( OT) Insult to injury
 

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter Reed Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the war they
just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about is where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has started making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid for my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance. I did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food, and then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the war they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid for my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance. I did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food, and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base, so they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food. The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face, wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is sent to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food. But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image in the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check while he
lies in a hospital bed. Don't explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on it, I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the truth that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story is to
listen to both.

"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
oups.com...

JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the war they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid for my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance. I did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food, and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base, so they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food. The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face, wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is sent to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food. But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image in the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check while he
lies in a hospital bed. Don't explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on it, I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the truth that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story is to
listen to both.


I hear you. Just another example of the libs spouting lies, professing them
as the truth, and supporting their entire argument around those lies.

Hey Chuck....sound familiar?

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:54:16 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:

Trust me, Harry, the military has little respect for your kind either.

John H


Trust you?
Not a chance.

From the king of newsgroup liars, Harry. I wouldn't want your 'trust'
nor anything else you've got to offer. You've shown yourself to be a
despicable, ****ing liar.

The military has little respect for ****ing liars, Harry, which is
where you fall.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the war they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid for my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance. I did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food, and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base, so they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food. The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face, wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is sent to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food. But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image in the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check while he
lies in a hospital bed. Don't explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on it, I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the truth that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story is to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have dropped out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!


John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"
wrote:


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance. I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food, and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base, so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is sent
to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check while
he
lies in a a
href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='hospital bed'; return true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a. Don't
explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story is
to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have dropped out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!

Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going! You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell do they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step to
the Bush Reich.

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JohnH wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"
wrote:


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance. I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food, and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base, so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is sent
to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check while
he
lies in a a
href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='hospital bed'; return true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a. Don't
explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story is
to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have dropped out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!

Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going! You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell do they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step to
the Bush Reich.


Did you complete your homework assignment Bassy?

JimH wrote:

Did you complete your homework assignment Bassy?

Um, I worked quite late into the night, if that's what you want to
know. You see, you nor no one else gives me an "assignment". I worked
late, have to go to a match this weekend in Nashville, so don't want to
be burdened with work issues.

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:

Did you complete your homework assignment Bassy?

Um, I worked quite late into the night, if that's what you want to
know. You see, you nor no one else gives me an "assignment". I worked
late, have to go to a match this weekend in Nashville, so don't want to
be burdened with work issues.


So you did not find the clue that you lost a while back. I guess you still
don't have a clue yet. Maybe try again tonight to find it.

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:46:43 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:


The military has little respect for ****ing liars, Harry, which is
where you fall.

John H


Awwww....widdle dwunk Herring is upset.

Actually, Herring, the military establishment is all about lying. It
does a very good job of it, and it usually takes really tough
investigations to bring out the truth.

Harry, as you have refined the art of lying, you should know. But,
since you have no knowledge of the military, it's just more ****ing
lies. You're a liar, Krause, but at least b'asskisser believes you.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On 28 Jan 2005 05:12:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"
wrote:


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance. I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food, and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base, so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is sent
to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check while
he
lies in a a
href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='hospital bed'; return true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a. Don't
explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story is
to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have dropped out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!

Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going! You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell do they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step to
the Bush Reich.

You're learning.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:14:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

basskisser wrote:
JohnH wrote:



Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!


Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going! You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell do they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step to
the Bush Reich.


Herring couldn't make it in the civilian world, which is why he resents
civilians commenting on his former pack of good old boys. But don't push
him too far...he'll fall off the wagon and end up back in the hospital.

Harry, you're a ****ing liar trying hard to come up with insults. Keep
working at it, you liar.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 05:12:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"

wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"
wrote:


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter
Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the
war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about
is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has
started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the
hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid
for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance.
I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food,
and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate
rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was
about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base,
so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is
sent
to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image
in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check
while
he
lies in a a

href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='a
href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='hospital bed'; return true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a'; return
true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a. Don't
explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind
with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's
called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get
paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She
was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on
it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to
Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the
truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story
is
to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have dropped
out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians
who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!

Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd
think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going! You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell do
they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell
them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step to
the Bush Reich.

You're learning.

