|
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Harry, that guy you hated so much is being treated well by history. From CNN no doubt.
Hindsight, Harry. You gotta love hindsight... https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/22/polit...oll/index.html |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On 1/25/18 8:12 PM, Tim wrote:
Harry, that guy you hated so much is being treated well by history. From CNN no doubt. Hindsight, Harry. You gotta love hindsight... https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/22/polit...oll/index.html Dubya is speaking out against ******** Trump and in fact looks decent compared to Trump. Not surprising. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Keyser Soze
- show quoted text - Dubya is speaking out against ******** Trump and in fact looks decent compared to Trump. Not surprising. ..... Odd, in this article he doesn’t bad mouth Trump at all. It does say. “Because Bush’s speech was immediately interpreted as a presidential censure of the current Oval Office occupant, Democratic pundits heaped praise upon Bush. Although Bush never mentioned President Donald Trump, the narrative set up immediately – Bush had warned the nation forcefully about “Trumpism” and its impact on our national unity....” And what he was meaning is that Trump was fount to rock the immigration boat and a lot wouldn’t like it. Of course you would think he was down on the Donald because that’s how you’re geared. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rea...35343.amp.html |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Tim Wrote in message:
Keyser Soze - show quoted text - Dubya is speaking out against ******** Trump and in fact looks decent compared to Trump. Not surprising. .... Odd, in this article he doesn?t bad mouth Trump at all. It does say. ?Because Bush?s speech was immediately interpreted as a presidential censure of the current Oval Office occupant, Democratic pundits heaped praise upon Bush. Although Bush never mentioned President Donald Trump, the narrative set up immediately ? Bush had warned the nation forcefully about ?Trumpism? and its impact on our national unity....? And what he was meaning is that Trump was fount to rock the immigration boat and a lot wouldn?t like it. Of course you would think he was down on the Donald because that?s how you?re geared. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rea...35343.amp.html It's amazing how the liberal mind works...........or doesn't work. -- x ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 20:21:49 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 1/25/18 8:12 PM, Tim wrote: Harry, that guy you hated so much is being treated well by history. From CNN no doubt. Hindsight, Harry. You gotta love hindsight... https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/22/polit...oll/index.html Dubya is speaking out against ******** Trump and in fact looks decent compared to Trump. Not surprising. Presidents are like wine, they seem to get better with time. I am really surprised you are not hailing Nixon as the most "progressive" president since the Roosevelts. You probably should. Too bad your people had him killed him off, Who knows what wonderful things he might have done next. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Jan On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 20:21:49 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: - show quoted text - Presidents are like wine, they seem to get better with time. I am really surprised you are not hailing Nixon as the most "progressive" president since the Roosevelts. You probably should. Too bad your people had him killed him off, Who knows what wonderful things he might have done next. .... Killed off? Nixon or Kennedy? |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: Jan On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 20:21:49 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: - show quoted text - Presidents are like wine, they seem to get better with time. I am really surprised you are not hailing Nixon as the most "progressive" president since the Roosevelts. You probably should. Too bad your people had him killed him off, Who knows what wonderful things he might have done next. ... Killed off? Nixon or Kennedy? Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. .... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: Jan On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 20:21:49 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: - show quoted text - Presidents are like wine, they seem to get better with time. I am really surprised you are not hailing Nixon as the most "progressive" president since the Roosevelts. You probably should. Too bad your people had him killed him off, Who knows what wonderful things he might have done next. ... Killed off? Nixon or Kennedy? Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. Well, he did have the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crises on his CV. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Tim wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... He was not a real successful President. But he would most likely not have used Tonkin Gulf as an excuse to crank up the war. I heard he was trying to get us out of the debacle. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 01:07:00 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote: Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... He was not a real successful President. But he would most likely not have used Tonkin Gulf as an excuse to crank up the war. I heard he was trying to get us out of the debacle. "Trying" in a "put in more troops" sort of way. I agree LBJ was worse, turning a little regional civil war into a massive debacle that killed 65000 Americans and millions of Vietnamese. Cuba was a total disaster from start to finish. The "missile crisis" was totally unnecessary and after almost blowing up the world, we ended up with the deal Krushchev wanted in the first place. We pulled our old missiles out of Turkey and agreed not to put new ones back. That was the object of the exercise and in the end that was what happened. In the mean time Kennedy's ego and stupidity almost started WWIII. He did not know that there were already tactical nukes in Cuba, ready to go and he also did not know the subs had nuclear torpedoes on board. One political officer stopped the nuclear holocaust by telling a sub captain not to fire after we attacked his boat. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Tim wrote:
On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot. Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed. The presidency was glossed up. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot. Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed. The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Tim wrote:
On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. If the Kennedys were Repubs, Fretwell would be praising their virtues. -- Posted with my iPhone 8+. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Keyser Söze wrote:
Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. If the Kennedys were Repubs, Fretwell would be praising their virtues. And you would be Dissing them. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:46:43 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. If the Kennedys were Repubs, Fretwell would be praising their virtues. Not likely, it is personal with me. If you are running an illegal wire tap on a residential phone, in an attempt to pierce the lawyer client privilege, I won't like you no matter what party you are in. BTW you don't hear a lot of praise from me about either Bush or even Reagan. Ford may be the last GOP president I actually had a lot of respect for and Chevy Chase killed him. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
