OT--Amazing numbers
 

Whether or not you agree or disagree with Bush's policies, you'll be amazed
at the following poll from University of Pennsylvania.

University of Pennsylvania National Annenberg Election Survey. Nov.
28-Dec. 1, 2003. N=847 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

NOYB wrote:

Whether or not you agree or disagree with Bush's policies, you'll be amazed
at the following poll from University of Pennsylvania.

University of Pennsylvania National Annenberg Election Survey. Nov.
28-Dec. 1, 2003. N=847 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

.

"Now I'd like to ask you how you feel about George W. Bush as a
person, as opposed to how you feel about the job he is doing. Do you have a
favorable or unfavorable opinion of him as a person?"

Favor-
able
Unfav-
orable
Not
Sure

%
%
%

11/28 - 12/1/03 72 19 9
11/23-26/03 65 24 11




72% of this country has a *favorable* opinion of the man "as a person".
Since the left's hate for the man
dominates about half of the news (and *all* of NPR's news), you would think
it was higher than 19% of this
country that so despises him.





So, the conclusion is, nice guy, but total foch-up...?


--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

Should read as follows:

11/28-12/1 72% favorable, 19% unfavorable, 9% not sure


11/23-26/03 65% favorable, 24% unfavorable, 11% not sure


I knew guys like Harry were in the minority...but I had no idea he and his
ilk were that *small* of a minority. They actually hate the man, not his
policies.



"NOYB" wrote in message
...
Whether or not you agree or disagree with Bush's policies, you'll be
amazed
at the following poll from University of Pennsylvania.

University of Pennsylvania National Annenberg Election Survey. Nov.
28-Dec. 1, 2003. N=847 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

.

"Now I'd like to ask you how you feel about George W. Bush as a
person, as opposed to how you feel about the job he is doing. Do you have
a
favorable or unfavorable opinion of him as a person?"

Favor-
able
Unfav-
orable
Not
Sure

%
%
%

11/28 - 12/1/03 72 19 9
11/23-26/03 65 24 11




72% of this country has a *favorable* opinion of the man "as a person".
Since the left's hate for the man
dominates about half of the news (and *all* of NPR's news), you would
think
it was higher than 19% of this
country that so despises him.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that message only
seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest in politics.
Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the great majority of the
country.

His job approval ratings have been 52% for some time. His job disapproval
rating is 34%, which has been falling. That means out of every 100 people,
19 hate his guts...no matter what policies he adopts. An additional 15
dislike his policies. However, 52 like his policies. The remaining 14 have
no favorable or unfavorable opinion on his policies.

I guess it's safe to assume that those 14 without opinions on his policy
will either a) not vote, or b) vote for Bush because he's affable.

Either way, it seems he'll be hard to beat.







"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Whether or not you agree or disagree with Bush's policies, you'll be
amazed
at the following poll from University of Pennsylvania.

University of Pennsylvania National Annenberg Election Survey.
Nov.
28-Dec. 1, 2003. N=847 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

.

"Now I'd like to ask you how you feel about George W. Bush as a
person, as opposed to how you feel about the job he is doing. Do you
have a
favorable or unfavorable opinion of him as a person?"

Favor-
able
Unfav-
orable
Not
Sure

%
%
%

11/28 - 12/1/03 72 19 9
11/23-26/03 65 24 11




72% of this country has a *favorable* opinion of the man "as a person".
Since the left's hate for the man
dominates about half of the news (and *all* of NPR's news), you would
think
it was higher than 19% of this
country that so despises him.





So, the conclusion is, nice guy, but total foch-up...?


--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

In article ,
says...
Should read as follows:

11/28-12/1 72% favorable, 19% unfavorable, 9% not sure


11/23-26/03 65% favorable, 24% unfavorable, 11% not sure


I knew guys like Harry were in the minority...but I had no idea he and his
ilk were that *small* of a minority. They actually hate the man, not his
policies.

I don't think people hate him as a man, lots of people hate his policies
and disagree with his ambitions.

You can have all the respect in the world for a man and still consider
him wrong for a job.

The numbers?

It's the turkey surprise. Bush's numbers will fall as his little
adventure into the mid-east drags on. Americans don't have a lot of
patience to spare.

Turkey platter shots only go so far, reality will wash the tide back in.

jps

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
Should read as follows:

11/28-12/1 72% favorable, 19% unfavorable, 9% not sure


11/23-26/03 65% favorable, 24% unfavorable, 11% not sure


I knew guys like Harry were in the minority...but I had no idea he and
his
ilk were that *small* of a minority. They actually hate the man, not
his
policies.

I don't think people hate him as a man, lots of people hate his policies
and disagree with his ambitions.

This particular poll asked about a person's opinion of Bush "as a
person"...policies aside.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

jps wrote:
In article ,
says...

Should read as follows:

11/28-12/1 72% favorable, 19% unfavorable, 9% not sure


11/23-26/03 65% favorable, 24% unfavorable, 11% not sure


I knew guys like Harry were in the minority...but I had no idea he and his
ilk were that *small* of a minority. They actually hate the man, not his
policies.


I don't think people hate him as a man, lots of people hate his policies

Care to tell us which ones??

the ones that returned lefty taxes to the tax payers so they can decide
for themselves how to live their lives?? instead of faceless unelected
cretins like you deciding what should be done with other peoples' money, or

The policies that stopped the US (& us) from making the biggest mistake
of all time & signing kyoto?? Gee even you must now realise it was a
load of potentially very damaging BS & will make no different to global
warming anyway, even if we did want to make a difference. Gees louise
even your communist mates in russia have trigged now, or

are you referring to those policies that have stopped the terrorists
dead in their tracks such that despite them trying there's been no more
attacks on the US, or

are you referring to those policies that have clipped the wings of the
very few corporate cowboys & now commercial confidence is returning as
shown in the economic numbers?

Remember you say it's "his" policies your herd don't like so tell us
about them.

and disagree with his ambitions.

Which "ambitions"?? Personally he's made it to the top so I guess you
mean his "ambitions" for the American people??

to make the US safe from terrorists or any other nuts??

to get the US economy moving again despite the rest of the world (save
us) having fallen in an economic hole??

to make hard working people have the rewards left after tax, so they
aspire to better things, yes maybe even you can leave your walmart job jps?

to get noisy minorities snorts out of the publicly funded trough, gee
now I see your problem jps you being a govt funded bludger are
definitely at risk.


You can have all the respect in the world for a man and still consider
him wrong for a job.

Gee he was appointed by the people & those same people are smart enough
to see through your personal abuse of him. Given there's no coherent
alternative, that can even stop fighting amongst itself; they'll extend
his appointment.

The numbers?

It's the turkey surprise. Bush's numbers will fall as his little
adventure into the mid-east drags on. Americans don't have a lot of
patience to spare.

The world is impressed & it's Bush who has lifted the reputation of the
US after the fiascoes of the loony left administrations.


Turkey platter shots only go so far, reality will wash the tide back in.

But it was a good thing to do for the brave troops yes?? can you
imagine Mr makeup clinton going anywhere near a war zone to support the
troops or if you want a good giggle try imagining Al Gore!!!, his comb
over would get ruffled by the helicopter:-) :-)

Are you ready to tell us about these jobs appointments you & Harry as
"employers" are making yet??? Na??? didn't expect so; lefty lies upon
lefty lies & nary a turtle to be found.



jps


K

Here's some of Harry's lies for you, just to bring back old memories:-)



I'm doing my part to ease unemployment. I'm hiring another writer
for my


staff. Will be putting the ad on MONSTER.COM and in the Wash Post.


I need more staff because 2004 is a major election year and business
booked to date indicates we'll be drowning in work. We need to hire a
production coordinator, too. It has very little to do with the state of
the economy, other than using it as reason to defeat Republicrap
candidates.


I'm doing my part to ease unemployment. I'm hiring another writer
for my

staff. Will be putting the ad on MONSTER.COM and in the Wash Post.




We have first-class benefits, including a top-of-the-line health
insurance plan, a non-contributory defined-benefit pension plan, a 401k,
and a life insurance policy equal to annual salary. We contribute a
share of profits to the 401k on behalf of the employee. Our employees
pay $4.50 for generic prescriptions and $8.00 for non-generics, but
that's going up next year to $10 and $15. New employees get two weeks
vacation the first year, and that goes to three weeks the third year. In
addition, we have 12 paid holidays and we shut down from noon on
Christmas eve to the day after New Year's Day. We also provide 20 days
of paid sick leave a year. And we have an outside company administering
pre-tax flexible bennies for our employees.
Our fringe benefit package follows the trade union model, except, of
course, for the profit contributions to 401k's. Trade unions are
not-for-profit enterprises.
How do these compare to the bennies at your shop?

Paid? Every year? I call "bull****". With 3 weeks vacation, 12 paid
holidays, and 20 paid sick days that's 47 *paid* days off every year.
Are
they hourly employees? For a "small business", that's the road to
bankruptcy.

Boy...and you had me going there for a minute.

Not quite so simple, though you are trying hard to make it so. Our
business is up because we're on the cusp of an election year. Our
business always goes up in a major election year.
You could say we're going to be doing very well in 2004 because Bush is
such a total failure.


The 20 paid sick days aren't part of the "paid" days off unless those
days are used. None of our people abuses sick leave. In fact, no one as
yet has even come close to using 20 sick days in one year. They're there
in case they're needed.


Oh, I forgot. We also provide everyone with LTD.

The company provides an insurance plan that pays 50% of an employe's
salary for Long Term Disability. Employes have the option of purchasing
an additional 16.66%, bringing their total to 66.66%. The basic benefit
maximum is $4,000 per month. With the buy up, the limit is increased to
$10,000 per month.



