 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Bush/Gore Round 2
|
|
|
Subject: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lonesome EJ Date: 11 Oct 00 - 03:47 PM Tonight,Wednesday 9PM EST.Gentlemen,start your engines.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Mbo Date: 11 Oct 00 - 03:49 PM Yeah, and this time Feeb & Dweeb are 100 miles away in Raleigh. The better no start something in MY state. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: DougR Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:56 PM I can't be bothered tonight. I go other, more interesting things to do. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Ebbie Date: 11 Oct 00 - 05:15 PM I came across a quote that made me laugh out loud. In a conservative news magazine story, a woman voter had planned to vote Republican but said that she had discovered during the first debate that "Seeing George W. Bush makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck." The second debate starts here (live) at 5 o'clock, which is a tad early for working people. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: MarkS Date: 11 Oct 00 - 07:03 PM Can't wait to hear Gore slam big tobacco from a forum in North Carolina. Winston-Salem no less! The more I see of him the more I am reminded of the kid in the 6th grade who used to run to the teacher to tell when somebody else had not done their book report. Go Ralph Go MarkS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Mrrzy Date: 11 Oct 00 - 07:21 PM I just heard Dumya (in a replayed stump speech on npr) saying that keeping families together keeps kids off drugs, which is a good thing, since later he says drugs cause families to fall apart... Am really looking forward to this, um, debate. Formalized one-two stump speeches again, I bet... Boy, I knew Bush wouldn't answer any questions, but I was really disappointed that Gore didn't either. At least the veeps did, after the very first one at least. What I'm really looking forward to is the townhallesque Round 3. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Mbo Date: 11 Oct 00 - 08:06 PM Father Tom said the Weather Channel is much more interesting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 11 Oct 00 - 08:14 PM Gore blimey, they're both daft as a bush! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny Date: 11 Oct 00 - 11:25 PM I'm for Gore but I don't think he did very well tonight. Spent a lot of time blaming Bush for everything that is wrong with Texas. What's wrong with Texas goes back before Bush was born. I couldn't care less about who voted for what in 1962 -- what I want to know is what is going to be done in the future. A lot of the time-wasting in these debates is the fault of Jim Lehrer and his choice of questions. I like JL on the News Hour, but I think the moderator of the VP debates was a lot better. WHAT IS HIS NAME - ANYBODY, PLEASE?? == Johnny in Oklahoma City |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lonesome EJ Date: 11 Oct 00 - 11:36 PM This was a bit better,although they both were trying so hard to be nice in the beginning that they sounded like they were running on the same ticket.About 1/3 of the way through it warmed up,and the two became more specific about their differences.I liked Gore's frankness about his environmental views,particularly Global Warming,which Bush indicated was worth looking at but is still theoretical.I also liked Gore's re-emphasis of a point he had won in the last debate...that genocide represents a threat to our national interest.He also had Bush sweating on the record of health care for children in Texas,when he said that the tax cuts had caused continued suffering,diverting the money to wealthy interests.Bush scored some points on his pragmatic view of foreign policy ("who are we to say people must govern themselves as we do?"),although I think Gore's idealistic approach is in closer agreement with mine. I don't,however,like Gore's adamant support of Hate Crimes Legislation,and I think Bush makes sense when he says that there is no greater crime than murder,and the law needs no contributing "hate" factors to make that crime more reprehensible. I liked George's Dad,and in much the same way,I find George W a likeable fellow.He's a "plain speaker". But I don't think he does a lot better with "the vision thing" than Senior did.He may be a very effective manager,but I find myself leaning farther toward Gore because I have more confidence in his world-view and leadership abilities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Carlin Date: 11 Oct 00 - 11:43 PM I think the moderator of the veep debate was Bernard Shaw.
