John H wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in
Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically
aligned with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative
to say.

John H

Nope, certainly not, because the similarities between you and Kerry end
at your religion. For instance, Kerry is intelligent....

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.

Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned
with
Iran.

While I'm ambivalent on the war (or war it'self for that matter, but
that's a whole different subject) I thought the Iraqi election went
much better than I thought it would. There appears to be some sort of
balance in the governing legislature and the discussions between the
Kurds, Sunni and Shiite plus the 40 some political parties is bringing
some positive results.

I don't think we can necessarily call it a categorical failure - to
soon for that.

As to the winner's being aligned with Iran - that is not absolutely
true. From a theological standpoint, the Shiite component certainly
is, but they have to contend with a equally potent secular body in the
Kurds and Sunni communities plus the Shiite isn't a monoblock - there
are parties within that block that are secular and have seats in the
Legislature which would indicate that the influence of Iran may be
severely overstated.

It all has to play out before we can reach any conclusions.

Later,

Tom

I don't think it's a failure, Tom. As you said, the election went fairly
well, and by that, I mean the mechanics of it. My concern is this: I would
like to know what's on the president's mind perhaps 10 years down the road,
if after another couple of elections, the country ends up being another
Iran. Why does that concern me? One must be the owner of a mind in order to
speak one's mind.

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned
with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative to
say.

Which assumptions? Have you read much about the people who won in the Iraqi
election?

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:08:36 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned
with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative to
say.

Which assumptions? Have you read much about the people who won in the Iraqi
election?


John Kerry and I are ideologically aligned with respect to our religion of
choice. Does that mean we agree on everything.

You are assuming that any ideological alignment (if it even exists) is
detrimental to the interests of the United States.

If the sharing of a religion meant a total ideological alignment, Harry Reid,
John Kerry and myself, all Christians, would be in agreement about everything.

Not.

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 16 Feb 2005 09:18:54 -0800, "basskisser" wrote:


John H wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in
Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically
aligned with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative
to say.

John H

Nope, certainly not, because the similarities between you and Kerry end
at your religion. For instance, Kerry is intelligent....

BTW, you forgot to answer the question:

It seems as though you have a very hard time stating what you believe.

Could you show me where I said I worshipped anything?

When you say, "It's the narrow minded mentality of the God fearing!" Do you
really mean, "It's the narrow minded mentality of *some of* the God fearing"?
Are there *any* God-fearing Democrats who are 'narrow minded'? Is 'narrow
mindedness' purely an affliction of God fearing Republicans?

And this one:

Let's see. Are you saying you are not responsible for your posts? Who is? No
one? If no one is responsible for his posts, than anyone should be able to say
whatever they wish without any accountability. True? If no accountability is to
exist, then why do you continuously ask for proof?

If you find these too difficult to answer, I will understand your just leaving
them unanswered. Or, you could just call some names...

And here I complimented you on your writing abilities!


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

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:08:36 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq,
but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned
with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative to
say.

Which assumptions? Have you read much about the people who won in the
Iraqi
election?


John Kerry and I are ideologically aligned with respect to our religion of
choice. Does that mean we agree on everything.

You are assuming that any ideological alignment (if it even exists) is
detrimental to the interests of the United States.

If the sharing of a religion meant a total ideological alignment, Harry
Reid,
John Kerry and myself, all Christians, would be in agreement about
everything.

Not.


I very much doubt that GW wants a true democracy in Iraq anyway, I bet it
will end up some form of a constitutional republic with constitutionally
guaranteed rigthts to the minority groups.


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 Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:07:57 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.

Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned
with
Iran.

While I'm ambivalent on the war (or war it'self for that matter, but
that's a whole different subject) I thought the Iraqi election went
much better than I thought it would. There appears to be some sort of
balance in the governing legislature and the discussions between the
Kurds, Sunni and Shiite plus the 40 some political parties is bringing
some positive results.

I don't think we can necessarily call it a categorical failure - to
soon for that.

As to the winner's being aligned with Iran - that is not absolutely
true. From a theological standpoint, the Shiite component certainly
is, but they have to contend with a equally potent secular body in the
Kurds and Sunni communities plus the Shiite isn't a monoblock - there
are parties within that block that are secular and have seats in the
Legislature which would indicate that the influence of Iran may be
severely overstated.

It all has to play out before we can reach any conclusions.

I don't think it's a failure, Tom. As you said, the election went fairly
well, and by that, I mean the mechanics of it. My concern is this: I would
like to know what's on the president's mind perhaps 10 years down the road,
if after another couple of elections, the country ends up being another
Iran.

It's all supposition at this point.

10 years down the road, it will be a different President and a
different set of problems.

As Warner Wolf is fond of saying: "The Future is Now".

Later,

Tom

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:07:57 +0000, Doug Kanter wrote:


I don't think it's a failure, Tom. As you said, the election went fairly
well, and by that, I mean the mechanics of it. My concern is this: I would
like to know what's on the president's mind perhaps 10 years down the
road, if after another couple of elections, the country ends up being
another Iran. Why does that concern me? One must be the owner of a mind in
order to speak one's mind.

Don't sell democracy short in Iran. While the old guard still maintains
the power, there is a strong pro-democracy undercurrent pushing for
modernization of the political process. I'm also hopeful for Iraq. If
Sistani can engage the Sunnis in the political process, it is possible the
country might stabilize. Then again, it is just as possible for a civil
war to breakout involving the entire region.

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:07:57 +0000, Doug Kanter wrote:


I don't think it's a failure, Tom. As you said, the election went fairly
well, and by that, I mean the mechanics of it. My concern is this: I
would
like to know what's on the president's mind perhaps 10 years down the
road, if after another couple of elections, the country ends up being
another Iran. Why does that concern me? One must be the owner of a mind
in
order to speak one's mind.

Don't sell democracy short in Iran. While the old guard still maintains
the power, there is a strong pro-democracy undercurrent pushing for
modernization of the political process. I'm also hopeful for Iraq. If
Sistani can engage the Sunnis in the political process, it is possible the
country might stabilize. Then again, it is just as possible for a civil
war to breakout involving the entire region.

I agree. I'm just pointing to Iran as a symbol of evil for Bush, and for the
sewage who hasn't read what you've mentioned above.

"John H" wrote in message
...


Which assumptions? Have you read much about the people who won in the
Iraqi
election?


John Kerry and I are ideologically aligned with respect to our religion of
choice. Does that mean we agree on everything.

You are assuming that any ideological alignment (if it even exists) is
detrimental to the interests of the United States.

Actually, I don't think it's detrimental, but you can bet your home, car and
all your money on the fact that your president sees any alignment as evil.