Here's just some of his prior lies (in his own words pasted);

I sold off nearly $3,000,000 in new motors and boats, depressing
the new boat
industry in southern Connecticut for an entire season. Everything was
sold...every
cotter pin, every quart of oil, 30 days after I started. For near
full-retail, too.


He had just under $1,000,000 on floor plan with a
syndicate of banks led by National Shawmut of Boston. He had been a
solid customer of that back for more than 20 years and they gave him
great rates.



As far as your other complaints, well, almost every president in
my memory,
and I *remember* Truman, Eisenhower (who cheated on his wife),
Kennedy,
Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush, lied and
participated in
deceit to one degree or another, and on issues far more important
than who
was giving them blow jobs.

Good lord. I met *every* president in the damned group except
Bush, and I
worked once for his father.



My father used to pray that the north shore of LI Sound would be
hit by
a mild hurricane. No
one injured, no on-shore property damaged, but lots of boats sunk.
Preferably early in July.


We had the Hatteras for two years. Last year, out of the cold
clear, a
broker approached me with an offer to buy. Our continued Florida
lifestyle was somewhat up in the air, because the two breadwinners
hereabouts were about to be offered long-term but temporary
assignments
they could not refuse in the Washington, D.C., area. So, after being
romanced a little, we sold the Hatt for almost precisely what we paid
for it. Not bad, after two full years of use. And I mean full
years. So,
we didn't "make" any money off the Hatt, but we didn't lose any,
either.
The proceeds were prudently invested.

The PWC was won as
a prize in a raffle.



Never mind that. Why does he have a Bilgeliner in front of his
office?
Is it a display of "Boating Don'ts?"
Yeah, when we were in the boat biz, my father always had one or two







"around the back" that he was forced to take in trade. These were
sold
as "as is, where is." He made sure the engine would start and run.
Beyond that, it was up to the prospective buyer to decide if he
wanted
it. They moved off the lot pretty quickly, partially because my dad's
main store was on a highly trafficked commercial route with lots of
manufacturing and machining and aerospace plants near by. In
those days,
workers at these places could fix anything.


Actually, Dipper, I don't think my father ever saw a Bayliner.
But he still
called bumpers bumpers.
--



Bayliner wined and dined my father a half dozen times to
entice him
into becoming its dealer. His operation was the largest small boat
dealership in its area of New England, and for 30 years, he was the
*exclusive* Evinrude dealer in a densely populated coastal county. He
also handled Mercuries. He never liked Bayliners, and referred to
them
as "jerry-built."


From 1947 until he died, he sold more than 500 outboard motors a
year from his stores, accounting for a reasonably high percentage
of *all*
outboards sold in his home state for those years.


This is a killer. My father was in the boat business dating back to
right after
the Big War. When he died and I was looking through his
warehouse, I found
wrapped in a nuclear fall-out bag (no kidding), a brand-new 1949
Evinrude 8015
50 hp outboard. The motor was a gift to my father from Evinrude for
winning some
outboard stock utility or hydroplane race.

I gave the motor to a friend of my dad's, who worked at the shop
as head
mechanic. I don't believe he ever used it and I'm sure it is still
brand-new. I
have no idea who might own it now.



He also built
boats, and I worked on a few, both wood, glass covered wood and
all fiberglass. After he died, however, we sold the biz and I've
just been an occasional boat owner.


Besides, I worked off and on in the
boat business and inherited it when he died. So, as I said, I'm
knee-deep in boat heritage.


Oh,
and I had some friends who died in the service, too, but it
wasn't for
what they believed in. They were drafted, shipped to Vietnam and came
back in body bags.


During the war, he turned out experimental brass shell casings
for the
Army and hopped up outboards for the Navy, which wanted to use
them on
smaller
landing craft. I had photos at one time of my father with Ole
Evinrude
himself.
My mother knew one of Evinrude's wives...she was a minor movie
star or
singer...I forgot which. Maybe both.



Have you ever sailed from San Francisco to Hawaii? I have.
Have you ever rounded Cape Horn? I have, twice.
Have you ever transited the Panama Canal? I have.
Have you owned more than 20 boats in your lifetime? I have.
Have you ever sailed large boats competitively? I have.
Have you ever been hundreds of miles from land in a powerboat
unde your
command? I have.


My father and his chief mechanic once crossed the Atlantic in
winter in
a 22'
boat powered by twin outboards. Yes, it is possible, even the
fuel. Got a
"fireboat" welcome in NYC.




Here are some:

Hatteras 43' sportfish
Swan 41' racing/cruising sloop
Morgan 33
O'Day 30
Cruisers, Inc., Mackinac 22
Century Coronado
Bill Luders 16, as sweet a sailboat as ever caught a breeze.
Century 19' wood lapstrake with side wheel steering
Cruisers, Inc. 18' and 16' wood lapstrakes
Wolverines. Molded plywood. Gorgeous. Several. 14,15,17 footers
with various
Evinrudes
Lighting class sailboat
Botved Coronet with twin 50 hp Evinrudes. Interesting boat.
Aristocraft (a piece of junk...13', fast, held together with spit)
Alcort Sunfish
Ancarrow Marine Aquiflyer. 22' footer with two Caddy Crusaders.
Guaranteed 60
mph. In the late 1950's.
Skimmar brand skiff
Arkansas Traveler fiberglass bowrider (I think it was a bowrider)
Dyer Dhow
Su-Mark round bilge runabout, fiberglass
Penn Yan runabouts. Wood.
Old Town wood and canvas canoe
Old Town sailing canoe...different than above canoe



Sometime in the early 1960s, I was driving back from Ft. Leonard
Wood to
Kansas City in a nice old MGA I owned at the time. About halfway
home it
started raining heavily, I turned on the wipers, and EVERY SINGLE
electrical accessory and light in the car flashed on, there was a
large
popping sound and it all blew out at once. And the car caught fire. I
pulled over to the side of the road, watched the fire, removed my
license plate and hitched on home. For all I know, that old MGA
is still
there.

Sure was a pretty little car.


Puh-lease, Karen. You've not seen nor have I ever posted one
example of
my professional writings on building structure and the effects on
it of
hurricane-force winds and seismic activity. I haven't done any of
these
in at least 10 year, but at the time I was field researching,
photographing and writing these reports, they were quite accurate,
topical and well-received by their intended audiences.


A small fleet of Polar skiffs were purchased by an inshore bait,
tackle

and boat rental business on the ICW in NE Florida. These boats
were not
used on open waters. Within 90 days, cracks developed in the
liners that
also served as the deck over the flotation in the bottom of the
hulls. A
guide I know, one whose boats and engines are supplied to him by
manufacturers, also had a Polar skiff go bad on him for the same
reasons
-liner and then hull fractures.







Harry has claimed to have a 20 yrs his junior beautiful wife, he
even put a fake pic of a beautiful woman on a website once claiming it
was his "young bride", he may have a wife, although I doubt it, we don't
like nor tolerate misogynists for long.

Needless to say he's made up many "dramatic" over the top
stories over the years about this lie to feed his ego & pretend he's the
centre of attention, but as with his boat claims & other crap, there's
never once been even a shred of independently verifiable material.

After he stalked Madcow in real life, which was most
frightening, I do suspect he's very very dangerous & that this "bride"
story is his delusional appropriation of his, probably court ordered,
treating psychotherapist as "wife" (it seems he was under lock & key for
what?? over a year??? a sexual deviant maybe??), have a read of just a
small part of his BS & make up your own mind, it's all about free choice:-)


1. She *is* my bride. There are no rules that determine the end of
"bride-hood." If I want to refer to her as my bride, I may.

2. As a professional writer, I know the rules of language and am
entitled to
break them in exercise of my license.

3. I doubt many married women would object to their husbands lovingly
referring to them as brides. The connotations are pleasant.

4. She's 20 years younger than I am.



Naw. What happened was that I handled a couple of "political"
consulting
jobs funded out of the DC area to help a few candidates and defeat a
couple of ballot issues. Through no fault of mine, we won each of the
races, so some of the deep pockets types based in the DC area think I
actually *know something* about the process. I was offered a contract
that requires my presence in DC quite frequently. My bride also was
offered a job up here that represented a significant professional
career
move. So, we're "up here" much of the time and "down there" the rest of
it, except when we're "somewhere else." I've been back to Jax (well,
really south of Jax) five times since coming "up here" late last summer
and my bride just returned from a business trip there.

I swear this is true.


Here's a funny. My bride had to fly out to San Diego Wednesday and
hitched a ride on her company's corporate jet. They landed in Salina,
Kansas, which is due north of Wichita and Skippy's suburb of Derby.

So when she gets to San Diego, I get a call asking, "What the hell did
you do in Kansas...we didn't fly over one significant patch of
water...?"

Harry, you make over 500 posts a week to this group and you don't own
a boat?
And why are you so crabby?
Maybe these two factors are related?



One has to own something to use it? Hmmm. My bride drives off in
her car
every day, but she doesn't own it.

I'm not crabby. You asked for advice I gave you some. I questioned your
wanting to take a very small boat out into high seas and suddenly you
turned sour. It's your pot; you are the one stewing in it.

No, it is the boat of a friend. It is a 24' ProLine center console
with,
if I recall, a 225 hp Merc on it. It was a dark and stormy day in
January (1997) when we went out, but the sky cleared once we got out to
the Gulf Stream.


Bride and I caught and released:

1 white marlin
12-15 yellowtail snappers, maybe two pounds each. Pretty, pretty fish.
Assorted red snappers
1 amberjack
2 jack crevalle jacks
1 snook
Nondescript sharks

Did you spend a year as a line psychotherapist at a 650-bed state
hospital for forensic patients?
Did you spend a year as senior psychotherapist at a county facility for
substance abusers?
Did you spend two years as chief of therapy at a private, 200-bed
facility for the mentally and emotionally ill, at which approximately
half the patients were trying to beat drugs or alcohol?
Are you currently chief of therapy for a for a multi-practitioner
practice of some 825 patients, about a third of which are seeking help
for substance abuse problems?