I thought the thing tonight was pretty pathetic. I am likely voting for Bush, but I think Gore was certainly more coherent at times. Bush let a couple of good opportunities slip....(for instance the Marshall Plan spiel....Bush should have pointed out that when the Army of Occupation in Japan was called away from their 'nation building' duties to go fight a war in Korea they got mauled pretty badly. The equipment and training required for occupation duties are corrosive to combat readiness...). He allowed Gore to score a point or two he shouldn't have.
Gore on the other hand I thought was doing a lot of 'me too'ing when it came to domestic issues and oddly enough the environmental questions....he didn't duck fast enough to get out of the way of the Kyoto treaty.
I think the thing was a draw....I don't think either candidate turned in a good enough performance to be called a clear victor....It was like watching two boxers 'rope-a-dope'....I hate that.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: jofield Date: 11 Oct 00 - 11:52 PM Well, if Americans really make these decisions on the basis of who sighs or looks like he knows it all -- on body language as opposed to what actually is being said -- then I think Bush hurt himself tonight. Most of the time he *looked* hurt, ill at ease, or aggravated that he should have to submit to this questioning. He also snorted into his mike several times, not an association he needs to make at this point. As far as actual content, it was much closer, though Bush killed all three of the men convicted of the dragging murder in Texas, when in fact only one got the death sentence. In fact, his near glee at mentioning that three people would be put to death was not a good moment for him among undecided voters. Regardless of one's death-penalty views, it just didn't feel at all presidential. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Susan from California Date: 12 Oct 00 - 12:09 AM Am I the only one who thinks that every time the Governor sniffles it subliminaly reminds people that he used to abuse his nasal passages? You would think that after the whole "rats" thing he would be very careful :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lepus Rex Date: 12 Oct 00 - 12:17 AM Again, I still hate Gore, but he kicked Bush's 'humble' ass tonight. What a friggin' buffoon, Bush. He's lucky we have so many illiterate, sub-human, mullet-headed, Jerry-Springer-guest-dating, wife-beater-wearing, goat-raping NASCAR fans in this country---They're the only reason he's going to be our next Pres. Can't we give Texas to Mexico or something? Oh, but Bush REALLY impressed me with his mention of how he'd talk with the 'Israeli President' to help end the current violence in Palestine. As interesting as a chat with impotent figurehead Moshe Katsav might be, I bet he'd really rather talk with Prime Minister Ehud Barak... I hope he gets smallpox or something. Or maybe just leprosy. ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: katlaughing Date: 12 Oct 00 - 12:33 AM Rather than the lesser of two evils, I think we are being offered the dumbing down of America with Lowered Expectations. I was amazed to hear one commentator say, with a straight face, that Bush had done well because he made it through without any blunders. Makes me wonder if they all think this is just a dress rehearsal. I thought Bush did poorly with the usual simplistic fumbles and no guts to admit that Gore was right on the numbers in Texas. I know. I just researched it and did an editorial on it, yesterday. Instead of owning up to it, he looked like an aggravated bratty little kid. Gore wasn't much better. I was aggravated with him for not catching Bush on several points, esp. pointing out the fact that it was a Republican Congress which wasted the past 8 years in going after Clinton, rather than tend to the business of running the country. Something has to change in a fundemental way if this country is to get any better. At this rate, no one in their right mind would want to run for president, let alone any of other political positions. It costs too damn much money and there is no substance; the people who do run become cookie cutter products of polls, handlers, and the money that backs them. Some day I'd really like to see a woman's presidential campaign. Not that women aren't already a big part of the machinations. I just would like to believe there are enough fundemental differences in the way we think and do things that it could be different. No offense intended to any of you guys. katwhodoesn'tlikeloweringherexpectations! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Carlin Date: 12 Oct 00 - 12:41 AM Maggie Thatcher for Prez!!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lepus Rex Date: 12 Oct 00 - 12:42 AM I hope that old hag gets smallpox, too, Carlin. No,wait: I hope she gets trampled by Hunnish horsemen. >;) ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Carlin Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:00 AM "Oh, but Bush REALLY impressed me with his mention of how he'd talk with the 'Israeli President' to help end the current violence in Palestine. As interesting as a chat with impotent figurehead Moshe Katsav might be, I bet he'd really rather talk with Prime Minister Ehud Barak..."
