" jim--" wrote in message
...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Gould,
Your memory must be fading. This conversation started when you said:
" Kerry's supporters publish well documented, thoroughly researched items
like the one
you posted-" "Meanwhile, the right wing relies on slogan, rumor, insult,
and easily
remembered but out-of-context sound bytes to attract that portion of the
electorate that is more numerous, but less mentally adept."

And that's true.

The Republicans are trolling for votes among the least educated, most
easily
confused, least circumspect portions of the population. I don't see where
I
said these mental midgets were Republicans, only that the Republican
campaign
attempts to appeal to that element.

Example:

Take the claim that Kerry voted to increase taxes 350 times, or whatever.
You
will hear
the sheeple repeating that as if it had a shred of truth. In fact, the
republican spin machine counted a large number of Kerry's
votes to *decrease* taxes in the "voted to increase" category! The pseudo
logic
was that although Kerry was voting to decrease taxes, some Republican
introduced a bill to decrease them even more- so if the bill Kerry voted
for
had passed the tax bill wouldn't be lowered as much as it was when the
more
aggressive tax cut passed- therefore "increasing" (?!) taxes.

Maybe that's how college graduates think in your neck of the woods. We
hold
them to a higher standard out west.

A campaign tactic such as that outlined above won't appeal to people
unless
those folks are inclined to rely on slogan, rumor, insult, and easily
remembered out-of-context sound bytes.



LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Both sides are doing it. But I recall the Gore
team was handing out cartons of cigarettes to and driving bums to the
polls 4 years ago.

And *still* barely won Wisconsin. Wisconsin and maybe even Minnesota will
go for Bush this time. The coup de grace would be NJ going to Bush...all
because McGreevy wouldn't relinquish his office for fear that Republicans
might win the Governor's mansion in a special election.

Gould,

What was Kerry doing when he said "W stands for wrong", in reference to
Bush? Is it possible he was relying on a sound bite to swing the undecided
voters?

When Kerry said "He's cut the VA (Veterans Administration) budget and not
kept faith with veterans across this country. And one of the first
definitions of patriotism is keeping faith with those who wore the uniform
of our country." The truth is Bush voted for a 25% increase in those who
are eligible for veterans health care and in the first three years of his
presidency, funding for the Veterans Administration increased 27%. When you
include Bush's 2005 recommended budget, funding for his full four-year term
will amount to an increase of 37.6%. Kerry came up with the "sound bite"
because Bush did not vote for as large of an increase and the democrats
proposed. So is it possible that Kerry is guilty of the exact same thing
that gets your panties in a wad? Is Kerry using slogan, rumor, insult, and
easily
remembered but out-of-context sound bytes to attract that portion of the
electorate that is more numerous, but less mentally adept."

When Kerry's supporters said that "George Bush wants to eliminate overtime
pay for 8 million workers," referring to new overtime rules that the
Department of Labor has proposed. The 8-million figure comes from a study by
the labor-funded Economic Policy Institute. The same EPI concedes that many
low-income workers would be gaining the right to overtime pay. Under the
proposed rules any employee making less than $425 per week would be eligible
for overtime benefits, up from the present level of $155, a figure that
hasn't been changed since 1975. In its study , published in June 2003, EPI
said that change "is sorely needed."

The ad misquotes the study, however. What the study actually says is that an
estimated 8 million would lose the legal right to premium overtime rates
should they work more than 40 hours per week. It does not say they would
actually lose pay as the ad says. In fact, the 8-million figure is inflated
by many part-time workers who never get overtime work, or overtime pay, even
though they now have the right to it.

The proposal would change the rules for determining when white-collar
workers can be classified by their employers as exempt from overtime pay for
extra hours. The proposed rule changes are extensive, covering executive
employees who can hire and fire others, administrative employees in a
"position of responsibility", so-called "Learned Professional Employees" who
have "knowledge of an advanced type," creative professionals, outside sales
workers and certain computer workers such as systems analysts or software
engineers. (None of these groups look very much like the blue-collar factory
hand in the Moveon.org ad, by the way.)