Licensed psychotherapist
Screening as to character and background for each degree earned
On-going screening by faculty while in educational system
Interviews and screenings for required years of internships, plus,
at the same
time, supervision by a licensed professional.
Close professional and personal supervision by a licensed therapist
for two years
of employment before being allowed to apply for licensure
Licensure background check, submission of recommendations by licensed
practitioners
Four hour written examination on state laws
Five hour written examination on diagnosis, procedure and practice

My wife went through this before becoming licensed. Her final
internship was as a
psychotherapist at a 600-bed high security state psychiatric
hospital where, on a
daily basis, she was exposed to more danger than your average soldier.

My wife worked for a year as psychotherapist in a Florida 600-bed state
mental institution for forensic patients. She saw and treated numerous
sexual deviants who do a bit more than expose themselves. Such
"treatment"
is part of being in the mental health professions.


You see, I'm a nautical psychotherapist, and for only $125 an hour,
until their health insurance runs out, I help Bayliner owners
overcome their
feelings of boatable inadequacy.


She is a licensed, practicing
psychotherapist and often tells me I am the sanest person she sees each
day. Which can be taken any way one likes.


1. I'm married to a psychotherapist. Live-in therapy, dontcha know?
And much of
Freud is passe.

My ex-wife surpassed the anti-Christ at least a decade ago.

They're not actually "free" moments. I go to boat dealers to round-up
Bayliner owners who are trying to find one who will take their own
version of flotsam and jetsam in on trade.


1. The address listed is not a home address. It is an office.

2. I have three phone numbers. The phone number listed is not one of
mine. It has never been one of mine. The phone number *did* belong
to an
after-hours message recording hotline my wife maintained for her most
mentally disturbed patients. Some of these troubled souls were
court-ordered referrals. *Every* call to that phone number--every
call--was recorded AND because of the nature of the line, my wife had
the ability to alert the telephone company to trace the phone number of
every incoming call to that line, *even* if the person making the call
tried to block his number.

Why, you might ask? Because when you are dealing with suicidal people,
they'll liable to tell their therapist over the phone that they are
planning to take their life. If the therapist believes the threat is
real, she or he will want to dispatch emergency srvices and perhaps the
police.

In the years my wife has provided this pro bono service, she has never
received a threatening or abusive call from a mentally ill patient or
court-ordered referral. However, after the ranking Flaming Ass of this
newsgroup posted the hotline number in this newsgroup, she received a
number of abusive, foul-mouthed AND life-threatening calls. These were
mostly directed at me but, of course, I never received them BECAUSE
(duh!) the phone is not mine and I've never answered it.
Naturally, my wife alerted the authorities, with whom she works closely
because of her court-referred patients. The authorities are
investigating the callers and have involved both the FBI *and*
authorities in other states, including Florida, Georgia, California and
Texas. Working with the telephone company, the authorities have been
able to trace the origin of virtually every abusive call. And, of
course, they have the tape recordings of the abusive messages. Several
suspects have been identified. I really don't know what the outcome of
all this will be. We haven't had an update in several weeks, nor are
either of us here that interested in the sleazeballs that would make
such calls.


The phone number, of course, is "wired," so when the obnoxious
calls came in
from the idiot rec.boaters, the numbers were easy enough to trace.
The local
police handled a complaint, the local telco was involved and when
it was
discovered the point of origin was out of state, the FBI got
involved. At
least one of the idiots was caught and prosecuted. As far as I can
tell, he
has not posted here again

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"K Smith" wrote in message:


the ones that returned lefty taxes to the tax payers so they can decide
for themselves how to live their lives?? instead of faceless unelected
cretins like you deciding what should be done with other peoples' money,
or


I'll just reply to your first idea and leave the other ones for others:
"Returning" taxes when running huge
deficits and increasing discretionary spending at an amazing rate is
not "returning" any money. Bush likes to say "it's your money" but
it's also "your" debt. Or, more probably, debt that you are passing
on to your kids. ~ How about I borrow $100 in your name and
give you $50 of it? Sounds good to me.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 05:47:01 +0000, WaIIy wrote:

The old gay/lesbian/black/transgendered/fat/bisexual stalwarts ain't
gonna carry the election.

Just a thought, the traditional Republican power base is white males (80%
of white males consider themselves Republican). Now if one were to look
at demographics and growth . . . Republicans might want to consider
expanding that base.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:14:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that message
only seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest in
politics. Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the great
majority of the country.

That venom has been with us for some time, and isn't limited to one side
of the aisle. I never liked Clinton, but to this day, I am amazed at the
rabid hatred he inspires in some. Personally, I don't think either
President is deserving of hatred, and find the polarization troubling and
dangerous. I suspect the reasons lie in both sides perceptions that
Washington can not effectively run the country. Blame for this is often
the "other side".

OT--Amazing numbers
 

thunder wrote:

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:14:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that message
only seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest in
politics. Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the great
majority of the country.

That venom has been with us for some time, and isn't limited to one side
of the aisle. I never liked Clinton, but to this day, I am amazed at the
rabid hatred he inspires in some. Personally, I don't think either
President is deserving of hatred, and find the polarization troubling and
dangerous. I suspect the reasons lie in both sides perceptions that
Washington can not effectively run the country. Blame for this is often
the "other side".

Aside from the fact that tens of millions of Americans believe Bush
stole the election and that he is too stupid to be president and that he
has made a lot of dumb, hurtful decisions since presuming office, there
are all those things he has said and done to divide Americans into as
many camps as possible. Bush is getting just what he deserves, and heat
hasn't even been turned on yet. Starting slowly next month and then
building geometrically afterwards, Bush will be entering a political
firestorm of his own making. I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

No they're not.

For the next 11 months we will engage in an experiment to see which side can
gather the most votes from Boobus Americanus by saying hateful things about the
other. Sadly enough, after the mega-millions spent by political candidates to
slander one another- we draw very little distinction between disdain for the
"wrong" candidate and disdain for the people who support that candidate.

The lies, the mischaracterizations, the demonizations, and the wretched,
smoking poison will flow from Democrat and Republican sources alike. As usual,
there will be very little discussion of what either candidate proposes to do
and much more about the certain apocalypse that will be spawned by the election
of the not-so-esteemed opponent.

Talk radio has kept this crap going for the last four years, non-stop.
Frightening to think how it will now escalate with an election coming on.

Last time out, we elected a "uniter, not a divider." Well, good thing. Imagine
how different the social climate would be today if we had elected a divider,
not a uniter.................

Here's a scary possibility: The National Rifle Association is stumping to be
declared a "news" organization. They are also planning to purchase television
and radio networks. Under current campaign laws, they are not allowed to
broadcast campaign ads known to be untrue for the last 30 days prior to an
election. If they get the right to masquerade as a news organization rather
than a lobbying group, they will be able to say whatever they want, (known to
be untrue or not), and spend as much as they want right up to election day.

Expect that to pass. It will be one "freedom of speech" issue that the right
wing will be trampling one another to support. Can't afford to miss those NRA
contributions- or see them directed to an opponent.



http://www.tomorrowsbestseller.com/w...State/book.asp

OT--Amazing numbers
 

Gould 0738 wrote:

I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

No they're not.

For the next 11 months we will engage in an experiment to see which side can
gather the most votes from Boobus Americanus by saying hateful things about the
other. Sadly enough, after the mega-millions spent by political candidates to
slander one another- we draw very little distinction between disdain for the
"wrong" candidate and disdain for the people who support that candidate.

Actually, the kinds of ads I'm envisioning are aimed at getting the core
voters riled up so they show up at the polls on election day. Boobus
Americanus votes Republican these days, and you could show the actual
video tape of Bush diddling Michael Jackson and it wouldn't matter to them.



The lies, the mischaracterizations, the demonizations, and the wretched,
smoking poison will flow from Democrat and Republican sources alike.


The flow began from the GOP. Let's keep that in mind.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:14:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that message
only seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest in
politics. Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the great
majority of the country.

That venom has been with us for some time, and isn't limited to one side
of the aisle. I never liked Clinton, but to this day, I am amazed at the
rabid hatred he inspires in some. Personally, I don't think either
President is deserving of hatred, and find the polarization troubling and
dangerous. I suspect the reasons lie in both sides perceptions that
Washington can not effectively run the country. Blame for this is often
the "other side".

Actually, my feelings toward Bill Clinton had less to do with his policies
and more to do with his immorality. He was relatively moderate on many
issues...but his wife was ultra-liberal and was likely responsible for a lot
of the policies coming out of *their* Presidency.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

I *hope* the Dems continue to practice dirty politics. All of the liberal
hate fests do nothing more than help the "undecided" decide...and jump
squarely behind the man with a 72% favorability rating.

Don't you get it Harry? Attacking the popular guy is the surest way to make
yourself unpopular. I figured *you*, especially, would have learned that in
grade school.



"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:14:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an
absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that message
only seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest in
politics. Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the great
majority of the country.

That venom has been with us for some time, and isn't limited to one side
of the aisle. I never liked Clinton, but to this day, I am amazed at
the
rabid hatred he inspires in some. Personally, I don't think either
President is deserving of hatred, and find the polarization troubling
and
dangerous. I suspect the reasons lie in both sides perceptions that
Washington can not effectively run the country. Blame for this is often
the "other side".

Aside from the fact that tens of millions of Americans believe Bush
stole the election and that he is too stupid to be president and that he
has made a lot of dumb, hurtful decisions since presuming office, there
are all those things he has said and done to divide Americans into as
many camps as possible. Bush is getting just what he deserves, and heat
hasn't even been turned on yet. Starting slowly next month and then
building geometrically afterwards, Bush will be entering a political
firestorm of his own making. I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

NOYB wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:14:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that message
only seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest in
politics. Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the great
majority of the country.

