|
OT - The party of the rich is...
The Democrats!
Entire article can read at http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002 Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said. A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
I wonder if they are the ones buying up all the Grand Banks?
Lu Powell wrote: The Democrats! Entire article can read at http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002 Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said. A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
JimH wrote:
"Lu Powell" wrote in message ... The Democrats! Entire article can read at http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002 Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said. A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said. It is also the party of bigots/racists and the intolerant. If one looks at Super Tuesday D voting results many are in the NE area of the country and not in the southern States as usually stereotyped. Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race? |
OT - The party of the rich is...
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
JimH wrote: "Lu Powell" wrote in message ... The Democrats! Entire article can read at http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002 Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said. A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said. It is also the party of bigots/racists and the intolerant. If one looks at Super Tuesday D voting results many are in the NE area of the country and not in the southern States as usually stereotyped. Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race? and someone that young blacks can use for a role model? While Obama got a lot of black votes, he also got more votes from white males than Hillary, and more votes from females under the age of 65 than Hillary. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:29:48 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote: and someone that young blacks can use for a role model? While Obama got a lot of black votes, he also got more votes from white males than Hillary, and more votes from females under the age of 65 than Hillary. Everybody is a racist to some degree. Obama probably less than most, given his mixed heritage. I saw this writer on C-Span this morning, and he had some interesting insights - based on actual reporting - about the differences between Hillary and Obama. Here's the article he mentioned. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...or_v isionary Make of it what you will. --Vic |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message . .. JimH wrote: "Lu Powell" wrote in message ... The Democrats! Entire article can read at http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002 Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said. A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said. It is also the party of bigots/racists and the intolerant. If one looks at Super Tuesday D voting results many are in the NE area of the country and not in the southern States as usually stereotyped. Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race? "A credit to his race"...is a racist statement. Next thing, Harry will declare some of his best friends are Black. The Clintons want to credit Obama's wins to the Black vote. Yeah, there's a slew of Black voters in Idaho, Colorado, Kansas, etc. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"Vic Smith" wrote in message ... Everybody is a racist to some degree. Obama probably less than most, given his mixed heritage. I saw this writer on C-Span this morning, and he had some interesting insights - based on actual reporting - about the differences between Hillary and Obama. Here's the article he mentioned. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...or_v isionary Make of it what you will. --Vic Interesting and almost believable article until I got to the paragraph outlining Bill Clinton's successes as president. It offers "welfare reform" as one of two "success" examples, but neglects to point out that the same Welfare Reform Act was submitted to him for signature by a Republican congress *three* times. Clinton rejected it twice, but the Republicans forced the issue by sending it back to him. The third time worked when Clinton, at the advise of his senior advisors, suggested he should accept it or risk serious public negative reaction. But, now he takes credit for it. Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:29:48 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is
