On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 14:51:24 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:07:38 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:09:57 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

NOYB wrote:
Why would you join the military if there was no chance to see combat?
Because you can't find a decent job anywhere.
This from one who tells Tom he has the highest respect for the military!

Harry, you're a card.


Sorry, Herring, but what I said was I have respect for individual
members of the military (but certainly not all of them). I have no
respect whatsoever for the military establishment.


Harry, we all know what you've said. That's my point!

PS. If you're going to ask other's to pray, you should be setting a good
example. Your name-calling and general anti-social behavior are not doing so.



Aim your castigating at the members of Assholes United.

You are the one asking for prayer. Are you saying your behavior is above
reproach? Do you think Chuck would approve of your behavior?

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

Harry,
Are you talking about your imaginary buddies, playing on your imaginary
driveway?

If they are good will you take them out on your imaginary boat?


"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...


Aim your castigating at the members of Assholes United.

--
Let's pray the United States survives the rest of Bush's term.

Harry,
I guess if you need some friends you can use us as your "imaginary" buddies.

Can we play soccer on your imaginary lawn?


"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Real Name wrote:
Harry,
Are you talking about your imaginary buddies, playing on your imaginary
driveway?


No, ****head; the members of the imaginary online Assholes United Soccer
Team (AUST) team consist of people like you, Hertvik, Fritz, Robbins,
Charles, Jackoff. You know, the non-boating, non-fishing ejaculates who
post here only to disrupt and annoy.

The funny thing is that I suspect none of you would last two minutes in an
actual soccer game.




--
Let's pray the United States survives the rest of Bush's term.

Harry,
Why would I need balls to play on your "imaginary" lawn? Do you want to
make it one of your special games?

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Real Name wrote:
Harry,
I guess if you need some friends you can use us as your "imaginary"
buddies.

Can we play soccer on your imaginary lawn?


I''ve got the room, but you don't have the balls.




--
Let's pray the United States survives the rest of Bush's term.

Harry,
I know you want to play with my balls, but I play on a different team.

Let's just agree not to play with each other balls, I know you would enjoy
it, but I would not.


"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Real Name wrote:
Harry,
Why would I need balls to play on your "imaginary" lawn?


Let's just say you wouldn't enjoy the outcome and leave it at that.




--
Let's pray the United States survives the rest of Bush's term.

Harry,
Are you flirting with me?

Please ..... I am not interested.


"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Real Name wrote:
Harry,
I know you want to play with my balls, but I play on a different team.

Let's just agree not to play with each other balls, I know you would
enjoy it, but I would not.


Let's just say you'd not get very far onto my lawn, and leave it at that.



--
Let's pray the United States survives the rest of Bush's term.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:37:39 +0000, NOYB wrote:


R Hawaii 2.7%
R Vermont 3.1%
R North Dakota 3.5%
D New Hampshire 3.6%
D Virginia 3.6%
R Idaho 3.9%
D New Jersey 3.9%
R Florida 4.0%
R Nebraska 4.0%
R Nevada 4.0%
R South Dakota 4.0%
D Wyoming 4.0%
D Delaware 4.1%
R Maryland 4.2%
R Minnesota 4.3%
R Alabama 4.4%
D Montana 4.5%
D Oklahoma 4.5%
R Rhode Island 4.5%
D West Virginia 4.5%
D Wisconsin 4.7%
D Arizona 4.8%
R Indiana 4.8%
D Iowa 4.8%
R Massachusetts 4.8%
D Pennsylvania 4.8%
R Utah 4.9%
R Arkansas 5.0%
D Maine 5.0%
R New York 5.0%
D North Carolina 5.1%
R Georgia 5.2%
R California 5.3%
R Colorado 5.3%
R Connecticut 5.3%
D Kansas 5.3%
D Louisiana 5.4%
R Texas 5.5%
R Missouri 5.6%
R Kentucky 5.7%
D Washington 5.7%
D Illinois 6.8%
D New Mexico 6.0%
R Ohio 6.1%
D Tennessee 6.2%
R South Carolina 6.3%
R Alaska 6.4%
D Oregon 6.5%
D Michigan 7.1%
R Mississippi 7.1%


So the Democrats control the Governor's house in 60% of the 10 states with
the worst unemployment numbers, and in only 30% of the 10 states with the
best unemployment numbers.

LOL. Not that fast. There aren't 10 states with the worst unemployment,
nor 10 states with the best. Don't forget the ties, then figure in 28 of
the Governors are Republicans, 22 are Democrats.