That venom has been with us for some time, and isn't limited to one side
of the aisle. I never liked Clinton, but to this day, I am amazed at the
rabid hatred he inspires in some. Personally, I don't think either
President is deserving of hatred, and find the polarization troubling and
dangerous. I suspect the reasons lie in both sides perceptions that
Washington can not effectively run the country. Blame for this is often
the "other side".

Actually, my feelings toward Bill Clinton had less to do with his policies
and more to do with his immorality.

But Bush's immorality and his endless lies about really important
matters don't concern you, eh?



--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:

I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

No they're not.

For the next 11 months we will engage in an experiment to see which side
can
gather the most votes from Boobus Americanus by saying hateful things
about the
other. Sadly enough, after the mega-millions spent by political
candidates to
slander one another- we draw very little distinction between disdain for
the
"wrong" candidate and disdain for the people who support that candidate.

Actually, the kinds of ads I'm envisioning are aimed at getting the core
voters riled up so they show up at the polls on election day.


Mark my words...personal attacks on a popular, affable guy is a sure means
to failure.

Oh yeah...and Bush, Rove, and company have not even begun to fight
back...yet.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

NOYB wrote:

I *hope* the Dems continue to practice dirty politics. All of the liberal
hate fests do nothing more than help the "undecided" decide...and jump
squarely behind the man with a 72% favorability rating.

Don't you get it Harry? Attacking the popular guy is the surest way to make
yourself unpopular. I figured *you*, especially, would have learned that in
grade school.

There's a lot of time between now and the election, my friend, and one
of the goals is to bottle Bush up as much as possible before the voters
retire him next fall.





--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:bqveo1

The flow began from the GOP. Let's keep that in mind.

Simply untrue, Harry, but you already know that. Your posts are part of the
process, which simply evolved in a country with less and less sense of
ethical propriety. I recall numerous examples from '00 when the Boston
Globe would head up "news" articles from the campaign trail in a particular
way. When Al was stumping for votes, it would be "...Gore confers with
_____ group". In the same type of article about W, the head would read
"...Bush targets _____ group". Just that simple shift of words makes Al the
nice guy, and George the bully. Slanted coverage. There were also
seemingly unlimited ads from a variety of labor groups claiming that Reps
would cut school lunches, or cut medicare, when in fact what was at issue
was not a cut at all, but a 2 or 3 percent reduction in the rate of growth!
But what gets heard? Your kids will starve, and your old parents will be
left to die in the gutter. Literally - I recall an ad that characterized
Calcutta as the future for US if a Republican were elected.

And -- part of the dissembling is the revisionism that goes on during and
after the fact. Example: remember the whole Willie Horton thing used
against Dukakis in '88? Press and pundits loved to excoriate Bush41 over
that, race card, negative campaigning, blah, blah,..... In fact it was
none other than our old pal Al Gore who brought Willie Horton out of the box
during the Dem primaries that year, but there were very few voices raised in
righteous indignation at that time. Why is that?



***** Now, as a special treat, I'll save you the effort of replying by
entering now your standard retort:******

"...another Republitrash puppet..."

OT--Amazing numbers
 

The way I see it, the dems know they can't win in 04 and thats why they
are putting forth a sinking Bayliner of candidates. The armada leader, Dean,
appeals only to the Parker wannabes which is not the votes he needs to win.
The dems are holding back their big cruisers, Hillary, until 08 or unless
George hits a deadhead, tho not likely. (No sinking boat there).
The 04 strategy is to take potshots and hope to hole the reps' barge a few
times.
Gordon

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:14:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an
absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that
message
only seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest in
politics. Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the great
majority of the country.

That venom has been with us for some time, and isn't limited to one
side
of the aisle. I never liked Clinton, but to this day, I am amazed at
the
rabid hatred he inspires in some. Personally, I don't think either
President is deserving of hatred, and find the polarization troubling
and
dangerous. I suspect the reasons lie in both sides perceptions that
Washington can not effectively run the country. Blame for this is
often
the "other side".

Actually, my feelings toward Bill Clinton had less to do with his
policies
and more to do with his immorality.

But Bush's immorality and his endless lies about really important
matters don't concern you, eh?

How is bush immoral, and what is he lying about?

OT--Amazing numbers
 

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:14:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an
absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that
message
only seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest in
politics. Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the great
majority of the country.

That venom has been with us for some time, and isn't limited to one
side
of the aisle. I never liked Clinton, but to this day, I am amazed at
the
rabid hatred he inspires in some. Personally, I don't think either
President is deserving of hatred, and find the polarization troubling
and
dangerous. I suspect the reasons lie in both sides perceptions that
Washington can not effectively run the country. Blame for this is
often
the "other side".

Actually, my feelings toward Bill Clinton had less to do with his
policies
and more to do with his immorality.

But Bush's immorality and his endless lies about really important
matters don't concern you, eh?

How is bush immoral, and what is he lying about?



1. Oh, puh-lease.
2. Everything.

Here's a short and now out of date list of the lies of Bush and his
administration about one subject...WMD:




Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of
mass destruction.

Dick Cheney
Speech to VFW National Convention
August 26, 2002


Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for
the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush
Speech to UN General Assembly
September 12, 2002


If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is
once again misleading the world.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
December 2, 2002


We know for a fact that there are weapons there.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
January 9, 2003


Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the
materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve
agent.

George W. Bush
State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003


We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass
destruction, is determined to make more.

Colin Powell
Remarks to UN Security Council
February 5, 2003


We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized
Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the
dictator tells us he does not have.

George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003


If Iraq had disarmed itself, gotten rid of its weapons of mass
destruction over the past 12 years, or over the last several months
since (UN Resolution) 1441 was enacted, we would not be facing the
crisis that we now have before us . . . But the suggestion that we are
doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and
rearrange all of its pieces is not correct.

Colin Powell
Interview with Radio France International
February 28, 2003


So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of
mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our
judgment has to be clearly not.

Colin Powell
Remarks to UN Security Council
March 7, 2003


Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that
the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal
weapons ever devised.

George W. Bush
Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003


Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that
Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical
particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the
operation, for whatever duration it takes.

Ari Fleisher
Press Briefing
March 21, 2003


There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of
mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons
will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them
and who guard them.

Gen. Tommy Franks
Press Conference
March 22, 2003


I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass
destruction.

Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman
Washington Post, p. A27
March 23, 2003


One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a
number of sites.

Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark
Press Briefing
March 22, 2003


We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad
and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003


Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of
mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty.

Neocon scholar Robert Kagan
Washington Post op-ed
April 9, 2003


But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that
they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about
and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
April 10, 2003


We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi
scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he
destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.

George W. Bush
NBC Interview
April 24, 2003


There are people who in large measure have information that we need . .
.. so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.

Donald Rumsfeld
Press Briefing
April 25, 2003


We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.

George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 3, 2003


I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and
the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.

Colin Powell
Remarks to Reporters
May 4, 2003


We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction
in that country.

Donald Rumsfeld
Fox News Interview
May 4, 2003


I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam
Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.

George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 6, 2003


U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and
find" weapons of mass destruction.

Condoleeza Rice
Reuters Interview
May 12, 2003


I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean,
there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago --
whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're
still hidden.

Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne
Press Briefing
May 13, 2003


Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had
weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to
be found. I still expect them to be found.

Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
Interview with Reporters
May 21, 2003


Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating,
I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.

Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
NBC Today Show interview
May 26, 2003


They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.

Donald Rumsfeld
Remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations
May 27, 2003


For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass
destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one
reason everyone could agree on.

Paul Wolfowitz
Vanity Fair interview
May 28, 2003

It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we
have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal
sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually
every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad,
but they're simply not there.

Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force
Press Interview
May 30, 2003

Do I think we're going to find something? Yeah, I kind of do, because I
think there's a lot of information out there."

Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, Defense Intelligence Agency
Press Conference
May 30, 2003


--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

The flow began from the GOP. Let's keep that in mind.

Simply untrue, Harry, but you already know that.

Puh-leeze. We'd need to go back a couple of hundred years to figure out who
"started it." Shame on you *and* Harry for insisting it was the other side.

Like the Hatfields and McCoys, after a generation nobody even remembers who
started it.

No person can honestly and accurately say the other side started it.
The conservatives have institutionalized it, however, with hate radio.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Gould 0738" wrote in message

Puh-leeze. We'd need to go back a couple of hundred years to figure out
who
"started it." Shame on you *and* Harry for insisting it was the other
side.

My apologies, Chuck et al. I *do* agree with your point above. In the
original draft of my reply to Harry, there was a sentence referencing to the
"slime alley" as a two-way street. In editing it got cut, and I failed to
notice. Mea Culpa.


The conservatives have institutionalized it, however, with hate radio.

But let's not intentionally *******ize the language or the process with
loaded buzzwords like "hate radio". There's no hate, it is just
conservative talk radio. Most true conservatives are embarrassed by some of
the pompous rantings that go on, just as honorable Democrats are often
embarrassed by some of the drivel that occasionally spews from the far left.
Words have to mean something, or the whole process is pointless. If we use
words as triggers or weapons, credibility suffers.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:br0lft$27poe8

Here's a short and now out of date list

Since you unequivocally pronounce all these statements as administration
lies, we can presume that you have confirmed documentary evidence that there
are not now and were not then any NBC weapons in Iraq.

Sources, please?

OT--Amazing numbers
 

John Gaquin wrote:

"Gould 0738" wrote in message

Puh-leeze. We'd need to go back a couple of hundred years to figure out
who
"started it." Shame on you *and* Harry for insisting it was the other
side.