I suppose he could have said something really brilliant...oh like the Russians are not going to help see to it that there is a peaceful transition of power in Serbia (see Algore in the first debate)......that this would be a flat contradiction of the publicly announced position of the US State Dept. wouldn't matter I guess....not to mention at the very moment that Gore was uttering those words the Russians, Germans, and French were turning the screws to get rid of old Slobo....
Either he was taking a chance on screwing up all the diplomatic efforts to get rid of the 'Butcher of the Balkans' to score a few debating points....or else he is so far out of the loop he hasn't a clue what is happening in the administration he is a member of.....not that it matters to the average liberal mouth-breather..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lepus Rex Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:32 AM OK, Carlin... But why'd ya quote me? ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Ebbie Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:37 AM Hey! This seems illogical and unfair to me and it's tiresome. If we are really so convinced that the US political system and candidates are so useless/bad/dumbed down as we say, then why are we surprised? I think we would all agree, given the current climate surrounding candidates and in-office public figures, that we can't expect good people to be interested. As kat intimated, no one in their right minds would currently run for high office. Maybe the solution is a STRIKE- a strike against the system; no voting until the campaign season is shortened dramatically- the only reason it's so long is because it used to take months to travel around the country-, until a cap is put on the amount that can be spent on a campaign, until the press backs off on the hounding of those in office and the wannabe's, (Come on, do we really believe that all was well in the oval office until during the last couple of administrations? Power, as they say, is an aphrodisiac, and there will always be those who take what they're being offered.) and until the National Enquirer gobble-uppers are starved out. We'll take to the streets, storm Washington, picket the press and spread the word: Don't Vote! We'll come up with a catchy slogan; the year 2000 will be known as the year it began to change... Unless we do something of the sort, we haven't much reason to complain. IMO. Ebbie Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: DougR Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:41 AM You know, McGrath of Harlow, I'm beginning to think that no candidate could satisfy you. We only have two realistic choices, pick the one that represents the closest to whatever you believe and go with it! Give up on the fact that neither party is going to choose you as their candidate! If you want it, start working to get the nomination the NEXT election. (said in as friendly a way as I can muster at this point). DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: catspaw49 Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:44 AM I think McGrath also suffers from the fact that he's English too Doug. That could slow down his chances quite a bit. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lepus Rex Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:46 AM Ebbie, that's not the solution. That's what people are doing NOW. The solution is in the 10 or so OTHER boxes you can fill out on the Presidential portion of your ballot. :) ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: DougR Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:52 AM I just read all the threads relating to the debate. I was not surprised to find that the posters who listened to the debate changed their opinion of each candidate not one whit. Mudcatters are not the target audience of these debates anyway. I would venture to guess that less than 1% of Mudcatters is undecided about who he/she will vote for in the election. Had Gore struck a induspitable victory, those "Catters" who back Bush wouldn't admit it. The same is true of Bush supporters. A hundred years from now it won't make a particle of difference to anyone who reads these threads. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: JamesJim Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:53 AM Indeed, both "gentlemen" looked and sounded very Presidential this evening. The only difference was,one was sincere and the other was still changing (for the umpteenth time). Wonder who I could be talking about? Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Carlin Date: 12 Oct 00 - 01:59 AM Perhaps I took it the wrong way.....
But I think the difference in the two gaffes is a good illustration of the two men....Bush said 'President of Israel' when he should have said Prime Minister. Gore on the other hand, didn't just fracture a syllable or get his titles confused....he told a flat out bald-faced lie (I find it hard to believe he was that uninformed).
Thrashing Bush for saying President instead of Prime Minister, is on the same level as the people who went after Gore for the story about his uncle. Gore didn't say "My uncle was gassed in the Balkans...."
He said 'WWI started in the Balkans.....my uncle was gassed there.....'
