BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Wesley S
Date: 06 Feb 08 - 01:39 PM

It looks like I'm wrong:

Amendment XXII:

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states within seven years from the date of its submission to the states by the Congress.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Peace
Date: 06 Feb 08 - 01:28 PM

Two consecutive terms. However, in the following scenario, a person coude be president for 11.99 years, The VP--call her Suzette Labounce--is in the first day of her VPdom. The pres dies from whatever on day one. Suzette serves the pres's term out then runs for election and wins, then wins again.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Feb 08 - 01:24 PM

I haven't checked the language itself but it's my understanding that a president cannot serve more than two terms, so if s/he were vice president when the president died or was removed from office, s/he could not be elevated to president.

On the other hand, what about when a vice president finishes out a president's term- s/he is still legally able to subsequently serve out two full terms of his or her own. Guess I'd better check out the language.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Wesley S
Date: 06 Feb 08 - 10:56 AM

I think he's only limited to how many times he can run as President. Being apointed would be something different alltogether. As improbable as the rumor is - I think that legally it's possible. But don't hold your breath.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Feb 08 - 10:42 AM

Yeah, Bill would be precluded from running as VP by the term limit amendment.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Wesley S
Date: 06 Feb 08 - 10:21 AM

Someone here at work got an interesting rumor. Supposedly Hillary will appoint Bill Clinton as her Vice-President. Then she will resign the day after she takes office so Bill can be President again. Then she can always run again later.

That has to be one of the silliest things I've ever heard.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 18 Jan 08 - 06:01 PM

Dirty Tricks?

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Mr Red
Date: 18 Jan 08 - 03:16 AM

Just thought - has a name for this kind of snear campaign (I meant smear but it stands as is) become common? how about marg (as in margerine - spreading thinly)?

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Mr Red
Date: 18 Jan 08 - 03:14 AM

Haven't seen this kind of stuff in the UK but I never forward, no matter how heart-rending the story, and I would remove all traces of other peoples' e-mail if it ever got to the point of necessity.
Religion is only the start for political round robins - as we become jaundiced to the tactic it will evolve.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Wesley S
Date: 17 Jan 08 - 01:36 PM

A smear campain agaist Senator John McCain has been reported. Amazing stuff.

Story Link Here

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Wesley S
Date: 09 Jan 08 - 09:19 AM

For the life of me I don't recall seeing any e-mailed rumors about conservatives. I would assume there must be some out there but they never seem to make it to my computer.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: kendall
Date: 09 Jan 08 - 08:56 AM

I have, or have had half a dozen people who love to send this crap just because they hate democrats.They will believe anything bad about a democrat, and anything good about a republican.
Two of them got so bad I simply had to tell them to fuck off. Even the one I have known for 8 years. She was like a Pit bull and in spite of my asking, pleading, demanding that she stop, she just couldn't do it. Who needs that anyway? It got to where I hated to open their e mails.
So, they are both history.
The odd thing is, they claim to be Christians, yet they delight in spreading lies. I told them to read the commandment about bearing false witness, but they only got defensive.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Rapparee
Date: 08 Jan 08 - 03:36 PM

It's not new, it's just a faster way of getting the stuff out:

"Ma, Ma, where's my Pa?" was the chant about Grover Cleveland, who paid child support to Maria Halpin for an illegitimate child of whom he may or may not have been the father.

Andrew Jackson's marriage to Rachel Robards was a factor in the campaign of 1828, because her divorce wasn't finalized until two years after she married Andrew -- and Andrew fought 13 duels, killing one man, ostensibly over slurs to her honor.

And of course the Jefferson-Hemings possible affair.

To mention but a very few....

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Wesley S
Date: 08 Jan 08 - 01:49 PM

Getting back to what responses I received after I e-mailed dozens of people about the outright lies in the e-mail I was sent. I got two. One was from a lady who said - yes - it's a pack of lies. Thanks. The other was from the friend that sent me the story in the first place. His response was that he had seen it so many times before that he had just assumed that it was true. Grrr... Now one of the scary things to me is that my friend works for a major network TV station. Thank goodness he isn't anywhere near the editorial department. He a technical guy who routes feeds from the network and cables. But still - I would have hoped that he would have had a more decerning eye for crap like this.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jan 08 - 12:35 PM

THese are the sort of trance-state citizens whose thinking processes have been disabled through one overwhelm or another and are thence reduced to reacting to whoever screams in their ear with the most alarming information, or catches their eye with the most upsetting images.

THey need long vacations in safe surroundings with no news media present.


MEanwhile, rebut and reject.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: SINSULL
Date: 08 Jan 08 - 10:23 AM

I have one relative and one older friend who constantly send me stuff like this. I did get the Obama message, checked it out in Snopes and emailed them that it was a lie. I have done the same regarding poisonous pin pricks, missing girls abducted in McDonald's drive throughs and lord only knows what else. But the two of them still send on every piece of junk that comes their way either to inform, warn or protect me. Now I just delete it all unread.They are older and mean well."I read it in the paper so it must be true" mentality.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: GUEST,Seiri Omaar
Date: 08 Jan 08 - 09:56 AM

Really? Hahaha... glad I use Yahoo free mail. I hardly get anything at all from them, and I've had my account for 10 years or so.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 08 Jan 08 - 06:50 AM

With most ISPs that let you use anything other than web email, there are simple ways to set up "mail sorting" and/or mutliple addresses.

With our DSL AT&T/Yahoo your "primary account" can apparently only connect to web email (we didn't work too hard at checking this out).

You can, however, create up to ten "subaccounts" each of which can have a separate email address and can use OE or Outlook or, presumedly, any other email program you want. (You actually can have more subaccounts, but only ten at a time can be "active.")

When you set up a new subaccount with new email address, you can tell AT&T/Yahoo what old email address to "merge" with the account, and they will magically arrange to have mail addressed to the old account AND mail addressed to the new one all appear in the same OE window.

If the old account was a "real email" like LiK's MSN account, they'll both come into the same Local Computer In Box. Since my old Hotmail email is a bootstrap/juryrig/phony simulation of actual email, it comes into a separate Hotmail In Box while new stuff comes into the normal Local Machine In Box; but they're both visible, at the same time, in the same OE window.

(Note that email in a Hotmail In Box (in OE) is only downloaded to temporary file space. If you want it stored on your own machine, you need to move it to a folder in the Local Machine space.)

AT&T/Yahoo suggests allowing 30 days for people to be informed of your new address, after which they will email you the phone number you need to call to cancel the old account/address, since hardly any old accounts you might have will accept "second-party" notice to close.

(With "free" Hotmail, you don't actually have to call them, since if you click on any "Don't send me any more Hotmail Advertisements" box in any of their frequent SPAMS it AUTOMATICALLY AND INSTANTLY TERMINATES your free Hotmail email account.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Jan 08 - 06:04 AM

In Outlook you can open a new pst and keep the old one to flip back to.

I think I ahcve seen programs designed to enable you to keep separate stores of emails allocated by for example sender, designed to work with Outlook Express, but not Outlook.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 08 Jan 08 - 02:56 AM

Our most prolific offender happens to be a "Mrs Preacherman" (very fundie) who worked with Lin years ago, and most of the forwards are "good for your spirit" type stuff with lots of puppies and kitties and fabricated morality-tales-guaranteed-to-be-true, although there's an occasional political witchhunt tossed in - ALWAYS confirmably a false smear. (Lin will not permit me to send any answers to this "friend" and usually "deletes-on-receipt" anything that might make me mad enough to be tempted. I know that there have been several, that I have seen, but don't know how many she's dumped.)

Lin gets a lot of email and enough of it is "business related" that I try to make regular backups. She recently exceeded CD capacity for her OE folder, with around 230 "correspondents," so I had to look at what was in it, export the whole .dbx, delete "something big" and back up, import the whole .dbx and delete a different "something big" to backup, to get overlapping backups split between two CDs. (Then of course reimport the whole .dbx and beat her with a stick to get her to clean up some of it.) She had 828 messages from this one person - although they did go back about 3 years and perhaps a dozen or two actually contained some sort of personally composed message of interest.

All I get is advertisements from computer guys and SPAM from some French-Speaking Canadian(?) clothing syndicate. The French stuff might have some good bargains, but since I don't speak the language I can't tell if they have my size; but I can tell that they have lots of "special offers." (They use too many different addresses to block them all.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 07:43 PM

A certain friend of my wife's used to regularly send her emailed jokes, cartoons, clever and/or sentimental sayings, etc. There was such sheer volume of stuff coming from this person that it got to be rather tiresome. My wife would usually delete it without reading it.

Finally she had a conversation with this friend, and learned that the friend was on several mailing lists herself, and often forwarded stuff without reading it! Can you imagine?

I wonder if that kind of thing goes on with political stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Sorcha
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 07:36 PM

Nice of you John. I try to do the same. Mr has an cousin who sends me this crap. I finally got fed up with her and just blocked her addy.

Of course she never admitted she was flim flammed and just kept sending MORE crap. No idea what she thought when a mail to me bounced. Don't care much either.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 07:22 PM

In the rare instance where I've felt inclined to send to all of the people CCd in an original blatherbit, I have always made it a point to append the comment that:

"Your email address was provided to me, and possibly to every spammer on the network, by the message I received from your friend <<<name of sender>>>. Please suggest to your friend that basic email courtesy does not permit revealing the email addresses of others by such broadcast mailings."

(My mailing, of course, moved all the addresses to the BCC box, as is proper, so they each thought they'd received an individual message.)