My apologies, Chuck et al. I *do* agree with your point above. In the
original draft of my reply to Harry, there was a sentence referencing to the
"slime alley" as a two-way street. In editing it got cut, and I failed to
notice. Mea Culpa.


The conservatives have institutionalized it, however, with hate radio.

But let's not intentionally *******ize the language or the process with
loaded buzzwords like "hate radio".


It's hate radio. The "hosts" are spewing hate. There's no other word to
describe it.


--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

John Gaquin wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:br0lft$27poe8

Here's a short and now out of date list

Since you unequivocally pronounce all these statements as administration
lies, we can presume that you have confirmed documentary evidence that there
are not now and were not then any NBC weapons in Iraq.

Sources, please?




WMD, please?

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

It's hate radio. The "hosts" are spewing hate. There's no other word to
describe it.

You make my point. QED

OT--Amazing numbers
 

As expected.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

Gary Warner wrote:
"K Smith" wrote in message:


the ones that returned lefty taxes to the tax payers so they can decide
for themselves how to live their lives?? instead of faceless unelected
cretins like you deciding what should be done with other peoples' money,

or


I'll just reply to your first idea and leave the other ones for others:
"Returning" taxes when running huge
deficits and increasing discretionary spending at an amazing rate is
not "returning" any money. Bush likes to say "it's your money" but
it's also "your" debt. Or, more probably, debt that you are passing
on to your kids. ~ How about I borrow $100 in your name and
give you $50 of it? Sounds good to me.




Thanks for the reply Gary;

Last first?? So long as I have to spend it at the same bank, which you
happen to also own; that's not as bad as it first appears:-)

I don't think anyone says the debt is a good thing & at the moment the
war is certainly a part of it.

The real trouble was your debt was rising at an alarming rate even
throughout the economic boom times under Clinton, as people's wages
increased so too the tax take. The trouble was the Dems were also
allowing a boom in Govt funded programs/spending, while I suspect most
of us think many laudable, the fact remains their growth was even
greater than the economy in those once in a life boom times.

Bush was confronted with a downturn in the cycle, it had been seen a
long time out, so those that simplistically blame him for it, are just
being opportunists.

The real issue is given the circumstances Bush had to deal with, the
downturn, 911 etc he has done the right thing, he's cut taxes so despite
a huge loss of apparent consumer wealth with the tech wreck stock
collapse etc, people have still been able to spend.

It's thanks to the resilience of the US consumer the world looks more &
more like averting an economic meltdown & thanks.

It's most likely that if Al the voters best pal were in, then the loss
of wealth, 911 jitters & continuing high taxes might have shut the US
consumer spending confidence down & then we're all in it, big time.

Once the left's spending programs are rained in next term then the debt
can be better managed.

However again don't think anyone is happy about the debt Clinton
allowed to build when you should have been clearing sovereign debt, we &
lots of other places actually paid debt down during the boom high tax
flow times of the 90s, Clinton just flitted it away on loony left
favours to supporters, unions etc.

K

OT--Amazing numbers
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Gould 0738 wrote:


I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

No they're not.

For the next 11 months we will engage in an experiment to see which side can
gather the most votes from Boobus Americanus by saying hateful things about the
other. Sadly enough, after the mega-millions spent by political candidates to
slander one another- we draw very little distinction between disdain for the
"wrong" candidate and disdain for the people who support that candidate.


Actually, the kinds of ads I'm envisioning are aimed at getting the core
voters riled up so they show up at the polls on election day. Boobus
Americanus votes Republican these days, and you could show the actual
video tape of Bush diddling Michael Jackson and it wouldn't matter to them.



The lies, the mischaracterizations, the demonizations, and the wretched,
smoking poison will flow from Democrat and Republican sources alike.



The flow began from the GOP. Let's keep that in mind.


What a hoot!! Harry the biggest liar of all time & Chucky the boat
broker are concerned about the truth!!!! in the election.

A laugh a minute this bunch, they really are.


K

Here's some of Harry's lies for you, just to bring back old memories:-)



I'm doing my part to ease unemployment. I'm hiring another writer for my


staff. Will be putting the ad on MONSTER.COM and in the Wash Post.


I need more staff because 2004 is a major election year and business
booked to date indicates we'll be drowning in work. We need to hire a
production coordinator, too. It has very little to do with the state of
the economy, other than using it as reason to defeat Republicrap
candidates.


I'm doing my part to ease unemployment. I'm hiring another writer for my

staff. Will be putting the ad on MONSTER.COM and in the Wash Post.




We have first-class benefits, including a top-of-the-line health
insurance plan, a non-contributory defined-benefit pension plan, a 401k,
and a life insurance policy equal to annual salary. We contribute a
share of profits to the 401k on behalf of the employee. Our employees
pay $4.50 for generic prescriptions and $8.00 for non-generics, but
that's going up next year to $10 and $15. New employees get two weeks
vacation the first year, and that goes to three weeks the third year. In
addition, we have 12 paid holidays and we shut down from noon on
Christmas eve to the day after New Year's Day. We also provide 20 days
of paid sick leave a year. And we have an outside company administering
pre-tax flexible bennies for our employees.
Our fringe benefit package follows the trade union model, except, of
course, for the profit contributions to 401k's. Trade unions are
not-for-profit enterprises.
How do these compare to the bennies at your shop?

Paid? Every year? I call "bull****". With 3 weeks vacation, 12 paid
holidays, and 20 paid sick days that's 47 *paid* days off every year. Are
they hourly employees? For a "small business", that's the road to
bankruptcy.

Boy...and you had me going there for a minute.

Not quite so simple, though you are trying hard to make it so. Our
business is up because we're on the cusp of an election year. Our
business always goes up in a major election year.
You could say we're going to be doing very well in 2004 because Bush is
such a total failure.


The 20 paid sick days aren't part of the "paid" days off unless those
days are used. None of our people abuses sick leave. In fact, no one as
yet has even come close to using 20 sick days in one year. They're there
in case they're needed.


Oh, I forgot. We also provide everyone with LTD.

The company provides an insurance plan that pays 50% of an employe's
salary for Long Term Disability. Employes have the option of purchasing
an additional 16.66%, bringing their total to 66.66%. The basic benefit
maximum is $4,000 per month. With the buy up, the limit is increased to
$10,000 per month.



Here's just some of his prior lies (in his own words pasted);

I sold off nearly $3,000,000 in new motors and boats, depressing
the new boat
industry in southern Connecticut for an entire season. Everything was
sold...every
cotter pin, every quart of oil, 30 days after I started. For near
full-retail, too.


He had just under $1,000,000 on floor plan with a
syndicate of banks led by National Shawmut of Boston. He had been a
solid customer of that back for more than 20 years and they gave him
great rates.



As far as your other complaints, well, almost every president in my memory,
and I *remember* Truman, Eisenhower (who cheated on his wife), Kennedy,
Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush, lied and participated in
deceit to one degree or another, and on issues far more important than who
was giving them blow jobs.

Good lord. I met *every* president in the damned group except Bush, and I
worked once for his father.



My father used to pray that the north shore of LI Sound would be hit by
a mild hurricane. No
one injured, no on-shore property damaged, but lots of boats sunk.
Preferably early in July.


We had the Hatteras for two years. Last year, out of the cold clear, a
broker approached me with an offer to buy. Our continued Florida
lifestyle was somewhat up in the air, because the two breadwinners
hereabouts were about to be offered long-term but temporary assignments
they could not refuse in the Washington, D.C., area. So, after being
romanced a little, we sold the Hatt for almost precisely what we paid
for it. Not bad, after two full years of use. And I mean full years. So,
we didn't "make" any money off the Hatt, but we didn't lose any, either.
The proceeds were prudently invested.

The PWC was won as
a prize in a raffle.



Never mind that. Why does he have a Bilgeliner in front of his office?
Is it a display of "Boating Don'ts?"
Yeah, when we were in the boat biz, my father always had one or two







"around the back" that he was forced to take in trade. These were sold
as "as is, where is." He made sure the engine would start and run.
Beyond that, it was up to the prospective buyer to decide if he wanted
it. They moved off the lot pretty quickly, partially because my dad's
main store was on a highly trafficked commercial route with lots of
manufacturing and machining and aerospace plants near by. In those days,
workers at these places could fix anything.


Actually, Dipper, I don't think my father ever saw a Bayliner. But he still
called bumpers bumpers.
--



Bayliner wined and dined my father a half dozen times to entice him
into becoming its dealer. His operation was the largest small boat
dealership in its area of New England, and for 30 years, he was the
*exclusive* Evinrude dealer in a densely populated coastal county. He
also handled Mercuries. He never liked Bayliners, and referred to them
as "jerry-built."


From 1947 until he died, he sold more than 500 outboard motors a
year from his stores, accounting for a reasonably high percentage of *all*
outboards sold in his home state for those years.


This is a killer. My father was in the boat business dating back to
right after
the Big War. When he died and I was looking through his warehouse, I found
wrapped in a nuclear fall-out bag (no kidding), a brand-new 1949
Evinrude 8015
50 hp outboard. The motor was a gift to my father from Evinrude for
winning some
outboard stock utility or hydroplane race.

I gave the motor to a friend of my dad's, who worked at the shop as head
mechanic. I don't believe he ever used it and I'm sure it is still
brand-new. I
have no idea who might own it now.



He also built
boats, and I worked on a few, both wood, glass covered wood and
all fiberglass. After he died, however, we sold the biz and I've
just been an occasional boat owner.


Besides, I worked off and on in the
boat business and inherited it when he died. So, as I said, I'm
knee-deep in boat heritage.


Oh,
and I had some friends who died in the service, too, but it wasn't for
what they believed in. They were drafted, shipped to Vietnam and came
back in body bags.