It seemed obvious to me that he meant his uncle was gassed during WWI and the Western Front popped into my mind as the most likely place....(Though there is a reporter in TN that has uncovered evidence to suggest that the guy wasn't even in the war....I don't know, I'll give Algore the benefit of the doubt)
What I'm trying to say is that everyone, Bush and Gore included, makes little slips here and there. If you are gonna play gotcha! it should be with big stuff....
Besides, Bush has Condoleeza Rice to tell him who are the Presidents and who are the Prime Ministers, and which one of them he needs to talk too.....she is a pretty sharp gal. She will be outstanding as the first African-American woman National Security Adviser...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: DougR Date: 12 Oct 00 - 02:17 AM Oops, Spaw! Overlooked the fact the McGrath was English. Right on, McGrath! Vote for whoever you like in the U. S. election. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lepus Rex Date: 12 Oct 00 - 02:21 AM I see, Carlin. But, like I said, I hate 'em both. But when Al Gore says something that's incorrect, I think he probably knows better. I respect a liar more than I respect an ignorant buffoon. Bush... He's like... some sort of dog or something, just sitting there licking his nuts, doing the tricks he's been trained to do. I mean, maybe he's not stupid to the point where he's disabled (I might vote for him then), but he's close. So he trained himself to pronounce 'Milosevic,' (though he still mispronounced it...), and he memorised a few 'big' words. Wow, a parrot can do that. And when Lehrer asked him if he agreed with the US response during various military conflicts, it was pretty obvious he remembered what maybe half of them were actually about. He just kept on saying 'Yes!' with this blank look in his eyes, until Lehrer took pity on him and stopped the questions. His 'Aw, shucks, folks! I'm just a simple country boy' act is a LOAD. Maybe if he'd have stayed off the coke during his youth, his brain might be in better condition today. And I think it's important for the President of our country to know who and what Ehud Barak is. I mean, I'm a high school drop out (OK, I was expelled...), and *I* know these things. Bush is the friggin' governor of TEXAS (maybe that explains it) and *HE* doesn't know these things, and *HE* wants to be Pres. If he were, say, applying for a job as a electrician, would you hire him if his only training was in acounting? He is a cretin, he is incompetent, and he is going to be our next President. Ah, well. Still voting for Nader. :) ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Carlin Date: 12 Oct 00 - 02:30 AM LOL!!!! As long as your not voting for Gore....(Nader is a fine man :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: DougR Date: 12 Oct 00 - 02:31 AM Lepus Rex, I think you are sincere. If you want to be the next governor of Texas, I'll contribute to your campaign. Texas needs a man with your vision I think. Particularly since they seem to be suffering so much under the leadership of George W. Bush! Texans need someone who can take Texas into the next millinium, someone who can build a bridge to the future, someone who can make all Texicans equal, rich, poor and MIDDLE CLASS alike. You the man, I do believe! **Grin** DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lepus Rex Date: 12 Oct 00 - 02:39 AM All right! I'll PM a P.O. Box for contributions. Never mind it's in Minnesota, I'll just 'pull a Cheney'. ;) ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: kendall Date: 12 Oct 00 - 08:35 AM "mouth breathing liberals?" I'd tread more carefully if I were you Carlin.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: kendall Date: 12 Oct 00 - 08:43 AM you and Doug are surrounded you know |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Carlin Date: 12 Oct 00 - 10:47 AM I apologize to all the mouth breathers....