It doesn't do much good, although in one case the original sender did comment about receiving "some feedback" about the mailing list. That particular spammer did NOT change her habit of sending the same kind of stuff in the same way, although she seems to have moved our addy to a "more selective list" so that we get a bit less of it from her.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Rapparee
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 05:39 PM

Right on, Tom.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: topical tom
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 05:37 PM

Who cares what the candidate's religion is? The only questions that count are "What are his declared policies?" and "What is his record?"

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 05:36 PM

All rubbish - just so long as he isn't a raving mormon!

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Rapparee
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 05:35 PM

It requires thinking, and that's much harder work than most people (worldwide, not just in the US) care to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 05:34 PM

Surely not McGrath. The purpose of the 11th September attach was twofold. It was surely to show the USA that it could not deploy its military might with total impunity - that its victims could hit back. It was also surely an attack on the front-line troops of the economic colonialists who would destroy cultures in search of profit.

But to return to the topic, yes, I have several friends who regularly send me commonplace internet hoaxes, no doubt in the utmost good faith. These warnings usually sound just a bit off key, and a quick google usually proves they are hoaxes. Then I send usually to the person who sent to me - sometimes to all the people ccd on the send to me, the disproof.

Over the last 3 years or more I have had I think one person say "Oops, thanks". I have had more than that say "well I got it from a reliable source"!.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 05:26 PM

The irony is that a central goal of the people they would claim to be against - Al Qaeda and co - is to achieve this kind of hatred and division. That was what 911 was centrally about. And it feels as if pretty well everything our governments have done since, at home or abroad, could have been designed to help in achieving that goal.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: CarolC
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 05:11 PM

There's always a reason, isn't there, Amos? This sort of thing can be avoided if things are handled properly by the government and the media. But as we have so amply seen, they are the ones stoking the flames of this ugly brand of hatred. That's very sad and also shameful, but what's even more so is the fact that so many of the people in this country are so eager and quick to jump on board.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 05:11 PM

I left the office not long after I made this thread -we'll see.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Amos
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 04:33 PM

CarolC:

While it is sad, it is not unexpected. COnsider how people in small town America and the military felt about Nips and Krauts (sorry for the politically incorrect terms) in 1940. They ostracized people who had been living and working alongside of them for years and were American citizens because they had a name that MIGHT have sounded German. Even if it turned out to be Slav or AUstrian.

War does that to people's minds. So does overwhelming personal stress. It makes them collapse things together that should be differentiated. The lizard brain rides again.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 04:28 PM

Wesley, I respect your efforts, but I would be interested in knowing whether any of the people who sent out the original email (1) reply to you by apologizing for the error and thanking you for setting them straight; or (2) forward your information to the people they originally sent the lying message to.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but I'm a pessimist about this sort of thing.

"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes."

Mark Twain said that, or something like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Kim C
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 04:17 PM

I just wish people would check those things out themselves before they send them on to others. My own mother is one of the worst offenders.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Peace
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 04:14 PM

Good work, Wesley.

They are 'smearing' the guy I hope is the next POTUS.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: CarolC
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 03:06 PM

Pretty sad that it's considered a smear to call someone a Muslim, though, eh?

I have a good friend who is a Sufi Muslim and all of her family are Muslims of one sort of another. She's one of the most kind and loving people I know, and she just can't believe that people would be that way in this country. Last time I talked with her in person, she actually cried because her image of the goodness of people in this country is being challenged by things like this. It's a shame. :-/

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 02:14 PM

Even if it was true ... who cares what religion a candidate is.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 02:08 PM

None of my friends would dare send me that kind of crap. They know I'd never speak to them again.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Amos
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 01:48 PM

WHen a good person is being smeared I respond as you did Wesley. And thanks for doing so.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: artbrooks
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 01:29 PM

Well, we only have two people who regularly send out blanket e-mails and generously include us. One is my bro-in-law, who is generally too intelligent to send out misinformation (he did mess up with the "Starbucks hates soldiers" urban legend). The other sends out so much crap as "fw:fw:fw:" mail that I generally delete her messages without opening them. So, I guess we don't fit into either of your categories.

Subject: BS: Politics -Responding to e-mail rumors
From: Wesley S
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 12:33 PM

This morning a friend of mine sent me an e-mail telling me that Barack Obama is a Muslim. The difference this time was that the e-mail said that the information had been checked out at Snopes.com and that it was "all true". I knew it wasn't so I proceeded to send it back with a link to the actual Snopes.com entry showing that it was a lie. And to back it up I sent along a link to truthorfiction.com's entry saying the same thing. After that I proceeded to send those links to everyone else that had received the e-mail since it had been forwarded four different times. I'm guessing I've sent the links to over 100 people by now.

I get sick and tired of these e-mail smear campaigns. They're cheaper than TV attack ads and just as effective. I plan to respond the same way to future e-mails of this sort. I notice I never seem to get notified that a Republican is a conservative. They always seem to be directed at Liberals.Do you tend to ignore these e-mails or respond to them?