Is it possible that the Kerry supporters used the ad of a blue collar worker
punching a time card to appeal to an unfounded fear of blue collar workers,
who are too lazy to look up the facts?

Is it possible that this ad below "...relies on slogan, rumor, insult, and
easily
remembered but out-of-context sound bytes to attract that portion of the
electorate that is more numerous, but less mentally adept."

http://www.bushin30seconds.org/view/2472_large.shtml

Is it possible that you are blinded when Kerry supporters are doing the
exact same thing you accuse Bush supporters of doing? Or are you distorting
the truth and relying on slogans, rumors insults and easily remembers sound
bytes to attract that portion of the electorate that are less mentally
adept?











"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Gould,
Your memory must be fading. This conversation started when you said:
" Kerry's supporters publish well documented, thoroughly researched items
like the one
you posted-" "Meanwhile, the right wing relies on slogan, rumor, insult,
and easily
remembered but out-of-context sound bytes to attract that portion of the
electorate that is more numerous, but less mentally adept."

And that's true.

The Republicans are trolling for votes among the least educated, most
easily
confused, least circumspect portions of the population. I don't see where
I
said these mental midgets were Republicans, only that the Republican
campaign
attempts to appeal to that element.

Example:

Take the claim that Kerry voted to increase taxes 350 times, or whatever.
You
will hear
the sheeple repeating that as if it had a shred of truth. In fact, the
republican spin machine counted a large number of Kerry's
votes to *decrease* taxes in the "voted to increase" category! The pseudo
logic
was that although Kerry was voting to decrease taxes, some Republican
introduced a bill to decrease them even more- so if the bill Kerry voted
for
had passed the tax bill wouldn't be lowered as much as it was when the
more
aggressive tax cut passed- therefore "increasing" (?!) taxes.

Maybe that's how college graduates think in your neck of the woods. We
hold
them to a higher standard out west.

A campaign tactic such as that outlined above won't appeal to people
unless
those folks are inclined to rely on slogan, rumor, insult, and easily
remembered out-of-context sound bytes.

Not true. Taco Heaven already showed you where Republican voters typically
have achieved a higher level of education.

Taco Belle cited a study that said "registered Republicans" are suppsoedly more
educated.

You would imagine that those brilliant, registered Republicans might be bright
enough to realize that the smear campaign isn't aimed at "registered
Republicans", who would vote for almost anybody annointed by the party, but
aimed at the
"undecided", or "independent" voters. Perhaps even at the "moderate or
conservative Democrats", that some surveys seem to feel are the dullest stars
in the firmament.

Gould 0738 wrote:
Not true. Taco Heaven already showed you where Republican voters typically
have achieved a higher level of education.

Taco Belle cited a study that said "registered Republicans" are suppsoedly more
educated.

You would imagine that those brilliant, registered Republicans might be bright
enough to realize that the smear campaign isn't aimed at "registered
Republicans", who would vote for almost anybody annointed by the party, but
aimed at the
"undecided", or "independent" voters. Perhaps even at the "moderate or
conservative Democrats", that some surveys seem to feel are the dullest stars
in the firmament.


You couldn't possibly mean the slimeball Republicans who are
mass-mailing into West Virginia their claim that John Kerry is trying to
do away with the bible?


--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

What was Kerry doing when he said "W stands for wrong", in reference to
Bush? Is it possible he was relying on a sound bite to swing the undecided
voters?

Diversion.

I stand by my statement that the Republicans are running their campaign in the
manner I described. Expressing an opinion about how some other party is running
a campaign does not refute my statement about the Republican campaign tactics.

Do you agree that Kerry is using the exact same tactics that upsets you when
it is used by a Bush supporter?

Do you agree that when Krause said Bush "is what falls out of a scumbag"
shows that there are just as many Kerry supporters who stoop to the lowest
levels to degrade their opponents?

Do you agree that it is hard to take the high road when those who support
your candidate are guilty of the exact same thing you are complaining about
in reference to the Bush supporters?




"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
What was Kerry doing when he said "W stands for wrong", in reference to
Bush? Is it possible he was relying on a sound bite to swing the
undecided
voters?

Diversion.