That doesn't sound "evenly balanced" to me. That's a huge disproportion
skewed against the Dems.

Didn't like the link that showed the economy runs better under a Democrat
President? Here, read another:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2005Apr1.html

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:37:39 +0000, NOYB wrote:


R Hawaii 2.7%
R Vermont 3.1%
R North Dakota 3.5%
D New Hampshire 3.6%
D Virginia 3.6%
R Idaho 3.9%
D New Jersey 3.9%
R Florida 4.0%
R Nebraska 4.0%
R Nevada 4.0%
R South Dakota 4.0%
D Wyoming 4.0%
D Delaware 4.1%
R Maryland 4.2%
R Minnesota 4.3%
R Alabama 4.4%
D Montana 4.5%
D Oklahoma 4.5%
R Rhode Island 4.5%
D West Virginia 4.5%
D Wisconsin 4.7%
D Arizona 4.8%
R Indiana 4.8%
D Iowa 4.8%
R Massachusetts 4.8%
D Pennsylvania 4.8%
R Utah 4.9%
R Arkansas 5.0%
D Maine 5.0%
R New York 5.0%
D North Carolina 5.1%
R Georgia 5.2%
R California 5.3%
R Colorado 5.3%
R Connecticut 5.3%
D Kansas 5.3%
D Louisiana 5.4%
R Texas 5.5%
R Missouri 5.6%
R Kentucky 5.7%
D Washington 5.7%
D Illinois 6.8%
D New Mexico 6.0%
R Ohio 6.1%
D Tennessee 6.2%
R South Carolina 6.3%
R Alaska 6.4%
D Oregon 6.5%
D Michigan 7.1%
R Mississippi 7.1%


So the Democrats control the Governor's house in 60% of the 10 states
with
the worst unemployment numbers, and in only 30% of the 10 states with the
best unemployment numbers.

LOL. Not that fast. There aren't 10 states with the worst unemployment,
nor 10 states with the best. Don't forget the ties

Huh? Just because there's a tie, doesn't mean that there aren't 10 at the
bottom and 10 at the top.

Of the ten at the bottom, 6 are Democrat-controlled.
Of the ten at the top, 7 are Republican-controlled.

then figure in 28 of
the Governors are Republicans, 22 are Democrats.

So then if it were truly balanced, the dems should make up roughly 40% of
the top 10, and 40% of the bottom ten...but that's not the case. They make
up only 30% of the top 10, and a whopping 60% of the bottom 10!



That doesn't sound "evenly balanced" to me. That's a huge disproportion
skewed against the Dems.

Didn't like the link that showed the economy runs better under a Democrat
President? Here, read another:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2005Apr1.html


The link was not relevant to the question I posed. I asked about
unemployment rates relative to which party controlled the governor's house.
When you compare Presidential administrations, you're not comparing apples
to apples since you're comparing two completely separate periods of time.
There are too many factors to consider when comparing the time periods of
two different Presidents. Technologies change. Oil Prices change. World
economic conditions change. Wars cause change. With the governor
comparison, you're comparing head to head while each is in power at the same
exact time period...under the same economic conditions at the federal level.

"NOBBY" wrote..
Why would you join the military if there was no chance to see combat?
Isn't
it a soldier's role to kill the enemy?


You're younger than 37, right? Actually, they give waivers for age
anyway. You can enlist.

Go ahead, you appear to believe in the cause... or are you just a
chicken**** coward?


P. Fritz wrote:
Can you imagine what the world would be like if the military of WWII was
filled with whiners like that?

You can wait in line to enlist right behind NOBBY... if there is a line,
which I doubt. You can send your kids too.

If not, then shut yer yaps. Neither have the balls to back up your
beliefs, just a lot of hot air... and no soldier ever won a battle by
loud-mouthing the enemy to death.

DSK

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:36:05 -0400, DSK wrote:

"NOBBY" wrote..
Why would you join the military if there was no chance to see combat?
Isn't
it a soldier's role to kill the enemy?


You're younger than 37, right? Actually, they give waivers for age
anyway. You can enlist.

Go ahead, you appear to believe in the cause... or are you just a
chicken**** coward?


P. Fritz wrote:
Can you imagine what the world would be like if the military of WWII was
filled with whiners like that?

You can wait in line to enlist right behind NOBBY... if there is a line,
which I doubt. You can send your kids too.

If not, then shut yer yaps. Neither have the balls to back up your
beliefs, just a lot of hot air... and no soldier ever won a battle by
loud-mouthing the enemy to death.

DSK

Did someone **** in your beer? You're sounding much like Kevin.

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD