On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:03:09 GMT, "Tom Donaly"
wrote:

Once a nation gets as mighty as
ours, it seems to get power-drunk therefrom and blows all its resources
on controlling the world. The next four years should be interesting, but
painful, no matter who controls the White House.

Hi Tom,

I agree, and that is why I said it was going to take YEARS and not one
day. We live in a decadent society that has lost all proportion of
integrity, commitment, and service. When one party rails against a
dope smoking president to offer us a crack smoking president; then you
know their (plural) system has all the morality of Sodom.

Well, I've finished my rounds for this cycle of registration/voting.
It's time to move on to my next project in starting another non-profit
(my buddies chuckle that I can now lose MORE money legally).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:23:57 -0800, "Ed Price"
wrote:
Usually, your types put the administration in the impossible position of
trying to prove a negative
Consistent in that they couldn't prove a positive either.
As Philip Gold offered: "Screw Up, Move On."

Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:03:09 GMT, "Tom Donaly"
wrote:


Once a nation gets as mighty as
ours, it seems to get power-drunk therefrom and blows all its resources
on controlling the world. The next four years should be interesting, but
painful, no matter who controls the White House.


Hi Tom,

I agree, and that is why I said it was going to take YEARS and not one
day. We live in a decadent society that has lost all proportion of
integrity, commitment, and service. When one party rails against a
dope smoking president to offer us a crack smoking president; then you
know their (plural) system has all the morality of Sodom.

Well, I've finished my rounds for this cycle of registration/voting.
It's time to move on to my next project in starting another non-profit
(my buddies chuckle that I can now lose MORE money legally).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Hi Richard,
good luck with your non-profit. Around here, selfishness,
unbridled acquisitiveness, social paranoia, and soul-deforming greed,
are all considered to be the real manifestations of morality. I hope
the American people will stop shooting each other in the back and
learn to get along some day.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

"chuck" wrote in message
news:C8vhd.88148$kz3.43033@fed1read02...

"Ed Price" wrote in message
news:2wlhd.87747$kz3.12494@fed1read02...

"Chuck" wrote in message
news:sQehd.3217$GN4.1349@okepread02...

Ed Price wrote in message
news:qZdhd.87705$kz3.49376@fed1read02...

"Chuck" wrote in message
news:%zbhd.3210$GN4.3006@okepread02...
Yes, Saddam was a first-class jerk and two-
bit tyrant, but was not an immediate threat to
America - he lost 2 wars and was sanctioned
by the UN - his army was left impotent, his
major weapons were destroyed after the gulf
war, his WMD programs were in shambles,
...
GWB is a war criminal - too bad you support
a real war criminal - and that's not spin.

Indeed Chuck, that's not spin. I'd call you an honest, straightforward
propagandist; what we used to simply refer to as a liar.

You mean like the debunked Swiftboat vets for Bush

Your judgement only. Odd, the only time Kerry managed anything, he left
with
270-some "employees" ****ed at him; and they still are, 35 years later.

Perhaps I give greater credibility to the folks
who served with Kerry in this regard, than
the vile rhetoric of folks with an un-American
religious/political agenda. Kerry was not alone
in his distain for that war, but the hawks who
opposed his position then, are still carrying a
grudge now - after all these years - that's both
obsessive and perverted IMO!

When a President has more loyalty to his
mega-corporate cronies and the looney
megalomaniac Pat Robertson, than he has
for the common folk, he does not deserve
to hold the office.

Chuck



Some things can be forgiven, some can be forgotten. But how can you savage
the opinion of 270-some veterans with a judgement of "obsessive and
perverted"? Of course, their feelings are being used for political influence
(remember Kerry saying he was "reporting and ready for duty"). But you are
way out of line to judge their memories.

I suppose your close really says it all; you say the candidate is loyal to
"mega-corporate cronies" and "loonies". Ahhhh, I'm dealing with the Almighty
Chuck, the mortal who can discern cronies from friends and who can define
the Common Folk. Yep, that answers everything.

Ed
wb6wsn

Randy,

I value and believe in my emotions.

Now what should I do?

Seriously, "informed decision making" is a personal action that of
necessity includes the context of an individual's emotions. What is
informed for you may be just plain stupid for me, and vice versa. How
could one ever completely separate "informed" decisions from emotions?

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Theplanters95 wrote:


Go vote on Tuesday. Vote your values and beliefs. Remember that your vote
last 4 years. I am afraid many people are going to vote out of emotions,
rather than informed decision making.

"Ed Price" wrote in message
news:afPhd.88762$kz3.24282@fed1read02...

"chuck" wrote in message
news:C8vhd.88148$kz3.43033@fed1read02...

"Ed Price" wrote in message
news:2wlhd.87747$kz3.12494@fed1read02...

"Chuck" wrote in message
news:sQehd.3217$GN4.1349@okepread02...

Ed Price wrote in message
news:qZdhd.87705$kz3.49376@fed1read02...

"Chuck" wrote in message
news:%zbhd.3210$GN4.3006@okepread02...
Yes, Saddam was a first-class jerk and two-
bit tyrant, but was not an immediate threat to
America - he lost 2 wars and was sanctioned
by the UN - his army was left impotent, his
major weapons were destroyed after the gulf
war, his WMD programs were in shambles,
...
GWB is a war criminal - too bad you support
a real war criminal - and that's not spin.

Indeed Chuck, that's not spin. I'd call you an honest,
straightforward
propagandist; what we used to simply refer to as a liar.

You mean like the debunked Swiftboat vets for Bush

Your judgement only. Odd, the only time Kerry managed anything, he left
with
270-some "employees" ****ed at him; and they still are, 35 years later.

Perhaps I give greater credibility to the folks
who served with Kerry in this regard, than
the vile rhetoric of folks with an un-American
religious/political agenda. Kerry was not alone
in his distain for that war, but the hawks who
opposed his position then, are still carrying a
grudge now - after all these years - that's both
obsessive and perverted IMO!

When a President has more loyalty to his
mega-corporate cronies and the looney
megalomaniac Pat Robertson, than he has
for the common folk, he does not deserve
to hold the office.

Chuck



Some things can be forgiven, some can be forgotten. But how can you savage
the opinion of 270-some veterans with a judgement of "obsessive and
perverted"? Of course, their feelings are being used for political
influence
(remember Kerry saying he was "reporting and ready for duty"). But you are
way out of line to judge their memories.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Ed,

Out of line? ROTFLMAO!

One cannot give credence to a piddly few
malcontents (270 out of millions) who have
an agenda - mainly that of the Christian
Coaliton. In contrast, the folks who served
with Kerry, have an entirely different story to
tell - a credible one!


I suppose your close really says it all; you say the candidate is loyal to
"mega-corporate cronies" and "loonies". Ahhhh, I'm dealing with the
Almighty
Chuck, the mortal who can discern cronies from friends and who can define
the Common Folk. Yep, that answers everything.

It is common knowledge that the
Republican party is traditionally aligned
to the rich and powerful, which includes
mega-corporate interests - "no bid"
Halliburton included - only a fool would
refute this.

As far as loonies, I've named only one:
the one who's agenda is to "replace the
constitution with the 10 commandments"
and to "Disenfranchize all liberals".

Rather than offer a credible retort, you
attempt to demean my position.
Intellectual honesty isn't one of your
strong points, I see.

Chuck

Ed
wb6wsn

Theplanters95 wrote:
The Bible tells us to pray for our leaders. We need to pray for our leaders
from the local elections all the way to the national. And please, no Bible or
Christian bashing :-)

If anyone ever furnishes proof that there is someone listening
to those prayers, I will join in.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On 01 Nov 2004 04:47:54 GMT, ospam
(Theplanters95) wrote:


The Bible tells us to pray for our leaders. We need to pray for our leaders
from the local elections all the way to the national. And please, no Bible or
Christian bashing :-)

Randy ka4nma

But several of your past presidents and famous men were agnostics, if
not atheists ... eg George Washington. Why pray for those who dont
believe in the power of prayer ( like me!)

Hi, Cecil:

Worldlings have made that challenge since time immemorial.

The someone listening is the author of prayer. Join in now, by praying for
the grace of faith, just in case your position of apparent unbelief turns
out to be the wrong one for all eternity.

73, Dave, N3HE

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Theplanters95 wrote:
The Bible tells us to pray for our leaders. We need to pray for our
leaders
from the local elections all the way to the national. And please, no
Bible or
Christian bashing :-)

If anyone ever furnishes proof that there is someone listening
to those prayers, I will join in.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:15:12 GMT, "NN7KexNOSPAMk7zfg"
wrote:

And, as WE WERE ATTACKED ON 9/11, we were as justified in retaliating
as in ANY period of time in the history of the Republic--

You were not attacked by Saddam Hussein on 9/11 so why attack him?