During the war, he turned out experimental brass shell casings
for the
Army and hopped up outboards for the Navy, which wanted to use them on
smaller
landing craft. I had photos at one time of my father with Ole Evinrude
himself.
My mother knew one of Evinrude's wives...she was a minor movie star or
singer...I forgot which. Maybe both.



Have you ever sailed from San Francisco to Hawaii? I have.
Have you ever rounded Cape Horn? I have, twice.
Have you ever transited the Panama Canal? I have.
Have you owned more than 20 boats in your lifetime? I have.
Have you ever sailed large boats competitively? I have.
Have you ever been hundreds of miles from land in a powerboat under your
command? I have.


My father and his chief mechanic once crossed the Atlantic in winter in
a 22'
boat powered by twin outboards. Yes, it is possible, even the fuel. Got a
"fireboat" welcome in NYC.




Here are some:

Hatteras 43' sportfish
Swan 41' racing/cruising sloop
Morgan 33
O'Day 30
Cruisers, Inc., Mackinac 22
Century Coronado
Bill Luders 16, as sweet a sailboat as ever caught a breeze.
Century 19' wood lapstrake with side wheel steering
Cruisers, Inc. 18' and 16' wood lapstrakes
Wolverines. Molded plywood. Gorgeous. Several. 14,15,17 footers with various
Evinrudes
Lighting class sailboat
Botved Coronet with twin 50 hp Evinrudes. Interesting boat.
Aristocraft (a piece of junk...13', fast, held together with spit)
Alcort Sunfish
Ancarrow Marine Aquiflyer. 22' footer with two Caddy Crusaders.
Guaranteed 0
mph. In the late 1950's.
Skimmar brand skiff
Arkansas Traveler fiberglass bowrider (I think it was a bowrider)
Dyer Dhow
Su-Mark round bilge runabout, fiberglass
Penn Yan runabouts. Wood.
Old Town wood and canvas canoe
Old Town sailing canoe...different than above canoe



Sometime in the early 1960s, I was driving back from Ft. Leonard Wood to
Kansas City in a nice old MGA I owned at the time. About halfway home it
started raining heavily, I turned on the wipers, and EVERY SINGLE
electrical accessory and light in the car flashed on, there was a large
popping sound and it all blew out at once. And the car caught fire. I
pulled over to the side of the road, watched the fire, removed my
license plate and hitched on home. For all I know, that old MGA is still
there.

Sure was a pretty little car.


Puh-lease, Karen. You've not seen nor have I ever posted one example of
my professional writings on building structure and the effects on it of
hurricane-force winds and seismic activity. I haven't done any of these
in at least 10 year, but at the time I was field researching,
photographing and writing these reports, they were quite accurate,
topical and well-received by their intended audiences.


A small fleet of Polar skiffs were purchased by an inshore bait, tackle

and boat rental business on the ICW in NE Florida. These boats were not
used on open waters. Within 90 days, cracks developed in the liners that
also served as the deck over the flotation in the bottom of the hulls. A
guide I know, one whose boats and engines are supplied to him by
manufacturers, also had a Polar skiff go bad on him for the same reasons
-liner and then hull fractures.







Harry has claimed to have a 20 yrs his junior beautiful wife, he even put a fake pic of a beautiful woman on a website once claiming it was his "young bride", he may have a wife, although I doubt it, we don't like nor tolerate misogynists for long.

Needless to say he's made up many "dramatic" over the top stories over the years about this lie to feed his ego & pretend he's the centre of attention, but as with his boat claims & other crap, there's never once been even a shred of independently verifiable material.

After he stalked Madcow in real life, which was most frightening, I do suspect he's very very dangerous & that this "bride" story is his delusional appropriation of his, probably court ordered, treating psychotherapist as "wife" (it seems he was under lock & key for what?? over a year??? a sexual deviant maybe??), have a read of just a small part of his BS & make up your own mind, it's all about free choice:-)


1. She *is* my bride. There are no rules that determine the end of
"bride-hood." If I want to refer to her as my bride, I may.

2. As a professional writer, I know the rules of language and am entitled to
break them in exercise of my license.

3. I doubt many married women would object to their husbands lovingly
referring to them as brides. The connotations are pleasant.

4. She's 20 years younger than I am.



Naw. What happened was that I handled a couple of "political" consulting
jobs funded out of the DC area to help a few candidates and defeat a
couple of ballot issues. Through no fault of mine, we won each of the
races, so some of the deep pockets types based in the DC area think I
actually *know something* about the process. I was offered a contract
that requires my presence in DC quite frequently. My bride also was
offered a job up here that represented a significant professional career
move. So, we're "up here" much of the time and "down there" the rest of
it, except when we're "somewhere else." I've been back to Jax (well,
really south of Jax) five times since coming "up here" late last summer
and my bride just returned from a business trip there.

I swear this is true.


Here's a funny. My bride had to fly out to San Diego Wednesday and
hitched a ride on her company's corporate jet. They landed in Salina,
Kansas, which is due north of Wichita and Skippy's suburb of Derby.

So when she gets to San Diego, I get a call asking, "What the hell did
you do in Kansas...we didn't fly over one significant patch of
water...?"

Harry, you make over 500 posts a week to this group and you don't own
a boat?
And why are you so crabby?
Maybe these two factors are related?



One has to own something to use it? Hmmm. My bride drives off in her car
every day, but she doesn't own it.

I'm not crabby. You asked for advice I gave you some. I questioned your
wanting to take a very small boat out into high seas and suddenly you
turned sour. It's your pot; you are the one stewing in it.

No, it is the boat of a friend. It is a 24' ProLine center console with,
if I recall, a 225 hp Merc on it. It was a dark and stormy day in
January (1997) when we went out, but the sky cleared once we got out to
the Gulf Stream.


Bride and I caught and released:

1 white marlin
12-15 yellowtail snappers, maybe two pounds each. Pretty, pretty fish.
Assorted red snappers
1 amberjack
2 jack crevalle jacks
1 snook
Nondescript sharks

Did you spend a year as a line psychotherapist at a 650-bed state
hospital for forensic patients?
Did you spend a year as senior psychotherapist at a county facility for
substance abusers?
Did you spend two years as chief of therapy at a private, 200-bed
facility for the mentally and emotionally ill, at which approximately
half the patients were trying to beat drugs or alcohol?
Are you currently chief of therapy for a for a multi-practitioner
practice of some 825 patients, about a third of which are seeking help
for substance abuse problems?


Licensed psychotherapist
Screening as to character and background for each degree earned
On-going screening by faculty while in educational system
Interviews and screenings for required years of internships, plus, at the same
time, supervision by a licensed professional.
Close professional and personal supervision by a licensed therapist for two years
of employment before being allowed to apply for licensure
Licensure background check, submission of recommendations by licensed
practitioners
Four hour written examination on state laws
Five hour written examination on diagnosis, procedure and practice

My wife went through this before becoming licensed. Her final internship was as a
psychotherapist at a 600-bed high security state psychiatric hospital where, on a
daily basis, she was exposed to more danger than your average soldier.

My wife worked for a year as psychotherapist in a Florida 600-bed state
mental institution for forensic patients. She saw and treated numerous
sexual deviants who do a bit more than expose themselves. Such "treatment"
is part of being in the mental health professions.


You see, I'm a nautical psychotherapist, and for only $125 an hour,
until their health insurance runs out, I help Bayliner owners overcome their
feelings of boatable inadequacy.


She is a licensed, practicing
psychotherapist and often tells me I am the sanest person she sees each
day. Which can be taken any way one likes.


1. I'm married to a psychotherapist. Live-in therapy, dontcha know? And much of
Freud is passe.

My ex-wife surpassed the anti-Christ at least a decade ago.

They're not actually "free" moments. I go to boat dealers to round-up
Bayliner owners who are trying to find one who will take their own
version of flotsam and jetsam in on trade.


1. The address listed is not a home address. It is an office.

2. I have three phone numbers. The phone number listed is not one of
mine. It has never been one of mine. The phone number *did* belong to an
after-hours message recording hotline my wife maintained for her most
mentally disturbed patients. Some of these troubled souls were
court-ordered referrals. *Every* call to that phone number--every
call--was recorded AND because of the nature of the line, my wife had
the ability to alert the telephone company to trace the phone number of
every incoming call to that line, *even* if the person making the call
tried to block his number.

Why, you might ask? Because when you are dealing with suicidal people,
they'll liable to tell their therapist over the phone that they are
planning to take their life. If the therapist believes the threat is
real, she or he will want to dispatch emergency srvices and perhaps the
police.

In the years my wife has provided this pro bono service, she has never
received a threatening or abusive call from a mentally ill patient or
court-ordered referral. However, after the ranking Flaming Ass of this
newsgroup posted the hotline number in this newsgroup, she received a
number of abusive, foul-mouthed AND life-threatening calls. These were
mostly directed at me but, of course, I never received them BECAUSE
(duh!) the phone is not mine and I've never answered it.
Naturally, my wife alerted the authorities, with whom she works closely
because of her court-referred patients. The authorities are
investigating the callers and have involved both the FBI *and*
authorities in other states, including Florida, Georgia, California and
Texas. Working with the telephone company, the authorities have been
able to trace the origin of virtually every abusive call. And, of
course, they have the tape recordings of the abusive messages. Several
suspects have been identified. I really don't know what the outcome of
all this will be. We haven't had an update in several weeks, nor are
either of us here that interested in the sleazeballs that would make
such calls.


The phone number, of course, is "wired," so when the obnoxious calls came in
from the idiot rec.boaters, the numbers were easy enough to trace. The local
police handled a complaint, the local telco was involved and when it was
discovered the point of origin was out of state, the FBI got involved. At
least one of the idiots was caught and prosecuted. As far as I can tell, he
has not posted here again

OT--Amazing numbers
 

How is the hate you spew in this group and different than the hate on some
talk radio?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"Gould 0738" wrote in message

Puh-leeze. We'd need to go back a couple of hundred years to figure out
who
"started it." Shame on you *and* Harry for insisting it was the other
side.