Here wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: JimH wrote: "Lu Powell" wrote in message ... The Democrats! Entire article can read at http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002 Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said. A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said. It is also the party of bigots/racists and the intolerant. If one looks at Super Tuesday D voting results many are in the NE area of the country and not in the southern States as usually stereotyped. Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race? and someone that young blacks can use for a role model? While Obama got a lot of black votes, he also got more votes from white males than Hillary, and more votes from females under the age of 65 than Hillary. And next Tuesday, he's going to get two from retired, whites over the age of 55. -- John H |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 19:32:45 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "Vic Smith" wrote in message . .. Everybody is a racist to some degree. Obama probably less than most, given his mixed heritage. I saw this writer on C-Span this morning, and he had some interesting insights - based on actual reporting - about the differences between Hillary and Obama. Here's the article he mentioned. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...or_v isionary Make of it what you will. Interesting and almost believable article until I got to the paragraph outlining Bill Clinton's successes as president. It offers "welfare reform" as one of two "success" examples, but neglects to point out that the same Welfare Reform Act was submitted to him for signature by a Republican congress *three* times. Clinton rejected it twice, but the Republicans forced the issue by sending it back to him. The third time worked when Clinton, at the advise of his senior advisors, suggested he should accept it or risk serious public negative reaction. But, now he takes credit for it. If Hillary is the candidate, it's going to be interesting to see how the American public accepts another HillBilly presidency. In particular, as a former President, he gets the same NIE as she will. If it is Hillary, Bill is going to be a huge issue in addition to the "dynastic" properties of the election. My opinion is that average America has had enough of the Imperial Bush and Clinton families. Unfortunately, there are no viable potentials that don't already have their roots deeply planted in the corrupt, sickening WashDC club with membership consisting of both parties. Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
On Feb 6, 7:59*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in messagenews:44lkq31am7latsoovdbc5adh7mgu18jovk@4ax .com... On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 19:32:45 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "Vic Smith" wrote in message . .. Everybody is a racist to some degree. *Obama probably less than most, given his mixed heritage. I saw this writer on C-Span this morning, and he had some interesting insights - based on actual reporting - about the differences between Hillary and Obama. *Here's the article he mentioned. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...ts_choice_mana.... Make of it what you will. Interesting and almost believable article until I got to the paragraph outlining Bill Clinton's successes as president. It offers "welfare reform" as one of two "success" examples, but neglects to point out that the same Welfare Reform Act was submitted to him for signature by a Republican congress *three* times. *Clinton rejected it twice, but the Republicans forced the issue by sending it back to him. The third time worked when Clinton, at the advise of his senior advisors, suggested he should accept it or risk serious public negative reaction. But, now he takes credit for it. If Hillary is the candidate, it's going to be interesting to see how the American public accepts another HillBilly presidency. In particular, as a former President, he gets the same NIE as she will. If it is Hillary, Bill is going to be a huge issue in addition to the "dynastic" properties of the election. My opinion is that average America has had enough of the Imperial Bush and Clinton families. Unfortunately, there are no viable potentials that don't already have their roots deeply planted in the corrupt, sickening WashDC club with membership consisting of both parties. Eisboch- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Terry Bradshaw would make a good president, make Howie long VP just so there would be some teeth in there... ;) |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 19:32:45 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message .. . Everybody is a racist to some degree. Obama probably less than most, given his mixed heritage. I saw this writer on C-Span this morning, and he had some interesting insights - based on actual reporting - about the differences between Hillary and Obama. Here's the article he mentioned. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...or_v isionary Make of it what you will. --Vic Interesting and almost believable article until I got to the paragraph outlining Bill Clinton's successes as president. It offers "welfare reform" as one of two "success" examples, but neglects to point out that the same Welfare Reform Act was submitted to him for signature by a Republican congress *three* times. Clinton rejected it twice, but the Republicans forced the issue by sending it back to him. The third time worked when Clinton, at the advise of his senior advisors, suggested he should accept it or risk serious public negative reaction. But, now he takes credit for it. Politicians always do that. Nature of the beast. What I found most interesting is the contention that the Clinton administration was essentially a continuation of Reagan policies, which Obama was at least hinting at when he said Bill Clinton was not a "transformative" character. --Vic |
OT - The party of the rich is...
