"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...

It's a defining event for the future of our country. ...

Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining
event.
The
administration would have us believe that the event defines the
future
indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse.

People compare it to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Personally, I think
it's
worse, since it was perpetrated on civilians. The attack on Pearl
Harbor
certainly "defined the future indefinitely, and obliterated all other
concerns"...in fact, it did so in a much more profound manner. Our
way
of
life has hardly changed following 9/11. Compare that to the years
immediately following Pearl Harbor.



I was referring to the atmosphere of fear which Ashcroft and Bush would
like
us to accept as normal, thereby making it OK to carve away at the
Constitution.

I wonder how the liberals felt about the Sedition Act of 1918, and FDR's
Executive Order 9066 signed in 1942...AT THAT TIME?

In times of war and national crisis, our nation has a history (and our
leaders a responsibility) of reigning in the rights of American citizens
for
our own safety.

However, the Patriot Act was done to undo the wrongs set by years of
rulings
by activist judges who tried to make laws from the bench.

As opposed to an inactivist judge? I think that's synonymous with a corpse.

Let's just see the way enlisted men and veterans vote in November...


HEAR HEAR!!!!!!! {{Applause}}

Butch Ammon

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...

You're a fool. An assassination threat was made on the President's life
the
same day 4 planes were hijacked, and flown into the WTC, and a building
in
close proximity to the President's residence.

Surely you don't believe that Bush's presence was any benefit to the
country
in the minutes, days and months after 9/11, do you? If he'd perished in
flames, better men would've stepped up. Matter of fact, Rudy's popularity
rating were far higher than Bush's.

Nice attempt at rewriting history. Bush's numbers were in the low 90's.

NOYB wrote:
I wonder how the liberals felt about the Sedition Act of 1918, and FDR's
Executive Order 9066 signed in 1942...AT THAT TIME?

A number of them hated it... along with a number of conservatives.
Please also note that those acts were eventually overturned.

Please also note that Republicans mostly disliked FDR, and the
right-wing branch of the GOP actively hated and undermined him, and
spread the most awful rumors they could think of. Some were outright
Nazi sympathizers.

If you really wanted to drum up ridicule for BushCo and the neocons, you
might google up a few exapmles and hold them up as praiseworthy
patriots... not that I'm trying to give you advice how best to achieve
your goals, Comrade


However, the Patriot Act was done to undo the wrongs set by years of rulings
by activist judges who tried to make laws from the bench.

Wow, now here is a classic. First, you obviously feel the Patriot Act
should be a permanent addition to the American legal scene (or should we
say, a permanent subtraction from the Constitution). Secondly, you are
again displaying that wonderful hypocrisy and the strong double-standard
that are the hallmark of the BushCo cheerleaders. Not long ago you were
smirking about activist judges making law from the bench, saying how
great it. Only it was about abortion then.

After giving up on John H, how comforting to see that you're still as
amusing as ever, Nobby!

DSK

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:08:06 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .

Well then, using another "defining moment" in our history, why shouldn't
Kerry use images of our American dead and wounded coming back from Iraq?

That's a real equivalent in bad taste and emotional blackmail.

jps

Would those images somehow portray a job Kerry has done? Seems like he
voted to send them, but then voted not to resource them.


John H

I understand Bush's commercials portray people cuddling babies and school
children saying the pledge of allegiance. Bush has no connection whatsoever
to patriotism or raising healthy children. Both candidates will simply throw
**** at the wall until election day, and hope enough of it sticks.


One could say that an anti-abortion policy may have a bearing on the
cuddling of babies. I know, it would be a stretch, but...

John H

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

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:04:25 GMT, bb wrote:

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 18:10:02 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

You're a fool. An assassination threat was made on the President's life the
same day 4 planes were hijacked, and flown into the WTC, and a building in
close proximity to the President's residence.

One of the resident Bush cheerleaders, John H, claimed "Bush did a
superb job of providing leadership to the country during a
time when panic could have reigned supreme." Bush is commander in
Chief, but in a very dark day for this nation, he turned into
commander in Chicken. John H's claims about how Bush acted are
outlandish.

So you say it's worse if the victims say it's worse? Ok, then let's apply
your logic and apply it to what these "victims" have to say:

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jf_kerry.htm

You want to use a lunatic right wing fringe group web site to back up
your argument? You may buy into it Nobbie, but the public isn't.

