And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:

My boy? The last time I voted it was for Al Sharpton.

John H


Which just proves what a sleaze you are, because if you did vote for
Sharpton, you voted in the Democratic primary, and since you are a
Republican, you cast your vote as a would-be spoiler.

Harry, we are learning! Don't you remember the last gubernatorial election
in Maryland? The one where Democrats were -re-registering as Republicans in
the primary and then re-reregistering as Democrats in the regular election.
They tried to get anybody but Erlich as the Rebublican nominee.

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:

My boy? The last time I voted it was for Al Sharpton.

John H


Which just proves what a sleaze you are, because if you did vote for
Sharpton, you voted in the Democratic primary, and since you are a
Republican, you cast your vote as a would-be spoiler.

Harry, we are learning! Don't you remember the last gubernatorial election
in Maryland? The one where Democrats were -re-registering as Republicans in
the primary and then re-reregistering as Democrats in the regular election.
They tried to get anybody but Erlich as the Rebublican nominee.


Nope. I don't remember hearing of any Democrats who registered as
Republicans
in order to vote in someone other than Erlich as the nominee. A large
number of Republicans in Georgia
crossed over to vote for Edwards, in order to stymie Kerry, but I think
Kerry will carry Georgia.

I think Bush is in deep, deep trouble. Almost every time he opens his
mouth, he's caught in a series of lies...and all he has left at the
moment is trying to trash Kerry. Not very presidential.

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

basskisser wrote:

Absolutely. Good science can not be biased. If it WERE flawed, it
would be easily reputed.

Reputed?

Good God Almighty.

-- Charlie

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

Charles wrote in message ...
basskisser wrote:

Absolutely. Good science can not be biased. If it WERE flawed, it
would be easily reputed.

Reputed?

Good God Almighty.

-- Charlie

Never made a typo, there, Charlie?

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

Charles wrote in message ...
basskisser wrote:

Absolutely. Good science can not be biased. If it WERE flawed, it
would be easily reputed.

Reputed?

Good God Almighty.

-- Charlie

Charlie, in the interest of fairness, I've taken two whole minutes to
bring up some of YOUR jewels. Good God almighty.

Interesting how some who think they are open-minded and bright and
really the most closed minded and dumb people, like you.

What to HELL does that above sentence mean?

LOL! Gawd, it never stops with you.

Gawd??? Is that a word?


kinda like b'asskisser listening to rush limbaugh.

A person's name, being a proper noun, should be capitalized, and if
you were to look at my screen name, it is basskisser.


Figures. Same way you democrats handle taxpayers now.

Figures, punctuated like it is a complete sentence?

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
Charles wrote in message
...
basskisser wrote:

Absolutely. Good science can not be biased. If it WERE flawed, it
would be easily reputed.

Reputed?

Good God Almighty.

-- Charlie

Never made a typo, there, Charlie?

It could certainly be a typo if the "p" and the "f" keys were next to or
close to each other. The problem is, they are not.

It was not a typo. Just as your spelling of the word "intelligence" (you
spelled it "intelligents") was not.

No one would care about your lack of spelling skills if you did not
continually call people "stupid".

Learn a lesson from this, laugh about it and move on.

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:36:06 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .

Why??? The has no attractive qualities. Were you unimpressed with the
other
choices?

I wanted to **** off Wesley Clark. I thought he was a scumbag of the
first order. I even got my wife to vote for Sharpton. I really wanted
Sharpton to get more votes than Clark, but it didn't happen.

If Edwards became the Democrat's choice, I might consider voting for
him. Not Kerry though. I think the alternative, Bush, is still better
than Kerry.

Well....I guess if you feel everyone should have equal rights....even
idiots... I prefer a shifty smart person to a dolt, though.


I agree with the shifty smart person, but I don't think Bush is a
dolt. I think he just can't speak publicly. He does OK when he's
reading, and he did learn to fly an F-102. That takes some smarts.

John H


So, why did you vote for Sharpton instead of Bush?

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"John H" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:36:06 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .

Why??? The has no attractive qualities. Were you unimpressed with
the
other
choices?

I wanted to **** off Wesley Clark. I thought he was a scumbag of the
first order. I even got my wife to vote for Sharpton. I really wanted
Sharpton to get more votes than Clark, but it didn't happen.

If Edwards became the Democrat's choice, I might consider voting for
him. Not Kerry though. I think the alternative, Bush, is still better
than Kerry.

Well....I guess if you feel everyone should have equal rights....even
idiots... I prefer a shifty smart person to a dolt, though.


I agree with the shifty smart person, but I don't think Bush is a
dolt. I think he just can't speak publicly. He does OK when he's
reading, and he did learn to fly an F-102. That takes some smarts.

John H


So, why did you vote for Sharpton instead of Bush?



Because, Bush may not have been on his ballot.

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 15:29:58 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:36:06 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .

Why??? The has no attractive qualities. Were you unimpressed with the
other
choices?

I wanted to **** off Wesley Clark. I thought he was a scumbag of the
first order. I even got my wife to vote for Sharpton. I really wanted
Sharpton to get more votes than Clark, but it didn't happen.

If Edwards became the Democrat's choice, I might consider voting for
him. Not Kerry though. I think the alternative, Bush, is still better
than Kerry.

Well....I guess if you feel everyone should have equal rights....even
idiots... I prefer a shifty smart person to a dolt, though.


I agree with the shifty smart person, but I don't think Bush is a
dolt. I think he just can't speak publicly. He does OK when he's
reading, and he did learn to fly an F-102. That takes some smarts.

John H


So, why did you vote for Sharpton instead of Bush?

Bush wasn't on the Democratic primary ticket. Al was.

John H

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

And the Bush lies just keep on coming
 

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 19:04:48 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

John H wrote:

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 16:30:14 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

.....and in the final analysis, pollution credits may not matter, anyway.
Your boy is managing to alienate former supporters every day. Must be his
hobby.

Go here...
http://www.npr.org/rundowns/rundown....ate=1-Mar-2004

...and scroll about 2/3 of the way down the page to this heading. It's a
sound file containing a story from yesterday's broadcast.
Outdoors Enthusiasts Question Bush Policies


My boy? The last time I voted it was for Al Sharpton.

John H


Which just proves what a sleaze you are, because if you did vote for
Sharpton, you voted in the Democratic primary, and since you are a
Republican, you cast your vote as a would-be spoiler.

Brilliant mosquitoes, no less!

John H

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