John H

Yes, and please, let us remember, you ARE one. Are you REALLY so narrow
minded that you believe that the people that live in, elect officials
in, work in, provide 99.999% of the workforce in, pay the same in
taxes, run the educational systems, and on and on, don't know anything,
and some army grunt with an 8th grade education should tell THEM how do
think????

JohnH wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:14:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

basskisser wrote:
JohnH wrote:



Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians
who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!


Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd
think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going!
You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell do
they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able
to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell
them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step
to
the Bush Reich.


Herring couldn't make it in the civilian world, which is why he
resents
civilians commenting on his former pack of good old boys. But don't
push
him too far...he'll fall off the wagon and end up back in the
hospital.

Harry, you're a ****ing liar trying hard to come up with insults.
Keep
working at it, you liar.

John H

Hell, I take back what I said about all of your class being low. You
don't even have LOW CLASS. That would be an insult to low class people.

On 28 Jan 2005 08:08:48 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:14:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

basskisser wrote:
JohnH wrote:



Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians
who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!


Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd
think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going!
You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell do
they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able
to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell
them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step
to
the Bush Reich.


Herring couldn't make it in the civilian world, which is why he
resents
civilians commenting on his former pack of good old boys. But don't
push
him too far...he'll fall off the wagon and end up back in the
hospital.

Harry, you're a ****ing liar trying hard to come up with insults.
Keep
working at it, you liar.

John H

Hell, I take back what I said about all of your class being low. You
don't even have LOW CLASS. That would be an insult to low class people.

Don't feel too insulted, b'asskisser.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On 28 Jan 2005 08:07:24 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 05:12:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"

wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"
wrote:


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter
Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the
war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about
is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has
started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the
hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid
for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance.
I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food,
and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate
rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was
about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base,
so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is
sent
to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image
in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check
while
he
lies in a a

href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='a
href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='hospital bed'; return true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a'; return
true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a. Don't
explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind
with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's
called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get
paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She
was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on
it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to
Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the
truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story
is
to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have dropped
out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians
who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!

Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd
think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going! You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell do
they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell
them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step to
the Bush Reich.

You're learning.

John H

Yes, and please, let us remember, you ARE one. Are you REALLY so narrow
minded that you believe that the people that live in, elect officials
in, work in, provide 99.999% of the workforce in, pay the same in
taxes, run the educational systems, and on and on, don't know anything,
and some army grunt with an 8th grade education should tell THEM how do
think????

Are you bragging about your education again?
John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 08:07:24 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 05:12:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"

wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"

wrote:



http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter
Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the
war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future
that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry
about
is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter
Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has
started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the
hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I
paid
for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence
Allowance.
I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my
food,
and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the
anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate
rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to
pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was
about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And
the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on
base,
so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for
food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he
is
sent
to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own
food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an
image
in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check
while
he
lies in a a


href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='a

href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='a
href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='hospital bed'; return true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a'; return
true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a';
return
true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a.
Don't
explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind
with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's
called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America
crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get
paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay.
She
was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called
on
it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never
said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them
for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need
to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to
Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two
halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the
truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half
tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole
story
is
to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have
dropped
out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians
who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!

Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd
think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going!
You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell
do
they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able
to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell
them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step
to
the Bush Reich.

You're learning.

John H

Yes, and please, let us remember, you ARE one. Are you REALLY so
narrow
minded that you believe that the people that live in, elect
officials
in, work in, provide 99.999% of the workforce in, pay the same in
taxes, run the educational systems, and on and on, don't know
anything,
and some army grunt with an 8th grade education should tell THEM how
do
think????

Are you bragging about your education again?
John H

Gee, I was never IN the armed forces.......wonder who was, and brags
about it....OH, that's YOU!!!!!!

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 08:07:24 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 05:12:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"

wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"

wrote:



http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter
Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the
war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future
that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry
about
is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter
Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has
started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the
hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I
paid
for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence
Allowance.
I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my
food,
and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the
anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate
rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to
pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was
about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And
the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on
base,
so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for
food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he
is
sent
to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own
food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an
image
in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check
while
he
lies in a a


href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='a

href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='a
href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='hospital bed'; return true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a'; return
true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a';
return
true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a.
Don't
explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind
with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's
called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America
crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get
paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay.
She
was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called
on
it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never
said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them
for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need
to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to
Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two
halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the
truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half
tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole
story
is
to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have
dropped
out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians
who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!

Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd
think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going!
You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell
do
they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able
to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell
them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step
to
the Bush Reich.

You're learning.

John H

Yes, and please, let us remember, you ARE one. Are you REALLY so
narrow
minded that you believe that the people that live in, elect
officials
in, work in, provide 99.999% of the workforce in, pay the same in
taxes, run the educational systems, and on and on, don't know
anything,
and some army grunt with an 8th grade education should tell THEM how
do
think????

Are you bragging about your education again?
John H

I'll take that as a sign that you don't want to answer the questions??

On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....

That's obvious.


John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....

That's obvious.


John H

It sure is! I've never had to have someone tell me every move to make.

On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:55 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


I'll take that as a sign that you don't want to answer the questions??

Is it okay or not okay. Yes, Harry is a liar. No, I'm not narrow
minded. After all, I've given you several ideas on how to improve your
posts.

I also have a little more than an 8th grade education, but I can
understand your jealousy of same.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JimH wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 05:12:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005 17:35:56 -0800, "Curtis CCR"

wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"

wrote:



http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter
Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the
war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future
that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry
about
is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter
Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has
started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the
hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I
paid
for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence
Allowance.
I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my
food,
and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the
anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate
rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to
pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was
about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And
the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on
base,
so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for
food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he
is
sent
to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own
food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an
image
in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check
while
he
lies in a a


href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='a

href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='a
href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=hospital%20bed"
onmouseover="window.status='hospital bed'; return true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a'; return
true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a';
return
true;"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"hospital bed/a.
Don't
explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind
with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's
called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America
crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get
paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay.
She
was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called
on
it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never
said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them
for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need
to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to
Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two
halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the
truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half
tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole
story
is
to
listen to both.

Several good points there. Notice that Jim, seems to have
dropped
out
of the discussion after his hyper-whine.

Friggin' civilians spouting lies to other friggin' civilians
who'll
believe anything that's anti-administration!

Yeah, damned civilians. Who do they think they are? Jeez, you'd
think
that they owned the corporations that keep this country going!
You'd
also think they made up the bulk of the population! Who to hell
do
they
think they are? Hell, they CAN'T possibly know enough to be able
to
take information given to them and ascertain whether or not it's
viable. Damn it, any washed up ex-soldier in Maryland could tell
them
that they can't possibly have any brains if they don't goose step
to
the Bush Reich.

You're learning.

John H

Yes, and please, let us remember, you ARE one. Are you REALLY so
narrow
minded that you believe that the people that live in, elect
officials
in, work in, provide 99.999% of the workforce in, pay the same in
taxes, run the educational systems, and on and on, don't know
anything,
and some army grunt with an 8th grade education should tell THEM
how do
think????


Soldiers have 8th grade educations Bassy? What planet do you live
on?

I've known MANY people where I grew up, that quit school at or around
that time and joined the military.

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:55 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


I'll take that as a sign that you don't want to answer the
questions??

Is it okay or not okay.

Is WHAT okay?

Yes, Harry is a liar. No, I'm not narrow
minded.

That's odd, you don't think that you are narrow minded, when you state
that ALL civilians can't think for themselves?

After all, I've given you several ideas on how to improve your
posts.

Here's one for you, John. Try acting like an adult.

Speaking of liars, please show where Harry said, as you have stated,
that he "identified bodies" in 'Nam.

I also have a little more than an 8th grade education
VERY little more, no doubt.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....'

Yep.....they do have their basic minimums.


That's obvious.


John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to
resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:55 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


I'll take that as a sign that you don't want to answer the questions??

Is it okay or not okay. Yes, Harry is a liar. No, I'm not narrow
minded. After all, I've given you several ideas on how to improve your
posts.

I also have a little more than an 8th grade education, but I can
understand your jealousy of same.

Remember......he has that degree from Penn Tech LMAO


John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to
resolve it."
Rene Descartes

P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....'

Yep.....they do have their basic minimums.


