your shoulders, you will see the real
situation a lot better.

I believe the policy banning of the casket photography was in effect during the
Clinton administration. Bush simply enforced it.

In any case, so what? Why is this liberal president not showing all the caskets?

Why not write Fox News and ask them.... you could post their response
here....

The question had to do with the major media, not Fox. Fox wasn't, as far as I
know, broadcasting pictures of dead soldiers like the major media were.

Why is the major media not doing the same now?

I suppose that's a rough question for a liberal.

Maybe you should define "major media." Since FOX leads what I would
call major media by at least a 2 to 1 margin, I thought they were
major media.... silly me.....

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...-17-2011/86214

Too much of a challenge?

Major television media, to me, include NBC, ABC, and CBS, not the cable news
networks such as CNN, MSNBC, or FOX. Major newsprint media include the
Washington Post, NY Times, LA Times, USA Today, etc. None of them are pushing
pictures of dead soldiers as they were when Bush was president.

Nothing challenging there.

None of them were ever "pushing" pictures of our dead soldiers. You're
just a right wing nut.

An OT question
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 10:54:20 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 23:17:55 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 01:44:02 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 22:08:15 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:36:18 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 11:01:15 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:22:50 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:10:39 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:48:24 -0400, John H
wrote:

Last night I heard Oprah saying the war in Afghanistan had very little impact on
her because there was little to remind her it was going on.

That made me wonder...why don't we see the pictures of the dead, their caskets,
etc, like we did when Bush was president.

We used to see their pictures on NBC and other newscasts, and even in the big
papers. Now we see nothing of the sort.

Anyone?

Are you stupid or just lying? Bush was the one who banned photography
of the caskets. Obama rescinded that.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20090226/index.htm

That was American caskets,

John is talking about dead Arabs.
Nobody seems to give a **** about dead Arabs.
That is why it is easy to throw around terms like "no fly zones"
without equating it with dead people.

Really? Where did he say that? I don't see any reference to dead
Arabs. He's a right-wing liar, who doesn't give a fig about facts.

I was wrong, I did misread the first note. John does have a point
though. The media fought Bush for the right to go out to Dover and
take pictures of coffins from the Iraq war and now that they have that
right, they are not showing the coffins coming home from Afghanistan.

They do not "have the right" to do it. They have the right to get
permission from the families.
It does demonstrate how phony the righteous
indignation of the left was when Bush was the president. It was never
about the war. It was only about Bush.

Bush deserved every bit of indignation. He was a punk and bully.


Thanks for confirming what I said.

I find it disturbing that you would support such a jerk. He played a
huge role in ruining our economy, destroying our credibility abroad,
and caused 1000s of our brave troops to be killed and maimed.


He was just one player in a 20 year Bush/Clinton/Bush ... now Obama
government. The policy differences are largely cosmetic.

... and it starts again in Libya

No, he wasn't just "one player." He started a war of choice. He did
more than anyone else (unless you count Cheney) to undermine the US
economically, socially, and with foreign policy. Feel free to keep
defending him.

Nothing is starting "again" in Libya. More right-wing nonsense.

An OT question
 

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 12:18:37 -0400, Ernie wrote:

On 3/20/2011 11:46 AM, wrote:

Will there be any outrage about dead kids coming home from Libya?

The whole topic *bores* Krause.

I am always amused when the democrats sit idly by as a democratic
president prosecutes an idiotic war but they get all over a republican
for the same war.

Looks like you're about to join the traitors.
Are you seriously comparing Iraq to Libya?
It appears you just called them "the same war."
Are you anticipating the death of American military in Libya?
Will that happening "prove you right?"
Do you want to be "right?"
You just dropped 97 notches on the intelligence scale.
I'm surprised.
But as I said in another post, low politics has no morality or sense of
judgement.
As soon as you start talking "democrat" and "republican" you forfeit the
right to be taken seriously.
You become a puppet to those labels.
But it's amusing to see you join the ranks of Mike Moore and Scotty
Ingersoll in one fell swoop.

An OT question
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 11:46:47 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 11:06:25 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:04:41 -0400,
wrote:

I was wrong, I did misread the first note. John does have a point
though. The media fought Bush for the right to go out to Dover and
take pictures of coffins from the Iraq war and now that they have that
right, they are not showing the coffins coming home from Afghanistan.

I don't really think it is a liberal conspiracy though. I think the TV
networks just figured out they sell more products if they don't show
coffins and they like the American public to be as blissfully ignorant
of this war as Oprah. It does demonstrate how phony the righteous
indignation of the left was when Bush was the president. It was never
about the war. It was only about Bush.
That's about as simple-minded an analysis as I've seen. Maybe there's
less reportage about the bodies because it's been reported and it's boring.


So you are saying Bush made war a safe prospect for Democrats? Now
nobody cares that our kids are being killed for no particular reason
and they can stay in the blissful ignorance Oprah is so proud of.