Bush has used 9/11 shamelessly to prop up his failed administration
and it looks like the citizens of this country are getting a little
tired of it.

bb


Given the situation that day, I would not have wanted the President,
no matter who it was, in the White House. To suggest he should have
returned to the White House is ridiculous. Suppose he had, and suppose
the plane that went down in PA hadn't.

The Secret Service put the POTUS in as safe a place as they could.
That's their job.

Now that the Democrats have weeded out the only candidate I may have
considered, I can say that I will vote for Bush. I don't agree with
all his policies, but the alternative is unbearable.

John H

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

John H wrote:


Now that the Democrats have weeded out the only candidate I may have
considered, I can say that I will vote for Bush.


Yeah, reich, er, right. What a surprise...John the Wingnut voting
Republican...again.

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:10:15 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
thlink.net...

You're a fool. An assassination threat was made on the President's life
the
same day 4 planes were hijacked, and flown into the WTC, and a building in
close proximity to the President's residence.

Surely you don't believe that Bush's presence was any benefit to the country
in the minutes, days and months after 9/11, do you? If he'd perished in
flames, better men would've stepped up. Matter of fact, Rudy's popularity
rating were far higher than Bush's.

And if Rudy were running, I might vote for him. But he's not. Bush did
not perish, but he stepped up and did his job.

Should Roosevelt not be associated with Pearl Harbor? Kerry was
broadcasting his 8-mm Vietnam film every ten minutes (or so it
seemed). Was he seeking credit for his actions? He is taking advantage
of having participated in a conflict which he says, "...U.S. soldiers
had raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable
telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs,
blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot
cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged
the countryside of South Vietnam."

Kerry is a slap in the face of any Vietnam veteran. Some just don't
realize it.

John H

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

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:05:24 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...

It's a defining event for the future of our country. ...

Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining event.
The
administration would have us believe that the event defines the future
indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse.

People compare it to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Personally, I think it's
worse, since it was perpetrated on civilians. The attack on Pearl Harbor
certainly "defined the future indefinitely, and obliterated all other
concerns"...in fact, it did so in a much more profound manner. Our way of
life has hardly changed following 9/11. Compare that to the years
immediately following Pearl Harbor.



I was referring to the atmosphere of fear which Ashcroft and Bush would like
us to accept as normal, thereby making it OK to carve away at the
Constitution. All this to chase an enemy we cannot see or define clearly.
Quite a bit different than fighting German and Japanese soldiers.


Doug, are not the Democrats themselves continuously complaining about
the insufficiency of money for homeland defense? Hasn't Harry himself
used our lack of searching every container from every container ship
as proof that Bush is falling down on the homeland security issue?
Isn't the hardest part of this whole terrorist battle the fact that we
*can't* see or define them clearly?

John H

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

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 15:06:15 -0500, DSK wrote:

NOYB wrote:
I wonder how the liberals felt about the Sedition Act of 1918, and FDR's
Executive Order 9066 signed in 1942...AT THAT TIME?

A number of them hated it... along with a number of conservatives.
Please also note that those acts were eventually overturned.

Please also note that Republicans mostly disliked FDR, and the
right-wing branch of the GOP actively hated and undermined him, and
spread the most awful rumors they could think of. Some were outright
Nazi sympathizers.

If you really wanted to drum up ridicule for BushCo and the neocons, you
might google up a few exapmles and hold them up as praiseworthy
patriots... not that I'm trying to give you advice how best to achieve
your goals, Comrade


However, the Patriot Act was done to undo the wrongs set by years of rulings
by activist judges who tried to make laws from the bench.

Wow, now here is a classic. First, you obviously feel the Patriot Act
should be a permanent addition to the American legal scene (or should we
say, a permanent subtraction from the Constitution). Secondly, you are
again displaying that wonderful hypocrisy and the strong double-standard
that are the hallmark of the BushCo cheerleaders. Not long ago you were
smirking about activist judges making law from the bench, saying how
great it. Only it was about abortion then.

After giving up on John H, how comforting to see that you're still as
amusing as ever, Nobby!

DSK

For whom are you cheering, Doug? No one? You're happy with the status
quo? Or are you a Kerry cheerleader? Kerry, remember, takes offense at
being called a liberal.


John H

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