wrote:
On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot. Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed. The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? -- Posted with my iPhone 8+. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Keyser Soze wrote:
wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot. Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed. The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? whom? |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot. Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed. The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot. Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed. The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. None of them had a chance in 1964. Nixon lost and it was too soon to run again. Goldwater was too for out there. Romney? Nah. And I was living in Kansas. -- Posted with my iPhone 8+. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On 1/27/18 7:51 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. If the Kennedys were Repubs, Fretwell would be praising their virtues. And you would be Dissing them. That's just stupid. I volunteered for a GOP House candidate in 1960, and I was still too young to vote in 1964. I liked Nixon and I liked Gerry Ford. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:52:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things. One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot. Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed. The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. None of them had a chance in 1964. Nixon lost and it was too soon to run again. Goldwater was too for out there. Romney? Nah. And I was living in Kansas. Ah yes, The political nerve center of the nation ... Kansas. That is almost like being in DC going to a private school with the kids of politically connected parents. Kennedy was in trouble. People were basically starting to ask "We see the beefcake but where is the beef"? The democrats were disillusioned and wondering if they did not just have the ticket flipped. JFK had a filibuster proof senate (65 votes) and a big majority in the house and yet they were not seeing much coming out of it. The buzz was Johnson might have taken a run at JFK in 64. To start with, he knew how sick Kennedy really was. Lots of people knew he was not right but the news covered it up ... just like FDR. Johnson was not that nice. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 21:50:53 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote: That's just stupid. I volunteered for a GOP House candidate in 1960, and I was still too young to vote in 1964. I liked Nixon and I liked Gerry Ford. As I stated before, you should have loved Nixon. He was the best big government democrat you could ever hope for. A lot of people on the right thought we were egregiously betrayed. That may have been why Goldwater was on the side of **** canning him. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
|
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On 1/28/2018 9:37 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/28/18 7:04 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/28/2018 12:34 AM, wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:52:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things.* One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot.** Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around.* Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed.** The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. None of them had a chance in 1964. Nixon lost and it was too soon to run again. Goldwater was too for out there. Romney? Nah. And I was living in Kansas. Ah yes, The political nerve center of the nation ... Kansas. That is almost like being in DC going to a private school with the kids of politically connected parents. Kennedy was in trouble. People were basically starting to ask "We see the beefcake but* where is the beef"? The democrats were disillusioned and wondering if they did not just have the ticket flipped. JFK had a filibuster proof senate (65 votes) and a big majority in the house and yet they were not seeing much coming out of it. The buzz was Johnson might have taken a run at JFK in 64. To start with, he knew how sick Kennedy really was. Lots of people knew he was not right but the news covered it up ... just like FDR. Johnson was not that nice. In many ways Trump reminds me of LBJ, not so much in agenda issues but in personalities.* Both are/were bullies. LBJ understood government and the legislative process, and among other things, got the Civil Rights bill passed. Trump is a pig with no governmental or legislative talents, and would rescind what is left of the Civil Rights bill, if he could. Johnson has many great accomplishments and a colossal failure. Trump transferred more of the nation's wealth to the rich. All I said was that both personalities were/are those of a bully. BTW, what is your secret source of information that indicates that Trump would rescind the Civil Rights bill? Real info or more "Fake News"? |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On 1/28/18 9:56 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/28/2018 9:37 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 1/28/18 7:04 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/28/2018 12:34 AM, wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:52:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things.* One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot.** Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around.* Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed.** The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. None of them had a chance in 1964. Nixon lost and it was too soon to run again. Goldwater was too for out there. Romney? Nah. And I was living in Kansas. Ah yes, The political nerve center of the nation ... Kansas. That is almost like being in DC going to a private school with the kids of politically connected parents. Kennedy was in trouble. People were basically starting to ask "We see the beefcake but* where is the beef"? The democrats were disillusioned and wondering if they did not just have the ticket flipped. JFK had a filibuster proof senate (65 votes) and a big majority in the house and yet they were not seeing much coming out of it. The buzz was Johnson might have taken a run at JFK in 64. To start with, he knew how sick Kennedy really was. Lots of people knew he was not right but the news covered it up ... just like FDR. Johnson was not that nice. In many ways Trump reminds me of LBJ, not so much in agenda issues but in personalities.* Both are/were bullies. LBJ understood government and the legislative process, and among other things, got the Civil Rights bill passed. Trump is a pig with no governmental or legislative talents, and would rescind what is left of the Civil Rights bill, if he could. Johnson has many great accomplishments and a colossal failure. Trump transferred more of the nation's wealth to the rich. All I said was that both personalities were/are those of a bully. BTW, what is your secret source of information that indicates that Trump would rescind the Civil Rights bill?