OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
1900 wrote:
So what's the problem? How quickly you forget the assassination of
Bush's
daughters... I say...tough ****.

You mean, the out of control, law-breaking Bush kids? Like father, like
daughers...and nieces.

Once your children walk out the door you have no control over what they do,
you can only hope that what you have taught them will lead them down the
right path.

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ...
"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
om...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

The Bush whores were treated like anyone else who
breaks the law, at least in terms of press exposure.

I would comment on the point you are trying to make, but I am too tied
up laughing. You guys have dropped to referring to the President's
daughters as "whores" in a thread that started by arguing that it was
republicans taking the low ground.

Your president didn't attend the graduation of one of his own daughters.
That says a lot.

I don't think it says anything.

One of his daughters didn't attend her own graduation.

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
1900 wrote:
So what's the problem? How quickly you forget the assassination of
Bush's
daughters... I say...tough ****.

You mean, the out of control, law-breaking Bush kids? Like father, like
daughers...and nieces.

Once your children walk out the door you have no control over what they do,
you can only hope that what you have taught them will lead them down the
right path.

krause didn't have the opportunity to teach his children, and it's
probably for the better. Due to the way in which he treated their
mother, they are estranged from him. You'll notice in *all* the
{{{supposed}}} personal details he regularly offers here, *nothing* is
ever said about his children by the first marriage.

-- Charlie

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
1900 wrote:
So what's the problem? How quickly you forget the assassination of
Bush's
daughters... I say...tough ****.

You mean, the out of control, law-breaking Bush kids? Like father, like
daughers...and nieces.

Once your children walk out the door you have no control over what they do,
you can only hope that what you have taught them will lead them down the
right path.

The Bush girls probably thought that since it was "ok" that their daddy
was a drunken lawbreaker during his youth and young manhood, it was "ok"
for them, too. It's the lesson they learned from Daddy.



--
A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush;
A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse.

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

Curtis CCR wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ...
"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
om...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

The Bush whores were treated like anyone else who
breaks the law, at least in terms of press exposure.

I would comment on the point you are trying to make, but I am too tied
up laughing. You guys have dropped to referring to the President's
daughters as "whores" in a thread that started by arguing that it was
republicans taking the low ground.

Your president didn't attend the graduation of one of his own daughters.
That says a lot.

I don't think it says anything.

One of his daughters didn't attend her own graduation.

Indeed, a family proud of its intellectual achievements.

--
A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush;
A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse.

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Curtis CCR wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
om...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

The Bush whores were treated like anyone else who
breaks the law, at least in terms of press exposure.

I would comment on the point you are trying to make, but I am too
tied
up laughing. You guys have dropped to referring to the President's
daughters as "whores" in a thread that started by arguing that it was
republicans taking the low ground.

Your president didn't attend the graduation of one of his own
daughters.
That says a lot.

I don't think it says anything.

One of his daughters didn't attend her own graduation.

Indeed, a family proud of its intellectual achievements.

Installing a new roll of toilet paper, while drunk, without poking anyone's
eye out?

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Curtis CCR wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
om...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

The Bush whores were treated like anyone else who
breaks the law, at least in terms of press exposure.

I would comment on the point you are trying to make, but I am too
tied
up laughing. You guys have dropped to referring to the President's
daughters as "whores" in a thread that started by arguing that it was
republicans taking the low ground.

Your president didn't attend the graduation of one of his own
daughters.
That says a lot.

I don't think it says anything.

One of his daughters didn't attend her own graduation.

Indeed, a family proud of its intellectual achievements.

Installing a new roll of toilet paper, while drunk, without poking anyone's
eye out?




It's a tough family to figure. Dubya's father, while not one of my
favorite presidents, is no slouch intellectually, and neither is Barbara
Bush. The grandfather, Prescott Bush, was very smart. What happened to
Dubya? Too much drink and dope? What?

--
A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush;
A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse.

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:00:16 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

I would say that when the level of pollution becomes a direct health
threat, then steps need to be taken. But bear in mind that passing the
costs on to the rate payers, will hurt those on the low end of the
economic scale.

Dave


The level of pollution has ALREADY become a direct health threat. It's
universally accepted science. No more questions about it. This is why 5
states are suing a bunch of utilities and will very likely win.

As far as the cost, we're talking primarily about private companies here.
Everything you buy has the cost of doing business built into it. Who do YOU
think should pay for the improvements utilities must install?

Then you'd have no problem paying higher electric rates? How about if
the electric company decides to reduce or (horrors!) outsource some of
it's functions in order to lessen the costs?

The man in the
moon? When your local utility finally has to dismantle a nuclear reactor
whose lifespan has been reached, don't YOU expect the cost to be part of
your bill?

I had to pay to build the damn thing in the first place. Fortunately
they were not allowed to pass on the costs until the reactors went on
line. The really disgusting part of the whole thing was that our
electric company touted the building of this nuke plant in 1969 as a
way to reduce electric rates for local customers. So what did they do?
As soon as the reactors went on line, they added the construction
surcharges to our bills while selling the power produced to other
markets where they could get more for it, and our bills went up, not
down.

Dave

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 13:40:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Curtis CCR wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
om...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

The Bush whores were treated like anyone else who
breaks the law, at least in terms of press exposure.

I would comment on the point you are trying to make, but I am too
tied
up laughing. You guys have dropped to referring to the President's
daughters as "whores" in a thread that started by arguing that it was
republicans taking the low ground.

Your president didn't attend the graduation of one of his own
daughters.
That says a lot.

I don't think it says anything.

One of his daughters didn't attend her own graduation.

Indeed, a family proud of its intellectual achievements.

Installing a new roll of toilet paper, while drunk, without poking anyone's
eye out?

But did they inhale?

Dave

OT More from the Republican Pigs.
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:00:16 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

I would say that when the level of pollution becomes a direct health
threat, then steps need to be taken. But bear in mind that passing the
costs on to the rate payers, will hurt those on the low end of the
economic scale.

Dave


The level of pollution has ALREADY become a direct health threat. It's
universally accepted science. No more questions about it. This is why 5
states are suing a bunch of utilities and will very likely win.

As far as the cost, we're talking primarily about private companies here.
Everything you buy has the cost of doing business built into it. Who do
YOU
think should pay for the improvements utilities must install?

Then you'd have no problem paying higher electric rates? How about if
the electric company decides to reduce or (horrors!) outsource some of
it's functions in order to lessen the costs?

The man in the
moon? When your local utility finally has to dismantle a nuclear reactor
whose lifespan has been reached, don't YOU expect the cost to be part of
your bill?

I had to pay to build the damn thing in the first place. Fortunately
they were not allowed to pass on the costs until the reactors went on
line. The really disgusting part of the whole thing was that our
electric company touted the building of this nuke plant in 1969 as a
way to reduce electric rates for local customers. So what did they do?
As soon as the reactors went on line, they added the construction
surcharges to our bills while selling the power produced to other
markets where they could get more for it, and our bills went up, not
down.

Dave


So what? Let's say the cost of fertilizer quadruples over the next 5 years
and it affects ***all*** produce grown in this country. Would you not expect
to pay more for produce?