My apologies, Chuck et al. I *do* agree with your point above. In the
original draft of my reply to Harry, there was a sentence referencing to
the
"slime alley" as a two-way street. In editing it got cut, and I failed
to
notice. Mea Culpa.


The conservatives have institutionalized it, however, with hate radio.

But let's not intentionally *******ize the language or the process with
loaded buzzwords like "hate radio".


It's hate radio. The "hosts" are spewing hate. There's no other word to
describe it.


--
Email sent to is never read.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

Harry Krause wrote:

It's hate radio. The "hosts" are spewing hate. There's no other word to
describe it.


And there's no other word to describe your presence here either. It's
hate, pure and simple.

-- 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 =---

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:14:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:

I dunno Harry. This one has me totally perplexed. There is an
absolute
venom towards Bush on your side of the aisle. I've read articles
from
writers who stated they hate even the way he walks. Yet, that
message
only seems to come to those liberals that have a strong interest
in
politics. Obviously, the hate message isn't resonating with the
great
majority of the country.

That venom has been with us for some time, and isn't limited to one
side
of the aisle. I never liked Clinton, but to this day, I am amazed
at
the
rabid hatred he inspires in some. Personally, I don't think either
President is deserving of hatred, and find the polarization
troubling
and
dangerous. I suspect the reasons lie in both sides perceptions that
Washington can not effectively run the country. Blame for this is
often
the "other side".

Actually, my feelings toward Bill Clinton had less to do with his
policies
and more to do with his immorality.

But Bush's immorality and his endless lies about really important
matters don't concern you, eh?

How is bush immoral, and what is he lying about?



1. Oh, puh-lease.
2. Everything.

Here's a short and now out of date list of the lies of Bush and his
administration about one subject...WMD:




Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of
mass destruction.

Dick Cheney
Speech to VFW National Convention
August 26, 2002

Not Bush...but, nevertheless, not a lie. Saddam had 7 months from that date
to hide 'em or move 'em to Syria.




Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for
the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush
Speech to UN General Assembly
September 12, 2002

Again, absolute truth. Even Blix agreed with that one.



If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is
once again misleading the world.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
December 2, 2002

Not Bush again...but still not a lie.




We know for a fact that there are weapons there.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
January 9, 2003

Even the Clinton White House was convinced there were weapons there.



Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the
materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve
agent.

George W. Bush
State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003

We've already discovered the materials necessary to produce the stuff. We
just haven't found the WMD's...yet. At least as far as any of us outside
the White House knows.




We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass
destruction, is determined to make more.

Colin Powell
Remarks to UN Security Council
February 5, 2003





We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized
Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the
dictator tells us he does not have.

George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003


If Iraq had disarmed itself, gotten rid of its weapons of mass
destruction over the past 12 years, or over the last several months
since (UN Resolution) 1441 was enacted, we would not be facing the
crisis that we now have before us . . . But the suggestion that we are
doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and
rearrange all of its pieces is not correct.

Colin Powell
Interview with Radio France International
February 28, 2003


Well, there's a partial lie in this one. They *do* want to rearrange the
Middle East...and for good reason.



So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of
mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our
judgment has to be clearly not.

Colin Powell
Remarks to UN Security Council
March 7, 2003


Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that
the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal
weapons ever devised.

George W. Bush
Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003

I don't think the regime possesses them anymore...as they're in Syria being
concealed.



Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that
Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical
particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the
operation, for whatever duration it takes.

Ari Fleisher
Press Briefing
March 21, 2003


There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of
mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons
will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them
and who guard them.

Gen. Tommy Franks
Press Conference
March 22, 2003


I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass
destruction.

Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman
Washington Post, p. A27
March 23, 2003


One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a
number of sites.

Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark
Press Briefing
March 22, 2003


We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad
and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003

I believe that was about Saddam and his supporters...not WMD's.



Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of
mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty.

Neocon scholar Robert Kagan
Washington Post op-ed
April 9, 2003


But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that
they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about
and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
April 10, 2003


We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi
scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he
destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.

George W. Bush
NBC Interview
April 24, 2003


There are people who in large measure have information that we need . .
. so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that
country.

Donald Rumsfeld
Press Briefing
April 25, 2003


We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.

George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 3, 2003


I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and
the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.

Colin Powell
Remarks to Reporters
May 4, 2003


We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction
in that country.

Donald Rumsfeld
Fox News Interview
May 4, 2003


I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam
Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.

George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 6, 2003


U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and
find" weapons of mass destruction.

Condoleeza Rice
Reuters Interview
May 12, 2003


I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean,
there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago --
whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're
still hidden.

Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne
Press Briefing
May 13, 2003


Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had
weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to
be found. I still expect them to be found.

Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
Interview with Reporters
May 21, 2003


Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating,
I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.

Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
NBC Today Show interview
May 26, 2003


They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.

Donald Rumsfeld
Remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations
May 27, 2003


For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass
destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one
reason everyone could agree on.

Paul Wolfowitz
Vanity Fair interview
May 28, 2003

That's about as honest and forthright an answer you could ask for. WMD's
was *one* issue for getting rid of the guy.



It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we
have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal
sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually
every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad,
but they're simply not there.

Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force
Press Interview
May 30, 2003

Do I think we're going to find something? Yeah, I kind of do, because I
think there's a lot of information out there."

Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, Defense Intelligence Agency
Press Conference
May 30, 2003


When the WMD's show up next summer, Harry and his ilk will have already dug
their own graves on this issue...and they'll only have themselves to thank
for it.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:br0lft$27poe8

Here's a short and now out of date list

Since you unequivocally pronounce all these statements as administration
lies, we can presume that you have confirmed documentary evidence that
there
are not now and were not then any NBC weapons in Iraq.

Sources, please?




WMD, please?

It's too early. David Kay's preliminary report was pretty convincing all by
itself. However, the Bush administration knows that it will take a lot more
to convince the most ardent naysayers. I suspect the final report will be
all the proof that anyone needs...and will be released sometime next summer.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Here's a short and now out of date list of the lies of Bush and his
administration about one subject...WMD:

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized
Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the
dictator tells us he does not have.

George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003


Iraqi officer admits to be source of 45-minute WMD attack claim: paper

www.chinaview.cn 2003-12-07 18:31:33


LONDON, Dec. 7 (Xinhuanet) -- An Iraqi military officer has
admitted that he was the source of the claim on Iraq's alleged weapons of
mass destruction attack that led to a British scientist's apparent suicide,
the Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported.

According to the paper, Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh, who commanded a
front-line unit during the build-up to the US-led war against Iraq,has
revealed how he passed top secret information to British intelligence
warning that the Iraqi former regime had deployed weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) that could be used on the battlefield against coalition
troops in less than 45 minutes.

"I am the one responsible for providing this information," the
40-year old former head of an Iraqi air defense unit in the western desert,
told the paper in an exclusive interview.

The paper said al-Dabbagh, who is now working as an adviser to
Iraq's Governing Council, also insisted that the information related to
Iraq's battlefield WMD capability was correct.

"It is 100 percent accurate," al-Dabbagh said, adding local
commanders were told that they could use the weapons only on the personal
orders of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

He said he believed that the alleged banned weapons have been
hidden at secret locations and still in Iraq, a claim that comes against the
backdrop that the coalition forces have been combing Iraq in search of the
alleged WMD since March without any success.

On the paper's report, a spokeswoman for British Prime
MinisterTony Blair said Downing Street was not prepared to comment but it
urged all those involved to provide the Iraq Survey Group with whatever
information they believe they have.

The British government published a dossier on Iraq's banned
weapons last September, including the claim that Iraq could deploychemical
or biological weapons within 45 minutes of a decision to do so.

David Kelly, a weapons expert of the British Ministry of Defense,
apparently committed suicide in July after being identified as the source
for a BBC report that accused the government of "sexing up" the dossier to
make a stronger case for the US-led Iraq war.

Kelly's death led to a judicial inquiry by senior judge Lord
Hutton that has questioned the government's use of intelligence inthe run-up
to the Iraq war.

During the inquiry led by Hutton, who was expected to publish his
report early next year, Richard Dearlove, head of the British secret service
MI6, said that the information contained in the intelligence dossier
relating to the 45-minute claim had come froma single "established and
reliable" source serving in the Iraqi armed forces.



http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20...nt_1218017.htm

OT--Amazing numbers
 

Saddam sought missile factory, Iraqi files show

By DAVID E. SANGER and THOM SHANKER
New York Times


WASHINGTON -- It was Saddam Hussein's last weapons deal -- and it did not go
exactly as he and his generals imagined.

For two years before the American invasion of Iraq, Saddam's sons, generals
and front companies were engaged in lengthy negotiations with North Korea,
according to computer files discovered by international inspectors and the
accounts of Bush administration officials. The officials now say they
believe that those negotiations -- mostly conducted in neighboring Syria,
apparently with the knowledge of the Syrian government -- were not merely to
buy a few North Korean missiles.

Instead, the goal was to obtain a full production line to manufacture, under
an Iraqi flag, the North Korean missile system, which would be capable of
hitting American allies and bases around the region, according to the Bush
administration officials.

As war with the United States approached, though, the Iraqi files show that
Saddam discovered what American officials say they have known for nearly a
decade now: that Kim Jong Il, the North Korean leader, is less than a fully
reliable negotiating partner.

In return for a $10 million down payment, Saddam appears to have gotten
nothing.