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:29:48 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: JimH wrote: "Lu Powell" wrote in message ... The Democrats! Entire article can read at http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002 Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said. A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said. It is also the party of bigots/racists and the intolerant. If one looks at Super Tuesday D voting results many are in the NE area of the country and not in the southern States as usually stereotyped. Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race? and someone that young blacks can use for a role model? While Obama got a lot of black votes, he also got more votes from white males than Hillary, and more votes from females under the age of 65 than Hillary. And next Tuesday, he's going to get two from retired, whites over the age of 55. Wise move. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
JimH wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"Vic Smith" wrote in message ... Politicians always do that. Nature of the beast. What I found most interesting is the contention that the Clinton administration was essentially a continuation of Reagan policies, which Obama was at least hinting at when he said Bill Clinton was not a "transformative" character. --Vic I can understand that. There was somebody discussing H. Clinton and B. Obama differences today on one of the endless TV political coverage interviews. I don't remember who it was, but he made some good points, including (paraphrasing): The "wellness" factor of the USA (economic and otherwise) is a function of the spirit and moral of her population. This characteristic is almost unique compared to the more traditional acceptance of conditions in other countries. We tend to be more forward thinking, ready to embrace new ideas, new technology and new outlooks. And we like to be liked. Ronald Reagan understood and tapped into that spirit. He really didn't change things much. He simply provided inspiration and confidence at a time that the nation needed a spiritual vitamin. Barack Obama is doing the same thing. I think he also understands the enormous potential of this country to heal itself, given the inspiration, and that is what he was alluding to in his recent comments about Reagan that raised so many eyebrows. I think it's also why Obama is less specific about the details, whereas H. Clinton is going to micromanage and dictate a "recovery". I think Obama has the right attitude. Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? |
OT - The party of the rich is...
JimH wrote:
The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. wow, if you don't think Huckabee and Mitt are conservative enough for you I hate to think who you think would be "conservative" enough. I am glad to see some moderates trying to clean up the mess the far right and far left. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
D.Duck wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? A. Drowning is a possibility. That's a lasting physical effect. B. Dunno, but it sure can create lasting psychological effects. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
Eisboch wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message ... Politicians always do that. Nature of the beast. What I found most interesting is the contention that the Clinton administration was essentially a continuation of Reagan policies, which Obama was at least hinting at when he said Bill Clinton was not a "transformative" character. --Vic I can understand that. There was somebody discussing H. Clinton and B. Obama differences today on one of the endless TV political coverage interviews. I don't remember who it was, but he made some good points, including (paraphrasing): The "wellness" factor of the USA (economic and otherwise) is a function of the spirit and moral of her population. This characteristic is almost unique compared to the more traditional acceptance of conditions in other countries. We tend to be more forward thinking, ready to embrace new ideas, new technology and new outlooks. And we like to be liked. Ronald Reagan understood and tapped into that spirit. He really didn't change things much. He simply provided inspiration and confidence at a time that the nation needed a spiritual vitamin. Barack Obama is doing the same thing. I think he also understands the enormous potential of this country to heal itself, given the inspiration, and that is what he was alluding to in his recent comments about Reagan that raised so many eyebrows. I think it's also why Obama is less specific about the details, whereas H. Clinton is going to micromanage and dictate a "recovery". I think Obama has the right attitude. Eisboch AMEN |
OT - The party of the rich is...
JimH wrote:
"D.Duck" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks. Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use of this technique on captured terrorists. I have seen kids at the lake waterboarding, and they seemed to like it. I have seen kids doing flips on the waterboards. ;) |
OT - The party of the rich is...
On Feb 6, 8:35*pm, "D.Duck" wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message om... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. *His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. *He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. *Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Probably about like when I was a toddler and my swim mask filled up with water. My mom jumped in the pool and pulled me out, I almost drowned but was revived. I remember because she ruined her watch on our vacation to California. The next vacation was to Florida, I bought a new swim mask soon after we got off the plane.. ;) The same mask my mom soon after "lost" while me and dad were out on the Ducks;) |
OT - The party of the rich is...
|
OT - The party of the rich is...