What branch were YOU in, Fritz? Hell, by your posts here, maybe your
not yet old enough.

On 28 Jan 2005 11:56:32 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....

That's obvious.


John H

It sure is! I've never had to have someone tell me every move to make.

Then please inform us why you have your head buried to the hilt.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On 28 Jan 2005 12:13:14 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....'

Yep.....they do have their basic minimums.


What branch were YOU in, Fritz? Hell, by your posts here, maybe your
not yet old enough.

YOU'RE!!!

Geeez!

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On 28 Jan 2005 12:07:47 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:

Is it okay or not okay.

Is WHAT okay?

To say all people in Georgia are stupid because *some* of the people
in Georgia are stupid. I can't believe you forgot the question!

Yes, Harry is a liar. No, I'm not narrow
minded.

That's odd, you don't think that you are narrow minded, when you state
that ALL civilians can't think for themselves?

Please show me where I said, "...ALL civilians can't think for
themselves."



After all, I've given you several ideas on how to improve your
posts.

Unlike others, I don't have to act.

Speaking of liars, please show where Harry said, as you have stated,
that he "identified bodies" in 'Nam.

I told you, look it up yourself!

I also have a little more than an 8th grade education


VERY little more, no doubt.

Enough to suffice, Dr. b'asskisser!


John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On 28 Jan 2005 12:04:22 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Soldiers have 8th grade educations Bassy? What planet do you live
on?

I've known MANY people where I grew up, that quit school at or around
that time and joined the military.

Are you now trying to tell us that some folks went to school where you
grew up? Did they join the military at 13 years old? Wow!

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 12:13:14 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....'

Yep.....they do have their basic minimums.


What branch were YOU in, Fritz? Hell, by your posts here, maybe your
not yet old enough.

YOU'RE!!!

LMAO........asslicker still doesn't get it.


BTW....I turned down an appointment to West Point......didn't offer the
major I was going for...........


Geeez!

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to
resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 12:04:22 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Soldiers have 8th grade educations Bassy? What planet do you live
on?

I've known MANY people where I grew up, that quit school at or
around
that time and joined the military.

Are you now trying to tell us that some folks went to school where
you
grew up? Did they join the military at 13 years old? Wow!

Where did I say they were 13 years old, John? Jeez, can you read ONE
FLIPPIN sentence and get it right? A LOT of the farm boys around those
parts were dumber than posts. When I was in ninth grade, there was one
in my class that was so big when the teacher made him put his legs
under his desk, the legs of the desk were six inches off of the floor.
Add to that the fact that more than that never got past the eighth
grade, screwed around for a year or two, then joined. I don't know
about now, but back then, you could be dumber than the proverbial stump
and still get in the military. The local justice of the peace was all
the time taking young men, who had gotten into a little trouble, and
letting them off IF they joined.

P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 12:13:14 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"

wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....'

Yep.....they do have their basic minimums.


What branch were YOU in, Fritz? Hell, by your posts here, maybe
your
not yet old enough.

YOU'RE!!!

LMAO........asslicker still doesn't get it.

You are the one who don't get it. You STILL can't act like a man, can
you? Do you act like a child on purpose, or is it that you just don't
have the mental capacity to do so?


BTW....I turned down an appointment to West Point......didn't offer
the
major I was going for...........

Bull****. You don't act like an adult to this day, let alone be man
enough to be appointed to West Point.

"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 12:04:22 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Soldiers have 8th grade educations Bassy? What planet do you live
on?

I've known MANY people where I grew up, that quit school at or
around
that time and joined the military.

Are you now trying to tell us that some folks went to school where
you
grew up? Did they join the military at 13 years old? Wow!

Where did I say they were 13 years old, John? Jeez, can you read ONE
FLIPPIN sentence and get it right? A LOT of the farm boys around those
parts were dumber than posts. When I was in ninth grade, there was one
in my class that was so big when the teacher made him put his legs
under his desk, the legs of the desk were six inches off of the floor.
Add to that the fact that more than that never got past the eighth
grade, screwed around for a year or two, then joined. I don't know
about now, but back then, you could be dumber than the proverbial stump
and still get in the military. The local justice of the peace was all
the time taking young men, who had gotten into a little trouble, and
letting them off IF they joined.