I stand by my statement that the Republicans are running their campaign in
the
manner I described. Expressing an opinion about how some other party is
running
a campaign does not refute my statement about the Republican campaign
tactics.

"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:bSk5d.51755$wV.35637@attbi_s54...
Do you agree that Kerry is using the exact same tactics that upsets you
when it is used by a Bush supporter?

Do you agree that when Krause said Bush "is what falls out of a scumbag"
shows that there are just as many Kerry supporters who stoop to the lowest
levels to degrade their opponents?

Do you agree that it is hard to take the high road when those who support
your candidate are guilty of the exact same thing you are complaining
about in reference to the Bush supporters?





Chuckie is about close to the edge as he was when he had a NG breakdown last
year, promising to take a break from the NG and never again post political
stuff.

Based on the fact that Kerry does not stand a chance, I give old Chuckie 3
more weeks before he goes over the edge again.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
What was Kerry doing when he said "W stands for wrong", in reference to
Bush? Is it possible he was relying on a sound bite to swing the
undecided
voters?

Diversion.

I stand by my statement that the Republicans are running their campaign in
the
manner I described. Expressing an opinion about how some other party is
running
a campaign does not refute my statement about the Republican campaign
tactics.

Why don't you go home and cry into your mother's apron.

Do you agree that Kerry is using the exact same tactics that upsets you when
it is used by a Bush supporter?

No. Kerry is pointing our deficiencies in the performance of GWB as POTUS. Bush
is
fantasizing about possible disasters that might befall the country if Kerry is
elected.
It's a lot tougher for Kerry to make up outrageous falsehoods about Bush's
tenure as president. We can all refer to recent events to check his facts.

It's much easier for Bush to make up outrageous falsehoods about Kerry, as his
history is not as publicly known.

Do you agree that when Krause said Bush "is what falls out of a scumbag"
shows that there are just as many Kerry supporters who stoop to the lowest
levels to degrade their opponents?

I agree that when Harry Krause makes a statement there is no way to tell how
many people he represents. Let's see; there were 250 guys serving with John
Kerry on his 10-man boat, and they told tales that contradicted one another and
the official records. Let's put that over on the right, and Harry Krause
lobbing an insult over on the left. How can you use Harry Krause to justify a
wild statement that there are "just as many" Kerry supporters who stoop to the
lowest levels?
Looks like 250 to 1. :-)



Do you agree that it is hard to take the high road when those who support
your candidate are guilty of the exact same thing you are complaining about
in reference to the Bush supporters?


I can take any darn road I want to. High, low, or what not. Makes no difference
what somebody else does. Kerry is not "my candidate". I don't even like the guy
all that much. He is the brightest prospect for change, Because I see a need
for change that surpasses any perceived *risk* of putting Kerry in office- and
recognize that the risk of leaving GWB and the New American Century band on
stage for another four years trumps all other dangers to the US, I'm voting for
change. When your house is burning down, you don't care if the fire department
hooks up to a hydrant where the water may be slightly polluted.

A lot of guys are so filled with partisan zeal, they don't realize that our
country, and the constitution, is currently on fire.

Why don't you go home and cry into your mother's apron.

Another "more intelligent, more highly educated, more issues-oriented"
Republican weighs in.

Taco heavin' would be proud.

Taco heavin' good grief. Why the personal insults, you are sounding more
and more like Harry every day.

I thought we were discussing issues and our opinion.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Why don't you go home and cry into your mother's apron.

Another "more intelligent, more highly educated, more issues-oriented"
Republican weighs in.

Taco heavin' would be proud.

Gould 0738 wrote:
Why don't you go home and cry into your mother's apron.

Another "more intelligent, more highly educated, more issues-oriented"
Republican weighs in.

Taco heavin' would be proud.


Taco is nothing more than a fourth-generation sock puppet. He's best put
in the bozo bin and ignored, along with the brain sturgeon Minus Jim and
a few others who are non-contributors to society or the common weal.



--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Do you agree that Kerry is using the exact same tactics that upsets you
when
it is used by a Bush supporter?

A lot of guys are so filled with partisan zeal, they don't realize that
our
country, and the constitution, is currently on fire.

Are you saying I am filled with partisan zeal?