BTW Kendall, when are you going to show up so we can discuss the combat readiness of the military? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: DougR Date: 12 Oct 00 - 11:44 AM The check is on the way, Lepus! Kendall, you know I don't mind being surrounded! I been surrounded for the past 18 months. Loving every minute of it! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Jim the Bart Date: 12 Oct 00 - 11:58 AM Happiness (in this case) is having a good reason to not watch these guys "debate". Rapture is when the reason you have is that you're busy mastering your first CD. I've said just about all I have to say about this election and have nothing more of value to add; neither do these two guys, apparently. Is there any way that we can get this election called off? Bart, who's all ranted out (for now) but who reserves the right to change his mind |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: KathWestra Date: 12 Oct 00 - 03:47 PM Jofield -- Glad you brought up the creepy expression on dubya's face when he talked about killing Mr. Byrd's killers. He had this sly, smirky-smug expression that gave me the absolute creeps, but until you, nobody else had mentioned it. K. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: catspaw49 Date: 12 Oct 00 - 04:14 PM Yeah Kath and jo......that one got me too. I am amazed watching the post debate coverage that people were now more trusting of Bush. Someone said they liked him saying he "would" rather than Gore saying he would "try." The Bush team pulled off a real coup in getting everyone to believe that he was lousy and no match for Gore in the debate format. Now it seems that anything approaching mediocre is scored as a great victory for the gawddamn shrub. He completely fumbled the whole thing on both education and health care and yet NO ONE, even the supposed "liberal" press scored that against him. KATH.....I had a note from Sandy this AM and I know he feels about the same as I do. I think his last line summed it up best.........I fear we're toast..........yeah......pass the butter please. I'm not willing to give in yet and I'll do what I can on my tiny local level, but we all need to be looking at the composition and makeup of the Senate Judiciary Committee and getting their addresses ready for use. What the hell....Its been almost 30 years since I was arrested in a demonstration in DC. Maybe the foods better now. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: captroy Date: 12 Oct 00 - 05:45 PM Molly Ivins has a great article today............. http://www.star-telegram.com/columnist/ivins2.htm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: DougR Date: 12 Oct 00 - 06:00 PM Spaw! Were you among the ten thousand herded into Robert F. Kennedy Stadium that fatefull day the protesters vowed to shut down the government? About 1972? I walked from Georgetown through all that stuff (cars over turned and burned, etc.) to my office. Had I known you were there, I would have tried to get you bailed out. Sorry for the creep. You guys shouldn't give up yet! I still think Gore is gonna pull it off. Be not discouraged! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: katlaughing Date: 12 Oct 00 - 06:26 PM Jofield, Kath and Spaw, that look of smug glee creeped Rog and me, both, out. Anybody else think he looks kind of like death warmed over, himself? I mean he looks grey to me and I say that in all serious, as someone who has worked in the health profession. His colour just doesn't look healthy to me. We can't be toast, yet! The toaster burnt out and we've no more bread! Aaaarrrrggggghhh...let's see how they do when real people get to grill them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Lepus Rex Date: 12 Oct 00 - 06:39 PM Maybe I've been all wrong. Maybe Bush IS qualified, after all. I mean, almost every President has been a sociopathic murderer, ordering killings for his own political gain. That sadistic, reptilian grin Bush gets on his 'face' when talking about murdering prisoners puts him in good company, then, eh? >:) ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: kendall Date: 12 Oct 00 - 06:45 PM What do you mean, when am I going to show up to discuss the readiness of the military? If you are willing to believe one republican (Bush) why not another? (Cohen) Bush says he would only use the military in cases of our national interest, ok, then why does he want to "Build it up" more than it is now? The joint chiefs and the secretary of defense say it is fully armed and ready. This same old crap was used when Kennedy was running, claiming the military was in poor shape, then, years later, we find out the truth. It was bullshit! Naturally, the bullet makers love a bloated military. Do you remember a few years ago when the Prime Minister of New Zealand refused to allow a US nuclear powered aircraft carrier to enter their waters? A woman who was interviewed said something very true.."Enemies are expensive," And God knows we have made plenty of them |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Carlin Date: 12 Oct 00 - 08:12 PM Okie Dokie....what do you think we need to meet our military commitments around the world?
And if you don't believe one Republican, why do you believe the other?
You are aware that the Army itself says that three of its divisions are unfit for combat?
