On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 09:43:12 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

I am more than pleased to admit I was absolutely dead wrong about McCain
choice in Palin as VP.
What a refreshing new political face.

Let the bashing from the left begin ... it doesn't matter.

"Delicious!"


And 'ol Rudy wasn't too bad either!


You were taking the talking heads too seriously.
This is why I asked if Scarborough was assimilated a couple days ago.
He was spouting the same Dem talking points about "McCains's
judgement" as the Obama operatives.
Even yesterday up until Palin got a chance to talk, he couldn't stop
asking every guest, repeatedly and with great relish, "How many
interviews did you have with the chief-of-staff you hired?"
Today he hasn't opened his trap once about McCain's "lack of
judgement" even while flapping his jaws and running over other people
as is his fashion.
In his ideological conservative heart, Joe despises McCain. Jealously
probably.
He's dropped quite a bit in my estimation, since he's proved he's
caught up in his ego and the bubble of "good-old-buddy" pundits
surrounding him.
Once again Pat Buchanan is the only one who kept his head.
Classy.
He and Brokaw are the only sensible people on MSNBC.
Palin may get Hillary votes, and has certainly energized the
Republican base. But she has a way to go, and may be tripped up
on policy. Economics should carry the day for the Dems, but now
all the Reps need is a terrorist attack and they're in like Flynn.
The Dem voters made a big mistake in nominating an intellectual Yuppie
who didn't have the balls to put Hillary on the ticket. Hillary would
more easily neutralize Palin. Biden is just another Washington
insider.
American voters will often vote against their own economic interests
for other values.
Okay, enough bull**** from me. Hope I didn't offend anyone.

--Vic

Certainly not me. I also agree with your 100% regarding Brokaw and
Buchanan, although it was fun to see Buchanan absolutely delight in response
to the speeches. I love listening to politicians who have a sense of
humor. Rudy and Buchanan certainly don't disappoint.

BTW ..... I think we all have to accept the fact that the excitement of the
election, particularly this one because it's guarantied to be historic, is
naturally going to be a source for many OT posts here and in virtually every
other non moderated newsgroup.

Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch


Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.

Thank you for seeing the light. It has greatly reduced the number of 'hk'
posts already.

"John H" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch


Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.


Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"John H" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch

Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.


Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch




Heheheh...Herring stirs the pot, and you ladle out a spoonful and
swallow it.

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:38:38 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch


Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.


Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch


Tom didn't need defending at all.

Harry needed to be reprimanded by someone he 'respected'.

John H wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:38:38 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch

Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.

Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch


Tom didn't need defending at all.

Harry needed to be reprimanded by someone he 'respected'.


You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to me.

hk wrote:
John H wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:38:38 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult
hurling after
election day.

Eisboch

Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of
this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change -
election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began
calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.

Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch

Tom didn't need defending at all.

Harry needed to be reprimanded by someone he 'respected'.


You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to me.

I thought Eisboch and SWS were righteous righties? What happened?

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:43:09 -0400, hk wrote:

You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to me.

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:43:09 -0400, hk wrote:

You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to me.

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.


Seriously, what scares me, is this guy owns a gun.

On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:18:21 -0400, "Earl of Warwich, Duke of
Cornwall, Marquies of Anglesea, Sir Reginald P. Smithers III Esq. LLC,
STP. " wrote:

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.


Seriously, what scares me, is this guy owns a gun.

Maybe.

Even if so, he only shoots tree stumps which have threatened him
first.

Earl of Warwich, Duke of Cornwall, Marquies of Anglesea, Sir Reginald P.
Smithers III Esq. LLC, STP. wrote:
Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:43:09 -0400, hk wrote:

You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to
me.

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.


Seriously, what scares me, is this guy owns a gun.

There should be a law that the mentally Ill be prohibited from owning
any type of firearm.