Harry,
I thought you were ignoring me? You sure seem obsessed with me and upset
when someone else replies to my post? Just because you know you will lose
any discussion we have, does not mean others feel that insecure about
themselves.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:
Why don't you go home and cry into your mother's apron.

Another "more intelligent, more highly educated, more issues-oriented"
Republican weighs in.

Taco heavin' would be proud.


Taco is nothing more than a fourth-generation sock puppet. He's best put
in the bozo bin and ignored, along with the brain sturgeon Minus Jim and
a few others who are non-contributors to society or the common weal.



--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a
pariah.

What, me worry?

Taco heavin' good grief. Why the personal insults, you are sounding more
and more like Harry every day.

Poking fun at your goofy choice for the screen name you're using (this week) is
not a personal insult.

You cannot insult somebody who isn't there. Ain't nobody home at Taco Heavin',
which is why you use it to anonymize your commentary.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Poking fun at your goofy choice for the screen name you're using (this
week) is
not a personal insult.

You cannot insult somebody who isn't there. Ain't nobody home at Taco
Heavin',
which is why you use it to anonymize your commentary.

Sounds to me like you are attacking the messenger, and not the message.

According to every internet expert I have ever read, it is important to
1. Keep your personal information private including your name,
phone number, address, passwords and social security or credit card numbers

Source MSN Security on the internet.

The fact that you think it is smart to use your real name disagrees with
most security experts.

The fact that I like to eat tacos and anything that resembles a taco should
not be of any concern to you.

There is an old joke: "If God didn't want you to eat pussy, why did he make
it look like a taco."

"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:bSk5d.51755$wV.35637@attbi_s54...
Do you agree that Kerry is using the exact same tactics that upsets you
when
it is used by a Bush supporter?

The tactics may be the same, but the results will be different if Kerry
wins: We'll have a president who, even if he's no magician, will still not
be a complete idiot, fresh from the "special bus". Seriously - I knew speed
(amphetamine) freaks when I was much younger. They were damaged beyond
repair. They behaved PRECISELY as Bush does. So, who cares how Kerry gets
into the White House? We can't have damaged goods any more.

Doug,
It is nice to see someone call a spade a spade. That is exactly what I was
trying to get Gould to realize. He was trying to say that Kerry was taking
the high road and only Bush was slinging mud.
When in reality, they both are.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:bSk5d.51755$wV.35637@attbi_s54...
Do you agree that Kerry is using the exact same tactics that upsets you
when
it is used by a Bush supporter?

The tactics may be the same, but the results will be different if Kerry
wins: We'll have a president who, even if he's no magician, will still not
be a complete idiot, fresh from the "special bus". Seriously - I knew
speed
(amphetamine) freaks when I was much younger. They were damaged beyond
repair. They behaved PRECISELY as Bush does. So, who cares how Kerry gets
into the White House? We can't have damaged goods any more.

You just realized this? I explained to you before the weekend that when
dealing with a certain audience, it was necessary to use cold water,
electric shock, or whatever it takes to wake them up and make them realize
that (as many ancient activists used to say), "If you're not part of the
solution, you're part of the problem".

You don't seem to be paying attention.

"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:H906d.126740$D%.111173@attbi_s51...
Doug,
It is nice to see someone call a spade a spade. That is exactly what I
was
trying to get Gould to realize. He was trying to say that Kerry was
taking
the high road and only Bush was slinging mud.
When in reality, they both are.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:bSk5d.51755$wV.35637@attbi_s54...
Do you agree that Kerry is using the exact same tactics that upsets you
when
it is used by a Bush supporter?

The tactics may be the same, but the results will be different if Kerry
wins: We'll have a president who, even if he's no magician, will still
not
be a complete idiot, fresh from the "special bus". Seriously - I knew
speed
(amphetamine) freaks when I was much younger. They were damaged beyond
repair. They behaved PRECISELY as Bush does. So, who cares how Kerry
gets
into the White House? We can't have damaged goods any more.

