Wow, she has really hit a nerve, that is the most this loser has replied to
a post in weeks. It must be sad to work so hard to impress everyone and no
one, even those who endorse his political beliefs, believes a word he
writes.

I think sad is relative. How about the people (and there are several on this
NG) who just ooze hateful, spiteful, crap *every* time they post? Whatcha
think, Jack? Suppose those people might be pretty sad as well? If that's the
way their minds really work, that's way sad indeed.

Gould 0738 wrote:

Wow, she has really hit a nerve, that is the most this loser has replied to
a post in weeks. It must be sad to work so hard to impress everyone and no
one, even those who endorse his political beliefs, believes a word he
writes.

I think sad is relative. How about the people (and there are several on this
NG) who just ooze hateful, spiteful, crap *every* time they post? Whatcha
think, Jack? Suppose those people might be pretty sad as well? If that's the
way their minds really work, that's way sad indeed.



Why, do you mean people like our friend Jackoff here and, perhaps, Dave
Hall? Who today stated that those who could not afford health care
should just go somewhere to die.

--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:bqoqk8

....stated that those who could not afford health care
should just go somewhere to die.

"....... and decrease the surplus population" ?

Wally wrote:

NAACP lobbyist slammed for Kennedy judge memo


By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


Several conservative activists charge that an NAACP attorney

acted
unethically and should be disbarred for asking Sen. Edward M. Kennedy to
stall the confirmation of a judicial nominee who the lawyer feared would

rule unfavorably on a case involving the group.

Elaine Jones, president of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense Fund, asked Mr. Kennedy,
Massachusetts Democrat, to block the nomination of Tennessee Judge Julia
S. Gibbons to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals until after that
panel had ruled on last year's landmark affirmative action case, an
internal Democratic memo showed.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/...0142-7947r.htm


Other than trying to shift the spotlight to the Dems, why would you bring this
up?

If Kennedy is acting unethically, does that grant a license to everybody else
to do the same?

Is it OK to screw around with the public trust as long as somebody else is
doing the same or worse?

Nah. I don't think so.

Besides, there's a difference between lobbying and bribery. Not much,
sometimes, but a difference nonetheless.

Harry Krause wrote:

Why, do you mean people like our friend Jackoff here and, perhaps, Dave
Hall?

oops, forgot to include yourself krause.

-- Charlie


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Gould 0738 wrote:

How about the people (and there are several on this
NG) who just ooze hateful, spiteful, crap *every* time they post?

Ya, I agree. We'd be better off without your pal krause.


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---