"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
startribune.com
Editorial: Bush creates illusion of progress in Iraq

December 1, 2005


What about your boy Lieberman and his latest editorial? Seems to support
Bush.

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
startribune.com
Editorial: Bush creates illusion of progress in Iraq

December 1, 2005


What about your boy Lieberman and his latest editorial? Seems to support
Bush.


For how long will Lieberman's article be your bible? Is there an expiration
date, or does the article trump any subsequent information, regardless of
the source?

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:21:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
startribune.com
Editorial: Bush creates illusion of progress in Iraq

December 1, 2005


What about your boy Lieberman and his latest editorial? Seems to support
Bush.


For how long will Lieberman's article be your bible? Is there an expiration
date, or does the article trump any subsequent information, regardless of
the source?


Why does the major media have so much 'respect' for Murtha's words, but so
little for Lieberman's?
--
John H

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"
[A Self-obsessed Hypocrite]

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:21:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
startribune.com
Editorial: Bush creates illusion of progress in Iraq

December 1, 2005


What about your boy Lieberman and his latest editorial? Seems to support
Bush.


For how long will Lieberman's article be your bible? Is there an
expiration
date, or does the article trump any subsequent information, regardless of
the source?


Why does the major media have so much 'respect' for Murtha's words, but so
little for Lieberman's?
--
John H

Where do you get the idea that I have no respect for Lieberman's words? I'm
sure that he actually saw the things he wrote about. But, as NOYB and I
established a few minutes ago, he did not see everything.

If he *did* see everything and withheld that information, then I would have
a reason to mistrust him. I might even want his personal investment
portfolio audited, preferably with a gun to his head, on national
television. Any time a politician supports a lousy idea, there are two
possible reasons, one or both of which are present 100% of the time: Money,
or religion.

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:39:01 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:21:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
startribune.com
Editorial: Bush creates illusion of progress in Iraq

December 1, 2005


What about your boy Lieberman and his latest editorial? Seems to support
Bush.


For how long will Lieberman's article be your bible? Is there an
expiration
date, or does the article trump any subsequent information, regardless of
the source?


Why does the major media have so much 'respect' for Murtha's words, but so
little for Lieberman's?
--
John H

Where do you get the idea that I have no respect for Lieberman's words? I'm
sure that he actually saw the things he wrote about. But, as NOYB and I
established a few minutes ago, he did not see everything.

If he *did* see everything and withheld that information, then I would have
a reason to mistrust him. I might even want his personal investment
portfolio audited, preferably with a gun to his head, on national
television. Any time a politician supports a lousy idea, there are two
possible reasons, one or both of which are present 100% of the time: Money,
or religion.


I said nothing about you. Go back to 'go'.
--
John H

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"
[A Self-obsessed Hypocrite]