OMG...here we go again.

JimH wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 12:04:22 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Soldiers have 8th grade educations Bassy? What planet do you
live
on?

I've known MANY people where I grew up, that quit school at or
around
that time and joined the military.

Are you now trying to tell us that some folks went to school where
you
grew up? Did they join the military at 13 years old? Wow!

Where did I say they were 13 years old, John? Jeez, can you read
ONE
FLIPPIN sentence and get it right? A LOT of the farm boys around
those
parts were dumber than posts. When I was in ninth grade, there was
one
in my class that was so big when the teacher made him put his legs
under his desk, the legs of the desk were six inches off of the
floor.
Add to that the fact that more than that never got past the eighth
grade, screwed around for a year or two, then joined. I don't know
about now, but back then, you could be dumber than the proverbial
stump
and still get in the military. The local justice of the peace was
all
the time taking young men, who had gotten into a little trouble,
and
letting them off IF they joined.


OMG...here we go again.
don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.

"basskisser" wrote in message

don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.

your brother, wasn't it...... iirc a thread from some time ago.

On 28 Jan 2005 13:14:13 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 12:13:14 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"

wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....'

Yep.....they do have their basic minimums.


What branch were YOU in, Fritz? Hell, by your posts here, maybe
your
not yet old enough.

YOU'RE!!!

LMAO........asslicker still doesn't get it.

You are the one who don't get it. You STILL can't act like a man, can
you? Do you act like a child on purpose, or is it that you just don't
have the mental capacity to do so?


BTW....I turned down an appointment to West Point......didn't offer
the
major I was going for...........

Bull****. You don't act like an adult to this day, let alone be man
enough to be appointed to West Point.

You obviously know nothing of West Point appointments, b'asskisser.

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On 28 Jan 2005 13:11:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 12:04:22 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Soldiers have 8th grade educations Bassy? What planet do you live
on?

I've known MANY people where I grew up, that quit school at or
around
that time and joined the military.

Are you now trying to tell us that some folks went to school where
you
grew up? Did they join the military at 13 years old? Wow!

Where did I say they were 13 years old, John? Jeez, can you read ONE
FLIPPIN sentence and get it right? A LOT of the farm boys around those
parts were dumber than posts. When I was in ninth grade, there was one
in my class that was so big when the teacher made him put his legs
under his desk, the legs of the desk were six inches off of the floor.
Add to that the fact that more than that never got past the eighth
grade, screwed around for a year or two, then joined. I don't know
about now, but back then, you could be dumber than the proverbial stump
and still get in the military. The local justice of the peace was all
the time taking young men, who had gotten into a little trouble, and
letting them off IF they joined.

Most 8th graders are 13 when they start 8th grade. Now, where you grew
up they may have been 18, I don't know. Usually the Army won't take
8th grade dropouts. In fact, for many years they've taken only high
school graduates.

Now you're asking us to believe you were in the ninth grade? Are you
more credible than Harry?

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On 28 Jan 2005 13:34:19 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JimH wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 12:04:22 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Soldiers have 8th grade educations Bassy? What planet do you
live
on?

I've known MANY people where I grew up, that quit school at or
around
that time and joined the military.

Are you now trying to tell us that some folks went to school where
you
grew up? Did they join the military at 13 years old? Wow!

Where did I say they were 13 years old, John? Jeez, can you read
ONE
FLIPPIN sentence and get it right? A LOT of the farm boys around
those
parts were dumber than posts. When I was in ninth grade, there was
one
in my class that was so big when the teacher made him put his legs
under his desk, the legs of the desk were six inches off of the
floor.
Add to that the fact that more than that never got past the eighth
grade, screwed around for a year or two, then joined. I don't know
about now, but back then, you could be dumber than the proverbial
stump
and still get in the military. The local justice of the peace was
all
the time taking young men, who had gotten into a little trouble,
and
letting them off IF they joined.


OMG...here we go again.
don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.

Did they do that with the pot growers also?

John H

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

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"basskisser" wrote in message
don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.


It was a commom practice up here in the '60s.
When the salaries were upped and the manpower levels dropped...the supply
outgrew the demand and the military got picky.