The trail that investigators have uncovered, partly from reading computer
hard drives found in Baghdad and partly from interviews with captured
members of Saddam's inner circle, shows that a month before the American
invasion, Iraqi officials traveled to Syria to demand that North Korea
refund $1.9 million because it had failed to meet deadlines for delivering
its first shipment of goods.

North Korea deflected the request, telling Saddam's representatives, in the
words of one investigator, that "things were too hot" to begin delivering
missile technology through Syria.

The transaction provides an interesting glimpse into the last days of the
Saddam government, and what administration officials say were Iraq's desires
for a long-term business deal for missiles and a missile production plant.

Bush administration officials have seized on the attempted purchase of the
North Korean missiles, known as the Rodong, and a missile assembly line to
buttress their case that Saddam was violating U.N. resolutions, which
clearly prohibited missiles of the range of the North Korean Rodong.

It also establishes that Syria was a major arms-trading bazaar for the
Saddam government, in this case hiding an Iraqi effort to obtain missiles,
they say. Investigators say Syria had probably offered its ports and
territory as the surreptitious transit route for the North Korea-Iraq
missile deal, although it remains unclear what demands the government in
Damascus might have made in return. Further, according to U.S. government
officials and international investigators, the Iraqi official who brokered
the deal, Munir Awad, is now in Syria, apparently living under government
protection.

If it served as a middleman in this deal, as the documents suggest, Syria
was acting in violation of Security Council resolutions even as it served on
the council and voted with the United States on the most important
resolution before the war.

In an interview in Damascus on Sunday with The New York Times, Bashar Assad,
the Syrian president, was asked about the deal described in the Iraqi
computer files and said, "This is the first time I have heard this story."

He said Saddam "was never able to trust Syria, and he never tried and we
never tried to make any relation between him and any other country because
he did not trust us in the first place." For all its complaints about arms
smuggling across the Syrian-Iraq border, Assad said, the United States had
never cited specific cases, adding, "I told the Americans if you have any
evidence that there is smuggling of weapons into Iraq, please let us know."

International inspectors note that the missile deal gone bad appears to be
the most serious violation that has been found so far.

The investigators say they tripped over it while looking for something far
more nefarious -- evidence of a continuing nuclear program, or an active
effort to accumulate more biological or chemical weapons.

"So far, there's really not much in that arena," said one official who has
monitored the continuing search for weapons led by David Kay, a former
weapons inspector who is now conducting the search for the CIA.

After spending tens of millions of dollars in a search that continues on the
ground in Iraq to this day, the official noted, "We've learned this much:
that Kim Jong Il took Saddam to the cleaners."

The first clue of the North Korea-Iraq deal surfaced in public in October
when Kay released preliminary findings of his inquiry into Saddam's program
for developing unconventional weapons.

Kay said his team had uncovered evidence that Iraq had negotiated a deal
with North Korea to acquire missiles, a transaction that a senior
administration official said was apparently never detected by American
intelligence agencies.

But when it came time for the North Koreans to deliver on the deal, the
North Koreans demurred, according to an Iraqi account of the meeting in
Syria that international inspectors found on an Iraqi computer hard drive.
According to the files, the North Koreans said Iraq was under too much
American scrutiny. And evidence amassed since the invasion of Iraq indicates
the deal was for more than just missiles.

"This $10 million was a down payment, and not just a straight purchase for
Rodong missiles, but for Rodong technology," said one American official who
has read documentation on the deal. "Saddam's intent was to get the
expertise from the North Koreans and, potentially, open his own production
line." If the American interpretation is right, it is unclear where Saddam
might have built the production line or how it could have avoided detection
by American satellites.

The exact outlines of the deal remain unclear, the official said, "since the
North Koreans ended up stiffing the Iraqis." The Iraqis were demanding their
money back, "right up to the end," the official said.

American investigators say they have been able to discern outlines of the
murky deal. The $10 million was too much to buy simply a missile or two,
American and international experts say, and too little for an entire
production line, leading to the conclusion that it was a down payment.

Investigators said information downloaded from Iraqi computer hard drives,
at least one of which was obtained before the invasion of Iraq, allowed them
to more specifically interrogate detained members of Saddam's inner circle.
They, in turn, guided investigators deeper into the mountain of official
documents seized during the war.

"You do that, sort of a back-and-forth process," said one American official.
"You find something on a computer disk or in the pile of documents slowly
being translated. That makes you ask questions of the detainees. Then you
bounce back to the documents and so forth. That's how you get the bigger
picture."

Administration officials say investigators uncovered evidence of meetings
between the Iraqis and North Koreans as least as far back as late 2001.

One administration official said American intelligence had evidence that
"the agents from North Korea flew into Syria -- that's where the first
meeting took place." Other officials said at least one round of talks was
held in North Korea.

The final session was held in Syria in February of this year, just before
the war began, officials said. On that trip, according to the Iraqi account
of the meeting in Syria , the Iraqis were also seeking night-vision goggles,
ammunition and gun barrels -- mostly through European middlemen. At that
point, a huge American-British force had been built up on Iraq's southern
borders, and it was clear that war was coming.

What is also interesting about the shopping list, however, is "what's not on
it," said one investigator. "Nothing nuclear, no dual-use items, nothing
about weapons of mass destruction."

American officials said the failed missile deal was brokered by an Iraqi
firm called Al Bashair Trading Co., also spelled Al Bashir in some
documents, which has been identified by American investigators as having had
past involvement in arms trade for Iraq conducted with Yugoslavia.

The company reported directly to the Iraqi military command, investigators
said, and had close ties to one of Saddam's sons, Qusai, who was killed in a
battle with American troops in July.

The negotiations with the North Koreans were conducted by Munir Awad, the
senior officer of Al Bashair, American and international investigators said.

"Munir Awad is one of three men who personally oversaw the most sensitive
transfers of money from Al Bashair to other front companies and governments
and worked directly for Qusai Hussein," said one American official. "Awad is
believed to be in Syria under the protection of the Syrian government."

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.e94b15cb225c5b955ebcfb918f5c59a0@107 0907842.cotse.net...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:br0lft$27poe8

Here's a short and now out of date list

Since you unequivocally pronounce all these statements as
administration
lies, we can presume that you have confirmed documentary evidence
that
there
are not now and were not then any NBC weapons in Iraq.

Sources, please?




WMD, please?

It's too early. David Kay's preliminary report was pretty convincing
all by
itself. However, the Bush administration knows that it will take a
lot more
to convince the most ardent naysayers. I suspect the final report will
be
all the proof that anyone needs...and will be released sometime next
summer.


If it is, it'll be rightfully slammed for being pre-election Republican
bull****. If it were released tomorrow, it would simply be Republican
bull****.

No one is going to believe suddenly uncovered caches of WMD now.


You meant to say that *you* won't believe it. Anybody that challenges a
finding of WMD's will be slammed for pre-election Democratic bull****.

OT--Amazing numbers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.78954f52b57a82695192ae4be1fca2a9@107 0908131.cotse.net...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Here's a short and now out of date list of the lies of Bush and his
administration about one subject...WMD:

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized
Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the
dictator tells us he does not have.

George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003


Iraqi officer admits to be source of 45-minute WMD attack claim:
paper

www.chinaview.cn 2003-12-07 18:31:33


LONDON, Dec. 7 (Xinhuanet) -- An Iraqi military officer has
admitted that he was the source of the claim on Iraq's alleged weapons
of
mass destruction attack that led to a British scientist's apparent
suicide,
the Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported.

According to the paper, Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh, who commanded a
front-line unit during the build-up to the US-led war against Iraq,has
revealed how he passed top secret information to British intelligence
warning that the Iraqi former regime had deployed weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) that could be used on the battlefield against
coalition
troops in less than 45 minutes.

"I am the one responsible for providing this information," the
40-year old former head of an Iraqi air defense unit in the western
desert,
told the paper in an exclusive interview.


Yeah, right.

After six months of 1400 inspectors and 130,000 troops looking for
WMD, an Iraqi colonel comes forward to say Iraq had WMD.

No. Read it again. The Colonel was the source cited by Bush and Blair who
claimed that the generals were given orders before the war to launch WMD's.
You say Bush is lying. Well, he was going on info from guys like this
colonel.



There's a few problems with this tale:

First, the Colonel's interview is presented in the dark - I guess we have
to
take his word for it that he is a Colonel from Iraq and not a farmer from
Montana.

Second, according to the Colonel, Saddam had given the order to use the
weapons if things got desperate. I guess every single Iraqi officer who
had
the weapons made the same decision at the same time and decided to hide
rather than use the weapons. No small coincidence since they were all
risking death if caught and there could not have been communication
between
every Iraqi officer during the war.

Third, the Colonel fed expatriot Iraqis with the same information which
they
passed on to the U.S. Where are these Iraqi's now? They are on the
governing council. No conflict of interest there.

Fourth, not the Colonel nor any Iraqi officer is able to show where these
large WMD caches are hidden. Nor can they identify a single member of the
Republican Guard who may know where the WMD are hidden.

Fifth, Colonel wants us to believe that all the Iraqi officers who had the
WMD were really really good at hiding things since none of the caches have
been located.

Sixth, the Colonel says the weapons must have been chemical weapons
because
they were all given gas masks. That is his evidence - given gas masks so
the explosives must have been chemical weapons.



The "Colonel" probably was Sean Hannity doing a bad impression of a New
York taxi driver.












http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20...nt_1218017.htm

OT--Amazing numbers
 

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 17:05:40 +0000, NOYB wrote:

It's too early. David Kay's preliminary report was pretty convincing all
by itself. However, the Bush administration knows that it will take a lot
more to convince the most ardent naysayers. I suspect the final report
will be all the proof that anyone needs...and will be released sometime
next summer.

Maybe, but they are releasing the Iraqi weapons scientists now. Doesn't
look good for finding any WMDs.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...pons08-ON.html