No, I am not saying that Bush made way a "safe prospect." What I posted,
in plain English, is easy enough to understand: maybe there is less
reportage about the bodies because it's been reported and it's boring.

The young U.S. men and women who died in Iraq during Bush's war were
killed for no particular reason. The last time large numbers of U.S.
troops died for a particular reason was in World War II.

The question still stands, where is the outrage from the left about
the kids who are still coming home from Afghanistan in a box?

Will there be any outrage about dead kids coming home from Libya?

Why does there have to be outrage from the left? Where are the
Republicans who want the Afg. war to end right now? There aren't many.
Sounds to me like you're bitter about something. Perhaps you should
write Bush a letter and tell him how you feel about the two wars he
started, one of choice, while he pretty much ignored the one that had
some justification.

Where's all the outrage about the Bosnian conflict? Oh wait, that was
Clinton's war... So, he must be to blame for Viet Nam or so the logic
from the right wing nuts goes...

An OT question
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 12:29:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 12:18:37 -0400, Ernie wrote:

On 3/20/2011 11:46 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 11:06:25 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:04:41 -0400,
wrote:

I was wrong, I did misread the first note. John does have a point
though. The media fought Bush for the right to go out to Dover and
take pictures of coffins from the Iraq war and now that they have that
right, they are not showing the coffins coming home from Afghanistan.

I don't really think it is a liberal conspiracy though. I think the TV
networks just figured out they sell more products if they don't show
coffins and they like the American public to be as blissfully ignorant
of this war as Oprah. It does demonstrate how phony the righteous
indignation of the left was when Bush was the president. It was never
about the war. It was only about Bush.
That's about as simple-minded an analysis as I've seen. Maybe there's
less reportage about the bodies because it's been reported and it's boring.


So you are saying Bush made war a safe prospect for Democrats? Now
nobody cares that our kids are being killed for no particular reason
and they can stay in the blissful ignorance Oprah is so proud of.


No, I am not saying that Bush made way a "safe prospect." What I posted,
in plain English, is easy enough to understand: maybe there is less
reportage about the bodies because it's been reported and it's boring.

The young U.S. men and women who died in Iraq during Bush's war were
killed for no particular reason. The last time large numbers of U.S.
troops died for a particular reason was in World War II.

The question still stands, where is the outrage from the left about
the kids who are still coming home from Afghanistan in a box?

Will there be any outrage about dead kids coming home from Libya?

The whole topic *bores* Krause.

I am always amused when the democrats sit idly by as a democratic
president prosecutes an idiotic war but they get all over a republican
for the same war.

That's totally disingenuous and you know it. Bush lied us into a war.
Please name a Dem. president post Johnson who did that.

An OT question
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:38:56 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:36:18 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 11:01:15 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:22:50 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:10:39 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:48:24 -0400, John H
wrote:

Last night I heard Oprah saying the war in Afghanistan had very little impact on
her because there was little to remind her it was going on.

That made me wonder...why don't we see the pictures of the dead, their caskets,
etc, like we did when Bush was president.

We used to see their pictures on NBC and other newscasts, and even in the big
papers. Now we see nothing of the sort.

Anyone?

Are you stupid or just lying? Bush was the one who banned photography
of the caskets. Obama rescinded that.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20090226/index.htm

That was American caskets,

John is talking about dead Arabs.
Nobody seems to give a **** about dead Arabs.
That is why it is easy to throw around terms like "no fly zones"
without equating it with dead people.

Really? Where did he say that? I don't see any reference to dead
Arabs. He's a right-wing liar, who doesn't give a fig about facts.

I was wrong, I did misread the first note. John does have a point
though. The media fought Bush for the right to go out to Dover and
take pictures of coffins from the Iraq war and now that they have that
right, they are not showing the coffins coming home from Afghanistan.

I don't really think it is a liberal conspiracy though. I think the TV
networks just figured out they sell more products if they don't show
coffins and they like the American public to be as blissfully ignorant
of this war as Oprah. It does demonstrate how phony the righteous
indignation of the left was when Bush was the president. It was never
about the war. It was only about Bush.

Exactly.

Well, Greg has certainly got agreement from the racist/liar crowd.

An OT question
 

An OT question
 

An OT question
 

On Mar 20, 9:50*am, wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 23:16:28 -0700, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 01:42:10 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 22:06:50 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:25:41 -0400, wrote:

As distasteful as it is, those wackos apparently have the right to
protest.

At a certain point the reach the level of "fire in a crowded theater"..

The Supreme Court spoke on this subject. They have the right to do it.

As I said, bikers have become sissies. I would expect Rolling Thunder
to explain they also have the right to get their ass kicked if they
don't take their protest down the road.

They don't have such a right. That's a threat.

Duh *... BIKERS. They are supposed to be a little threatening.

Greg, I'd think it would be interesting if a West-burrow member tried
to break their line, though.