On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:46:36 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .

And then to name-calling.

OK, John. Rewrite my last response. But, base it on the fact that I'm
correct. You were presented with two candidates, both of whom left much
to
be desired. One is illiterate and would never make the first cut in the
selection process for CEO of any corporation. Your comrades elected him.
Describe that mistake in YOUR words.


The discussion had to do with foul language in movies, not the
election. You tried to change the direction of the discussion, and
when that didn't work, started calling names.

Also, you forgot to add, "...and the other is a lying scumbag who
called tens of thousands of Vietnam Veterans rapists and
ear-collectors after nominating himself for various awards, receiving
a discharge which he won't make public, promising the world to the
gullible, and on and on ...."

Now, ask me again who I'd chose.

Try to follow along, John. The discussion involves language. I pointed out
that we can control what movies kids watch. But, we should be OK with kids
watching the president speak. I then pointed out that your president is more
of a risk to our kids than a movie they cannot see (in a household with
responsible parents).

"Mom...how come President Bush gets away with saying stuff that would earn
me a few afternoons with a tutor?"


Follow along Doug. The discussion had to do with a movie and the
language therein. (Period)

It had nothing to do with your President.


John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!