Nope, I completely agree and never disagreed with your thesis. It is Gould
who disagrees with you.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
You just realized this? I explained to you before the weekend that when
dealing with a certain audience, it was necessary to use cold water,
electric shock, or whatever it takes to wake them up and make them realize
that (as many ancient activists used to say), "If you're not part of the
solution, you're part of the problem".

You don't seem to be paying attention.

"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:H906d.126740$D%.111173@attbi_s51...
Doug,
It is nice to see someone call a spade a spade. That is exactly what I
was
trying to get Gould to realize. He was trying to say that Kerry was
taking
the high road and only Bush was slinging mud.
When in reality, they both are.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:bSk5d.51755$wV.35637@attbi_s54...
Do you agree that Kerry is using the exact same tactics that upsets
you
when
it is used by a Bush supporter?

The tactics may be the same, but the results will be different if Kerry
wins: We'll have a president who, even if he's no magician, will still
not
be a complete idiot, fresh from the "special bus". Seriously - I knew
speed
(amphetamine) freaks when I was much younger. They were damaged beyond
repair. They behaved PRECISELY as Bush does. So, who cares how Kerry
gets
into the White House? We can't have damaged goods any more.

He was trying to say that Kerry was taking
the high road and only Bush was slinging mud.

Would you care to furnish some examples of untrue things that John Kerry has
said about George Bush or his policies?

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
He was trying to say that Kerry was taking
the high road and only Bush was slinging mud.

Would you care to furnish some examples of untrue things that John Kerry
has
said about George Bush or his policies?

How about we start with the million he claims are without health insurance
benefits because of Bush.

On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 07:56:53 -0400, jim-- wrote:


How about we start with the million he claims are without health insurance
benefits because of Bush.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=192

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 07:56:53 -0400, jim-- wrote:


How about we start with the million he claims are without health
insurance
benefits because of Bush.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=192

So how is that Bush's fault?

BTW: I am now JimH to make Harry happy.

thunder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 07:56:53 -0400, jim-- wrote:


How about we start with the million he claims are without health insurance
benefits because of Bush.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=192


Indeed, Bush has done nothing significant to help the 43 million
Americans without access to health insurance, and most of these folks do
not have access to decent health care, either. Another area where Bush
failed.




--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

" jim--" wrote in message
...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
He was trying to say that Kerry was taking
the high road and only Bush was slinging mud.

Would you care to furnish some examples of untrue things that John Kerry
has
said about George Bush or his policies?

How about we start with the million he claims are without health insurance
benefits because of Bush.

Or the jobs lost 'because' of Bush

Or that Bush has a secret plan to bring back the draft

Or that Bush has a secret plan to destroy dairy farmers

etc etc.

Indeed, Bush has done nothing significant to help the 43 million
Americans without access to health insurance, and most of these folks do
not have access to decent health care, either. Another area where Bush
failed.

Hey, this is America, not Russia. Those lazy n'er-do-wells who don't have
health insurance should just get a second, or third job, or as many as it takes
to earn the money to pay for it. Or go without. Whoever promised these people a
free ride?

(My wife and I have contemplated retirement. We're in our early to mid-50's.
One of the spoilers is health insurance.
In our state, coverage for the two of us would approach $1400 a month, and
continue to go up each year as we age. Easily done if either one of us is
working- but what sort of retirement would it be with one spouse working? How
many burger flippers can afford $1400 a month?)

While we're at it, we need to review our minimum wage laws. Why shouldn't the
free market set salaries and wages? If I can find somebody desparate enough to
work for $2.75 an hour, I should be able to pay that little, (and bill their
time at $75).
Until we drive our expendable working class into the same kind of poverty and
deprivation they experience in India, Thailand, etc, how are we ever going to
sustain corporate profits and still compete with the products we import from
overseas?

Or the jobs lost 'because' of Bush

I'm glad to hear that no jobs have been lost during the Bush administration.

Or that Bush has a secret plan to bring back the draft

Please check out the strategic goals for 2004 on the Selective Service website.
The plan is *not* a secret.

Or that Bush has a secret plan to destroy dairy farmers



Much of my wife's family is (or more acurately has been until very, very,
recently) in the dairy business. There's no *secret* about the demise of dairy
farming in this country, either. Take a drive out into the country and check
out the pastures.
How many dairy herds do you see these days? Even a Bush supporter should be
able to count that high. :-)

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Or the jobs lost 'because' of Bush

I'm glad to hear that no jobs have been lost during the Bush
administration.