"JimH" wrote in message ... "D.Duck" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks. Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use of this technique on captured terrorists. According to this (if true) we've used the technique 3 times since 9/11. http://www.reuters.com/article/lates.../idUSN05191813 Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"JimH" wrote in message ... "D.Duck" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks. Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use of this technique on captured terrorists. I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is opinions that there can be lasting effects. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
D.Duck wrote:
"JimH" wrote in message ... "D.Duck" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks. Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use of this technique on captured terrorists. I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is opinions that there can be lasting effects. The conservatives who support waterboard don't give a damn about that, and, of course, they are in denial about its impact, too. I'd be happy to see waterboarding approved right after the entire Bush and Cheney families subject themselves to it and tell us it is no biggie. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"HK" wrote in message ... I'd be happy to see waterboarding approved right after the entire Bush and Cheney families subject themselves to it and tell us it is no biggie. Ah! Now the Bush administration "invented" waterboarding. Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... I'd be happy to see waterboarding approved right after the entire Bush and Cheney families subject themselves to it and tell us it is no biggie. Ah! Now the Bush administration "invented" waterboarding. Eisboch What? Who said that, aside from you? |
OT - The party of the rich is...
On Feb 6, 6:12*pm, "Lu Powell" wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in messagenews:LLOdnQcfXewWrjfanZ2dnUVZ_srinZ2d@comca st.com... JimH wrote: "Lu Powell" wrote in message ... The Democrats! Entire article can read at http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...D=/20071123/NA.... Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said. A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said. It is also the party of bigots/racists and the intolerant. *If one looks at Super Tuesday D voting results many are in the NE area of the country and not in the southern States as usually stereotyped. Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race? "A credit to his race"...is a racist statement. Next thing, Harry will declare some of his best friends are Black. Al and Jessie? |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... I'd be happy to see waterboarding approved right after the entire Bush and Cheney families subject themselves to it and tell us it is no biggie. Ah! Now the Bush administration "invented" waterboarding. Eisboch What? Who said that, aside from you? My "spin" of your comment. You know what I meant. Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
JimH wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... D.Duck wrote: "JimH" wrote in message ... "D.Duck" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks. Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use of this technique on captured terrorists. I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is opinions that there can be lasting effects. The conservatives who support waterboard don't give a damn about that, and, of course, they are in denial about its impact, too. I'd be happy to see waterboarding approved right after the entire Bush and Cheney families subject themselves to it and tell us it is no biggie. Do a simple Google search to find out how effective this technique is. A simple 15~30 second dunking has resulted in some significant information relating to our national security. Yeah, I saw that claim. It's no more credible than any of the other lies the current administration and its civilian and military supporters have thrown out for us. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... I'd be happy to see waterboarding approved right after the entire Bush and Cheney families subject themselves to it and tell us it is no biggie. Ah! Now the Bush administration "invented" waterboarding. Eisboch What? Who said that, aside from you? My "spin" of your comment. You know what I meant. Eisboch No, I don't. My statement stands: when the Bush/Cheney families undergo waterboarding and report that it was no biggie, I'll not think it is torture. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 20:48:05 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: "JimH" wrote in message ... "D.Duck" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks. Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use of this technique on captured terrorists. I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is opinions that there can be lasting effects. No offense guys, but...well, no other way to put it, it's been part of military escape and evasion courses since the '70s. As to "lasting effects" - eh - minor at best. You've been waterboarded, or participated in medical research to determine that? Or are you just pushing the party line? |
OT - The party of the rich is...
On Feb 6, 7:48*pm, "D.Duck" wrote:
"JimH" wrote in message ... "D.Duck" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message news:JK6dnY0UiscaxzfanZ2dnUVZ_qGknZ2d@giganews .com... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message om... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. *His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. *He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. *Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? Nope. *It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks. Torture? *Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use of this technique on captured terrorists. I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is opinions that there can be lasting effects.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There can be lasting effects hanging around rec.boats, too! That is if you take comments seriously. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"HK" wrote in message ... Yeah, I saw that claim. It's no more credible than any of the other lies the current administration and its civilian and military supporters have thrown out for us. The problem with this kind of statement is that you can't prove them false anymore than I or others can prove them true. Or visa-versa. Trying to establish an opinion as fact just isn't an honest statement. It's spin. Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"HK" wrote in message ... You've been waterboarded, or participated in medical research to determine that? Or are you just pushing the party line? Have you? Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... Yeah, I saw that claim. It's no more credible than any of the other lies the current administration and its civilian and military supporters have thrown out for us. The problem with this kind of statement is that you can't prove them false anymore than I or others can prove them true. Or visa-versa. Trying to establish an opinion as fact just isn't an honest statement. It's spin. Eisboch President Clinton or Obama will outlaw waterboarding entirely. |
OT - The party of the rich is...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... You've been waterboarded, or participated in medical research to determine that? Or are you just pushing the party line? Have you? Eisboch Nope, but I'm bright enough to realize that when someone feels as if they are being drowned deliberately by someone else, it is torture. Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity." |
OT - The party of the rich is...
"HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Yeah, I saw that claim. It's no more credible than any of the other lies the current administration and its civilian and military supporters have thrown out for us. The problem with this kind of statement is that you can't prove them false anymore than I or others can prove them true. Or visa-versa. Trying to establish an opinion as fact just isn't an honest statement. It's spin. Eisboch President Clinton or Obama will outlaw waterboarding entirely. And probably further handicap our intelligence gathering capabilities. (an opinion). If you believe the recent CIA report (which I am sure you don't) waterboarding has not been used in five years. According to the report, it was used on three terrorists to gain intelligence data after 9/11. Three terrorists. Compared to how many beheaded American civilians and soldiers? Not to forget the approx 3000 people killed on 9/11. How soon we forget those gut-retching images of people kneeling in front of their terrorist captures, begging for life, just before getting their throat slit and head lopped off. Three terrorists waterboarded in order to expose more? No, I don't think it's a big deal. They lived. Eisboch |
OT - The party of the rich is...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Yeah, I saw that claim. It's no more credible than any of the other lies the current administration and its civilian and military supporters have thrown out for us. The problem with this kind of statement is that you can't prove them false anymore than I or others can prove them true. Or visa-versa. Trying to establish an opinion as fact just isn't an honest statement. It's spin. Eisboch President Clinton or Obama will outlaw waterboarding entirely. And probably further handicap our intelligence gathering capabilities. (an opinion). If you believe the recent CIA report (which I am sure you don't) waterboarding has not been used in five years. According to the report, it was used on three terrorists to gain intelligence data after 9/11. Three terrorists. Compared to how many beheaded American civilians and soldiers? Not to forget the approx 3000 people killed on 9/11. How soon we forget those gut-retching images of people kneeling in front of their terrorist captures, begging for life, just before getting their throat slit and head lopped off. Three terrorists waterboarded in order to expose more? No, I don't think it's a big deal. They lived. Eisboch If you are counting deaths, we have paid back the Muslim world at least 10 fold for 9-11. OF course, we have mostly killed the wrong Muslims, eh? Or are you saying that because al Qaeda tortures, it is ok for us to do so,too? |
OT - The party of the rich is...
On Feb 6, 8:53*pm, "JimH" wrote:
"D.Duck" wrote in message ... "JimH" wrote in message .. . "D.Duck" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message news:JK6dnY0UiscaxzfanZ2dnUVZ_qGknZ2d@giganew s.com... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message news:lcmkq31uqlknnk5d8pgo210avu3dmgomm8@4ax. com... I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's pretty viable as an alternative. I also have a lot of respect for McCain. *His only drawback is 25 years in the Senate. Eisboch Not me. *He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views, including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile terrorists resulted in tremendous information. As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old same old. The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this election. Being in favor of torture is a conservative view? No wonder I don't like conservatives. Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. *Does it leave any lasting physical or physiological effects? Nope. *It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks.. Torture? *Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use of this technique on captured terrorists. I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is opinions that there can be lasting effects. Were you ever dunked as a kid? *If so, how did you ever survive mentally?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Really, I remember Terry Glidden dunking me over and over about a dozen times, thought I was going to die.. Lived,, forgot about it till now... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:44 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com