Kennedy and the military...yes, Ike's Army was quite capable. The problem was that it was built around what was known as a 'pentonic' division. This was a unit that was about half the strength of a WW2 division. The idea was you could park it somewhere to defend a given area, but it was too small for an enemy (the Soviets) to waste a tactical nuke on. Any force sent against it large enough to defeat it on the other hand, would be a prime target (it takes a three to one superiority to give a reasonable chance of victory when attacking an entrenched enemy...four to one is better...). In other words, Ike's Army was set up to ensure an immediate escalation to nuclear war....mutually assured destruction on a hair trigger. This was regarded as a very bad idea....especially by those in the military. Maybe you are comfortable with it though.....
I am sure if there was some direct immediate threat to New Zealand, the first thing their PM would do is get on the horn and start begging for a carrier or two...it is amazing how quickly a little danger can focus the mind.
We do tend to make enemies....particularly when we go around bombing aspirin factories and refugee camps to keep our president's poll numbers up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: kendall Date: 12 Oct 00 - 08:45 PM and do you forget that The Actor bombed Kaddafees child? was that ok? You sound like you are part of that military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about. Now you wanna tell us how you know so much about the rediness of the military? As far as believing Cohen over Bush, Cohen is THERE! furthermore, he is from Maine, and I know him to be an honest man. And last, but not least, I dont know of my own knowledge who is bullshitting us, Cohen and the Joint chiefs, or Dumya. How do YOU know? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: DougR Date: 12 Oct 00 - 10:55 PM kat! You surprise me. One who didn't know the real kat might take your remarks about healthcare workers as being derogative. If there is anyone on the Mudcat who has established a reputation for championing public correctness, I would say it is you! Not chiding you, just surprised! Love ya' DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Carlin Date: 13 Oct 00 - 12:29 AM Kendall, I come from a very large family. At last count we had 1 Airforce Colonel, 1 Navy Captain and 2 LT. Commanders, a Marine Captain, 5 NCO's in the Army, an Airforce Tech Sargeant, and 1 Lance Corporal (these are all cousins btw...).
I have friends scattered throughout the services. You know something...THEY ARE ALL THERE! They aren't sitting in an office in Washington, unlike a certain Republican from Maine. And there ain't a one of 'em running for office.
These are the people on the ground that know how well they are being supplied (did you know that half of the f-14's are being cannibalized to keep the other half flying), and know what kind of training they are getting, and what the morale is like. Any one with any interest at all in the military can find hundreds of reports, both official and unofficial, on the state of the military.
I understand that you may find all things relating to the military distasteful, but you don't have to look or dig real hard to find out what is going on. You won't get dirty......
PS. Typo in the last post...should read 'pentomic', not 'pentonic'.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: katlaughing Date: 13 Oct 00 - 12:50 AM DougeR, darlin', I am awful slow tonight, sweetie-pie, could ya'll tell me what you are referring to? All I can find that I said was I used to work in health care and thought Bush's colour looked terrible. Sorry, I really am ahem *bushed* tonight!*bg* luvyakatwhodoesclaimtobeethicallyconscious |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Barbara Date: 13 Oct 00 - 12:54 AM A friend sent me this, from last Sunday's Liberty Meadows comic strip. The character is watching a political ad on TV. The words say,
"The future of Americans in your hand!
Blessings,
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 2 From: Jim the Bart Date: 13 Oct 00 - 01:07 AM I'm trying to understand what I need to believe to be a Republicans. I'm thinking of converting. Let's see if I've got this straight. We believe in the right to life. We believe in the death penalty We believe everybody should be able to own as many guns of any type that they want. We believe that the way to improve how we teach our children is to create better tests to tell us how much they know We don't believe that you can fix what's wrong with the schools by "throwing money at the problem". We believe that the best way to fix the military is to give it more money. We don't believe society should interfere with the way you run your business. We believe society has a responsibility to tell you how you should conduct your private life. We believe that competition in the market requires a level playing field for all businesses. We believe that the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the richest 5% of the population should not be infringed upon. I'm sure I've missed a few. Come on, people, help me out. . . |