Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 12:01:14 GMT, Lola Stonewall Riot
wrote:

Hail Eris! On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 05:21:20 +0000, The Black Goat With A
Thousand Young frothed and foamed:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:12:27 -0700, Gunner Asch fixed me with a beady eye,
and foamed wildly:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 09:52:09 GMT, Lola Stonewall Riot wrote:
Hail Eris! On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 00:24:25 -0700, Gunner Asch frothed and
foamed:
On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 21:16:27 -0400, A Real Boater wrote:
Mark Dunning wrote:
"A Real Boater" wrote...
Eisboch wrote:
"A Real Boater" wrote...
It took Palin five, or was it six, colleges to get a degree in
broadcast journalism. And Mcshame was at the bottom of his class.
Two more dummies, just what we do not need running the country.

You put WAY too much emphasis on academia providing common sense.

Eisboch
You sound more and more like a true anti-intellectual. No wonder
you admire Bush and Palin so much.
Better some military experience and effective executive experience
than 2 more lawyer-politicians.
The two best presidents in our history, Lincoln and FDR, had no
appreciable military experience. Lincoln served in a state militia for
a short time, killing native Americans. McCain's military experience
became irrelevant when he went along with the Bush regime's torture of
captives. Palin's executive experience seems to consist of little more
than runninga Bush-like secretive administration in Alaska, with her
administration populated by incompetents. Just like Bus.
Your biased and buffoonish opinion is noted.

With amused contempt.
...Dude, Lincoln was a Republican.
Yes. Congratulations. You know a data bit thats actually true.

And?
Try to follow the bouncing ball: Boater: "...two best presidents in our
history, Lincoln and FDR..."; you: "Your biased and buffoonish opinion is
noted." Me: "...Dude, Lincoln was a Republican." You: "Yes."

You just *declared* yourself to be an ignorant idiot, who doesn't know
when someone is presenting an _unbiased_ opinion. Boater says one
Republican and one Democrat are the "two best presidents" in your history,
and that, in your view, qualifies as "biased"??? You obviously think
(well, believe) that naming two Republicans would be "fair and balanced".
Your understanding of your own history is abysmal.
Oh, and SPANK! Gunner Asch is hereby resoundingly thrashed and defeated
in debate.


Lincoln? You mean that rat ******* who suspended Habeus Corpus

Well, the man who suspended habeas corpus.

and gutted the Constitution?

Nope, that must be some other Lincoln than the one who was President.

The one who failed his bar exam several times.

Could be.

The guy who freed SOME of the slaves (only those south of the Mason
Dixon line) and caused the deaths of 5 million American Citizens both
military and civiilan in a civil war?

Well, the guy I'm thinking of did free some of the slaves, but did not
cause the deaths of 5 million people.

And FDR, who gutted the Constitution totally,

Nope, some other FDR, obviously.

suspended Habeus Corpus,

And?

put hundreds of thousands of American Citizens in concentration camps,

Unfortunately. Bad move on his part... You DO know that Republicans
are the ones trying to say they weren't REALLY concentration camps,
right... For their own good, and all that.

put Fascist controls on the economy

Um, no, that would be some other guy.

(many of which are still with us today)

Well, no, they aren't.

envolved the US in a World War?

Well, the war kind of came to us, if you recall. Unlike, say, Vietnam
(a Democratic affair) or Iraq (a Republican affair), or the firefights
various other Presidents got us involved in (that seem to be your
favorites, except the Democratic ones).

And yet you worship both of these evil mother****ers...

Can't speak for the OP, but I certainly do not "worship" ANY Presidents.
The guys you describe are far from "evil" in any sense of the word,
though your favorites (Reagan and Bush II) are far closer to evil than
any guys YOU mention (even the made up ones you cite, above).

its not
surprising you are a Leftist.

Which "leftist" definition are you claiming, here? Under some
definitions I (and the OP) are certainly contained, under most of the
ones you use, neither of us complies.

You delight in totalitarians and worship at their feet.

Well, no. I'm pretty sure, from reading this newsgroup, that the OP
neither delights in totalitarians nor worships at their feet; in fact,
YOU are closer to that description. In further FACT, you are one mass
of projection in most of your posts...

Your ignorant and buffoonish attempt at diverting your moronic
behavior with some sort of childish "spank" is noted with amused
contempt.

He got you, eh? Typical spoiled child,lashing out at your tormentors.


Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by
legislation.

So, you are claiming there is no hope for you. Too bad you have such a
world view. My experience is that even the terminally stupid can be
educated, though the first step is always with you. The willfully
ignorant (again, you) are a harder nut to crack...

Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can't help being
stupid.

Don't be so sure - you are a case to invalidate that statement.

But stupidity is the only universal capital crime: the
sentence is death, there is no appeal, and execution is carried out
automatically and without pity.
Robert A. Heinlein

Heinlein never did understand humanity very well, though he did
occasionally make interesting observations that happened to be right.

Interesting that you should worship such a guy...

Dan