"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 09:26:01 -0400, JimH wrote:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410140008.html

Sure I did. And I loved the part about pre-emptive strikes. Do you
agree with such dirty tactics?

No, I was more interested in the reports of the RNC paying $500,000 to a
company ripping up democratic voter registration forms, or the former
Republican Party official who stated "I am looking to take Democrats of
the voter rolls", or, the Republican who stated "I we do not suppress the
Detroit vote, we are going to have a tough time in this election cycle."

And what dirty tactic were you referring to? Oh yeah, a preemptive press
release. What dirty SOBs those dems are.



LMAO! They are doing exactly what they said they would do. When no
evidence exists take pre-emptive strikes and make it up, as are the stories
you cite.

But glad you could glean all that information off a full 4 sentences on the
site yet ignore the main point of my post.

Nice spin. Nice try.

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:35:38 -0400, JimH wrote:


"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 09:26:01 -0400, JimH wrote:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410140008.html

Sure I did. And I loved the part about pre-emptive strikes. Do you
agree with such dirty tactics?

No, I was more interested in the reports of the RNC paying $500,000 to a
company ripping up democratic voter registration forms, or the former
Republican Party official who stated "I am looking to take Democrats of
the voter rolls", or, the Republican who stated "I we do not suppress
the Detroit vote, we are going to have a tough time in this election
cycle."

And what dirty tactic were you referring to? Oh yeah, a preemptive
press release. What dirty SOBs those dems are.



That's it....change the discussion. I posted a report by the DNC showing
the tactics it is taking on alleging voter fraud. You accused me of not
reading it. I posted the section of the report that I found a problem
with. You post your interpretation of a separate 2 sentence statement
about the RNC that is under investigation and unconfirmed.

Nice spin.

Nice try.

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize the discussion was limited to 1 sentence
in the 40 odd sentence link you posted.

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:35:38 -0400, JimH wrote:


"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 09:26:01 -0400, JimH wrote:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410140008.html

Sure I did. And I loved the part about pre-emptive strikes. Do you
agree with such dirty tactics?

No, I was more interested in the reports of the RNC paying $500,000 to a
company ripping up democratic voter registration forms, or the former
Republican Party official who stated "I am looking to take Democrats of
the voter rolls", or, the Republican who stated "I we do not suppress
the Detroit vote, we are going to have a tough time in this election
cycle."

And what dirty tactic were you referring to? Oh yeah, a preemptive
press release. What dirty SOBs those dems are.



That's it....change the discussion. I posted a report by the DNC showing
the tactics it is taking on alleging voter fraud. You accused me of not
reading it. I posted the section of the report that I found a problem
with. You post your interpretation of a separate 2 sentence statement
about the RNC that is under investigation and unconfirmed.

Nice spin.

Nice try.

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize the discussion was limited to 1 sentence
in the 40 odd sentence link you posted.

1 sentence? Did you read the article I posted? LOL!