** Real info or more "Fake News"? Trump is a racist. There are racists in his administration. The most prominent is Steve Miller. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/28/2018 9:37 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 1/28/18 7:04 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/28/2018 12:34 AM, wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:52:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things.* One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot.** Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around.* Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed.** The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. None of them had a chance in 1964. Nixon lost and it was too soon to run again. Goldwater was too for out there. Romney? Nah. And I was living in Kansas. Ah yes, The political nerve center of the nation ... Kansas. That is almost like being in DC going to a private school with the kids of politically connected parents. Kennedy was in trouble. People were basically starting to ask "We see the beefcake but* where is the beef"? The democrats were disillusioned and wondering if they did not just have the ticket flipped. JFK had a filibuster proof senate (65 votes) and a big majority in the house and yet they were not seeing much coming out of it. The buzz was Johnson might have taken a run at JFK in 64. To start with, he knew how sick Kennedy really was. Lots of people knew he was not right but the news covered it up ... just like FDR. Johnson was not that nice. In many ways Trump reminds me of LBJ, not so much in agenda issues but in personalities.* Both are/were bullies. LBJ understood government and the legislative process, and among other things, got the Civil Rights bill passed. Trump is a pig with no governmental or legislative talents, and would rescind what is left of the Civil Rights bill, if he could. Johnson has many great accomplishments and a colossal failure. Trump transferred more of the nation's wealth to the rich. All I said was that both personalities were/are those of a bully. BTW, what is your secret source of information that indicates that Trump would rescind the Civil Rights bill? Real info or more "Fake News"? And was the Republicans in Congress who passed the Civil Rights act. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On 1/28/2018 11:24 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/28/18 9:56 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/28/2018 9:37 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 1/28/18 7:04 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/28/2018 12:34 AM, wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:52:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things.* One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot.** Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed.** The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. None of them had a chance in 1964. Nixon lost and it was too soon to run again. Goldwater was too for out there. Romney? Nah. And I was living in Kansas. Ah yes, The political nerve center of the nation ... Kansas. That is almost like being in DC going to a private school with the kids of politically connected parents. Kennedy was in trouble. People were basically starting to ask "We see the beefcake but* where is the beef"? The democrats were disillusioned and wondering if they did not just have the ticket flipped. JFK had a filibuster proof senate (65 votes) and a big majority in the house and yet they were not seeing much coming out of it. The buzz was Johnson might have taken a run at JFK in 64. To start with, he knew how sick Kennedy really was. Lots of people knew he was not right but the news covered it up ... just like FDR. Johnson was not that nice. In many ways Trump reminds me of LBJ, not so much in agenda issues but in personalities.* Both are/were bullies. LBJ understood government and the legislative process, and among other things, got the Civil Rights bill passed. Trump is a pig with no governmental or legislative talents, and would rescind what is left of the Civil Rights bill, if he could. Johnson has many great accomplishments and a colossal failure. Trump transferred more of the nation's wealth to the rich. All I said was that both personalities were/are those of a bully. BTW, what is your secret source of information that indicates that Trump would rescind the Civil Rights bill?** Real info or more "Fake News"? Trump is a racist. There are racists in his administration. The most prominent is Steve Miller. It's sad that someone with your intelligence so easily buys into whatever the latest, popular claims of the left are. I have little respect for Joy Reid or Maxine Waters. I think they both exhibit reverse racism. Both are black. Does that mean I am a racist? |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:37:24 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 1/28/18 7:04 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/28/2018 12:34 AM, wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:52:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things.* One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot.** Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around.* Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed.** The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. None of them had a chance in 1964. Nixon lost and it was too soon to run again. Goldwater was too for out there. Romney? Nah. And I was living in Kansas. Ah yes, The political nerve center of the nation ... Kansas. That is almost like being in DC going to a private school with the kids of politically connected parents. Kennedy was in trouble. People were basically starting to ask "We see the beefcake but* where is the beef"? The democrats were disillusioned and wondering if they did not just have the ticket flipped. JFK had a filibuster proof senate (65 votes) and a big majority in the house and yet they were not seeing much coming out of it. The buzz was Johnson might have taken a run at JFK in 64. To start with, he knew how sick Kennedy really was. Lots of people knew he was not right but the news covered it up ... just like FDR. Johnson was not that nice. In many ways Trump reminds me of LBJ, not so much in agenda issues but in personalities.* Both are/were bullies. LBJ understood government and the legislative process, and among other things, got the Civil Rights bill passed. Trump is a pig with no governmental or legislative talents, and would rescind what is left of the Civil Rights bill, if he could. Johnson has many great accomplishments and a colossal failure. Trump transferred more of the nation's wealth to the rich. How much of that Vietnam budget went to the rich? (Dow, Dupont, General Dynamics, Boeing, Raytheon) We understand it was the poor who were dying. Rich kids who served, were in the rear with the gear or they just dodged the draft altogether. |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 11:34:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: It's sad that someone with your intelligence so easily buys into whatever the latest, popular claims of the left are. I have little respect for Joy Reid or Maxine Waters. I think they both exhibit reverse racism. Both are black. Does that mean I am a racist? Of course you are racist, you disagreed with Harry didn't you? |
Huh. George Bush ain't that bad of a guy after all...