Or that Bush has a secret plan to bring back the draft

Please check out the strategic goals for 2004 on the Selective Service
website.
The plan is *not* a secret.

Or that Bush has a secret plan to destroy dairy farmers



Much of my wife's family is (or more acurately has been until very, very,
recently) in the dairy business. There's no *secret* about the demise of
dairy
farming in this country, either. Take a drive out into the country and
check
out the pastures.
How many dairy herds do you see these days? Even a Bush supporter should
be
able to count that high. :-)

So how is any of this Bush's fault??

" JimH" wrote in message
...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Or the jobs lost 'because' of Bush

I'm glad to hear that no jobs have been lost during the Bush
administration.

Or that Bush has a secret plan to bring back the draft

Please check out the strategic goals for 2004 on the Selective Service
website.
The plan is *not* a secret.

Or that Bush has a secret plan to destroy dairy farmers



Much of my wife's family is (or more acurately has been until very,
very,
recently) in the dairy business. There's no *secret* about the demise of
dairy
farming in this country, either. Take a drive out into the country and
check
out the pastures.
How many dairy herds do you see these days? Even a Bush supporter should
be
able to count that high. :-)

So how is any of this Bush's fault??

It is comical to see the conspiracys generated out of the socialist
liebrals.....as well as the distortions. No one said jobs weren't lost
DURING the Bush administration, simply not BECAUSE of Bush.

The SS administration regrouping and setting goal WRT is purpose has NOTHING
to do with the lack of plans to reestablish a draft.

And the lack of any evidence that Bush is out to destroy the dairy farmers
is duly noted.....despite kerry's claims.

So how is any of this Bush's fault??

How is any of it an "untrue" comment about events during Bush's administration?

It would take a much shorter list to give examples of anything he's said that
was true!

IOW, none come to mind.

And just think, over three million a year are coming across our southern
border
just to increase the rolls of the uninsured.



If 1% of those are "terrorists", Bush's failure to secure our borders is an
additonal reason to bounce his butt in November.

Are you seriously trying to imply that the Bush policies have reduced the
number
of dairy farmers?



While Bush has been in office, directing national policies, the number of dairy
farmers has decreased, dramatically.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
And just think, over three million a year are coming across our southern
border
just to increase the rolls of the uninsured.



If 1% of those are "terrorists", Bush's failure to secure our borders is
an
additonal reason to bounce his butt in November.


Can you prove your *IF*?

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Are you seriously trying to imply that the Bush policies have reduced the
number
of dairy farmers?



While Bush has been in office, directing national policies, the number of
dairy
farmers has decreased, dramatically.

And do you know the reason for this or is it just convenient to blame Bush?

"JohnH" wrote in message
...


And just think, over three million a year are coming across our southern
border
just to increase the rolls of the uninsured.

Imagine what your next night out with your boyfriend would cost if all the
kitchen help were U.S. citizens, working legally.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...


Chuck, where in the plan is there any mention of instituting a draft in
2005, or
any year for that matter?

Remember how, in the past, I told you that you should read big boy news
sources? Here we go again! If you read those sources, you'd know that the
armed forces are experiencing great difficulty in recruiting new corpses.
The "free college" ruse doesn't work any more, since it became clear that
your president needed more bodies to use as sandbags in his Great War.

Doug Kanter wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...


And just think, over three million a year are coming across our southern
border
just to increase the rolls of the uninsured.

Imagine what your next night out with your boyfriend would cost if all the
kitchen help were U.S. citizens, working legally.



That would be tough on Whoring, since he resents the Mexicanos living
down the street from his house.


--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Sep 2004 03:30:18 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

He was trying to say that Kerry was taking
the high road and only Bush was slinging mud.

Would you care to furnish some examples of untrue things that John Kerry
has
said about George Bush or his policies?

It would take a much shorter list to give examples of anything he's said
that
was true!

John H

How convenient of you to not provide even one example. Toad.