On 1/28/18 11:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/28/2018 11:24 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 1/28/18 9:56 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/28/2018 9:37 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 1/28/18 7:04 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/28/2018 12:34 AM, wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:52:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:25:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On 27 Jan 2018 21:52:45 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote: wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:35:55 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote: Tim wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 2:09:35 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 13:46:24 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:55:11 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: - show quoted text - Both, one literally, the other figuratively but there is no comparison in what they accomplished. Kennedy's main claim to fame was ****ing Marilyn Monroe and getting shot. ... Jack was taken out way too early. Shame too. I look back at history and thought he could have done some great things.* One thing about him was he could sure deliver a great speech... I am not as convinced. He was an arrogant jerk who almost destroyed the world for no real reason and his brother shredded the constitution. Other than that I suppose he did look good on TV. you may be right. I was 7 yrs old when he was assassinated. I'm looking far into retrospect. Camelot.** Since he really screwed the pooch in his short time as President, but looked good, talked well, had a nice looking wife (who he played around on, and she to do the same playing around. Who the press seemed to overlook) and killed.** The presidency was glossed up. There was a very good chance that he was going to lose the 64 election. That is why he was in Dallas in the first place, trying to get the solid southern democrat vote back. Lose to who? We might have actually seen Nixon again but Goldwater had a much better chance against a live JFK than LBJ over the body of a dead president. By September of 63 K's approval ratings had fallen to the lowest in his presidency and there was not even anyone from the GOP reminding us how bad things were going. I was in DC every day at that time 2 blocks from his house. The blood was in the water. Lose to who? Goldwater? Nixon? Romney?, that's if he gets past the LBJ primary challenge. Like I said, the blood was in the water. Maybe the news didn't get to Connecticut. They were too busy talking about Jackie's new hat. None of them had a chance in 1964. Nixon lost and it was too soon to run again. Goldwater was too for out there. Romney? Nah. And I was living in Kansas. Ah yes, The political nerve center of the nation ... Kansas. That is almost like being in DC going to a private school with the kids of politically connected parents. Kennedy was in trouble. People were basically starting to ask "We see the beefcake but* where is the beef"? The democrats were disillusioned and wondering if they did not just have the ticket flipped. JFK had a filibuster proof senate (65 votes) and a big majority in the house and yet they were not seeing much coming out of it. The buzz was Johnson might have taken a run at JFK in 64. To start with, he knew how sick Kennedy really was. Lots of people knew he was not right but the news covered it up ... just like FDR. Johnson was not that nice. In many ways Trump reminds me of LBJ, not so much in agenda issues but in personalities.* Both are/were bullies. LBJ understood government and the legislative process, and among other things, got the Civil Rights bill passed. Trump is a pig with no governmental or legislative talents, and would rescind what is left of the Civil Rights bill, if he could. Johnson has many great accomplishments and a colossal failure. Trump transferred more of the nation's wealth to the rich. All I said was that both personalities were/are those of a bully. BTW, what is your secret source of information that indicates that Trump would rescind the Civil Rights bill?** Real info or more "Fake News"? Trump is a racist. There are racists in his administration. The most prominent is Steve Miller. It's sad that someone with your intelligence so easily buys into whatever the latest, popular claims of the left are. I have little respect for Joy Reid or Maxine Waters.* I think they both exhibit reverse racism.* Both are black.* Does that mean I am a racist? No, I don't believe you are a racist. But I think most of Trump's "base" supporters are. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:12 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com