On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Blue State Liberal wrote:
In her continuing move to the right, U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton today
stated on the floor of the Senate that there is far too much filth and
family unfriendly programming on American TV. A few minutes later,
in what seemed an odd remark to make, Senator Clinton stated were
it her decision, the FCC should have been dismantled and shut down
years ago.

Like her words mean anything. Had she been present in her marriage when she
was "First Lady" (if she could ever be called a lady; dyke is more like it),
then that filth of a husband she has wouldn't have caused disrespect to this
country or its highest office. Hypocritical bitch.

wrote in message
ups.com...
snip
The fact is that in every election there are several groups:

1) Those who will vote Republican no matter what
2) Those who will vote Democrat no matter what
3) Those who won't vote, or will vote for a 3rd party candidate
with absolutely no real chance of winning, no matter what
4) Those who are truly independent, and who may vote Democrat,
Republican, 3rd party, or not at all, depending on a wide variety of
factors, and whose votes really can decide an election.

Successful campaigning is all about identifying the 4th group, and
getting them to vote for your candidate.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Hello, Jim

I used to try and look at the candidates, but what the current
administration is doing and setting us up for - I will, unfortunately, be
voting straight Democrat until things are a bit more balanced.

I know that sounds stupid, but when I found out that a co-worker was in
Desert Storm and has a 10% service connected disability ... and can *not*
get VA care ...(yep, even with an honorable discharge, you must serve at
least 2 years now to be treated for anything other than the service
connected disability).

Being a Vietnam veteran and seeing the changes at the VA, I honestly do
*not* believe the Republicans support the troops. They wave the flag and
make speeches (even visit the troops), but then forget them.

I couldn't believe they were going to attack the AARP as having a "gay"
agenda! The big deal is that they have dug a huge monetary pit and don't
want to repay the "borrowed" funds from Social Security. You think Hillary
Clinton or Martha Stewart are/were crooks?

So, unless the Republicans can come up with a candidate with something on
their mind other than big money, I have to vote something else. 3rd party
won't cut it as has been proven in the past.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

Hillary in 2008 !

And if Condilesa(sp) Rice runs on the Republican ticket....

How about a swimsuit debate........ ;-)
On second thought, maybe not....

She has no power so it doesn't matter what she said about the FCC, She
ought to look at bill before talking about filth and family values.
Ken N8CGY


Vs someone who lied about weapons of mass destruction?

You know when there's a problem when politicians talk
about "family values", "school prayer", and similar
distractions instead of the important stuff like the
economy and Iraq. Hiding behind the flag or the Bible
is not a good way to run the country.

Over the last 50 years I've seen no significant change
in the moral or family values in the USA. We've been
"going to hell in a handbasket" for so long we should
have gotten to hell a long time ago.

Forget that her husband was one of the most prolific pathological
liars in the White House in over 200 years and she helped him. (No
wonder folks like Lennie Anderson and Brian Burke don't think twice
about doing it...Clinton set the trend...)

Nowheres near as bad as Nixon. Nixon rigged a presidential election,
which is a hell of a lot more serious than Clinton getting
sex in the Oval Office.

Forget that she still has never satisfactorially answered the
questions about her real estate dealings. Heck no! Martha Stewart
went to jail for 6 months just becasue she acted on a stock tip, yet
Hillary won't pay so mauch as attention.

A trivial matter compared to what Nixon did. They didn't
find anything more evil than what normally goes on in
the business world anyway.

Forget that Hillary was responsible for STEALING real property
from the White House as she and Billary were on thier way out the door
in 2000. "Oh...that's not ours? Well...I guess we'll put it back..."
Dodged ayet another bullet.

Big Whoop.


Forget that she facilitated (or at least tolerated) her husband's
philanderings all-the-while promoting herself as the champion of
women's rights and equal opportunity.

As Billary's "Health Care Advocate" in 90's, she didn't do a
single worthy thing. She and Bill brandished a "health care card" at
his first "State of the Union" address, but that was the end of it.
Health care benefits for the uninsured, under-insured, the aged and
catastrophically ill or infirmed are threadbare, to say the least.
They didn't horsetrade well enough like a skillful politician....

But they did reform Welfare, something the Republicans wanted
to do but never did themselves.

But, unfortunatley, people will still vote for her...Again, just
because she wears a skirt.

Better her than some Republican... :-)

I had occasion to meet and chat with Reed Hundt a few times. There
is no doubt in my mind the man did not know his proverbial ass
from a hole in the ground when it came to functioning as head of the
FCC. Incompetent comes to mind, but that is far too polite to describe
the man. However, he was well-connected, which once again proves
it is not what you know but WHO you know (the Clintons).


You seriously think that they'd select someone who actually
understands the physics of radio in charge of the FCC? Get
real....

JAMES HAMPTON wrote:

wrote in message
ups.com...
snip

The fact is that in every election there are several groups:

1) Those who will vote Republican no matter what
2) Those who will vote Democrat no matter what
3) Those who won't vote, or will vote for a 3rd party candidate
with absolutely no real chance of winning, no matter what
4) Those who are truly independent, and who may vote Democrat,
Republican, 3rd party, or not at all, depending on a wide variety of
factors, and whose votes really can decide an election.

Successful campaigning is all about identifying the 4th group, and
getting them to vote for your candidate.

Sometimes that means using crap like "family values" to
get the dumb ones to vote for the guy that will do for
them a worse job.



I used to try and look at the candidates, but what the current
administration is doing and setting us up for - I will, unfortunately, be
voting straight Democrat until things are a bit more balanced.



I couldn't believe they were going to attack the AARP as having a "gay"
agenda! The big deal is that they have dug a huge monetary pit and don't
want to repay the "borrowed" funds from Social Security. You think Hillary
Clinton or Martha Stewart are/were crooks?

All they have to do is increase the threshold where you stop paying
"FICA" from your paychecks. Oh wait, that's taxing the rich, can't
have that....

So, unless the Republicans can come up with a candidate with something on
their mind other than big money, I have to vote something else. 3rd party
won't cut it as has been proven in the past.

Voting 3rd party is like giving it to the Republicans, so I won't
vote 3rd party.

Last year nobody in these newsgroups could give me a reason
to vote for Bush. It's the economy stupid. What, I
should reward Bush for my income going way down....

Looney Liberal Blue state Democrats SUCK.





Idiot Redneck Red state Republicans ..... :-)


(Time for a good old fashioned political flame war....)

"robert casey" wrote in message
nk.net...
JAMES HAMPTON wrote:

wrote in message
ups.com...
snip

The fact is that in every election there are several groups:

1) Those who will vote Republican no matter what
2) Those who will vote Democrat no matter what
3) Those who won't vote, or will vote for a 3rd party candidate
with absolutely no real chance of winning, no matter what
4) Those who are truly independent, and who may vote Democrat,
Republican, 3rd party, or not at all, depending on a wide variety of
factors, and whose votes really can decide an election.

Successful campaigning is all about identifying the 4th group, and
getting them to vote for your candidate.

Sometimes that means using crap like "family values" to
get the dumb ones to vote for the guy that will do for
them a worse job.



I used to try and look at the candidates, but what the current
administration is doing and setting us up for - I will, unfortunately, be
voting straight Democrat until things are a bit more balanced.



I couldn't believe they were going to attack the AARP as having a "gay"
agenda! The big deal is that they have dug a huge monetary pit and don't
want to repay the "borrowed" funds from Social Security. You think
Hillary
Clinton or Martha Stewart are/were crooks?

All they have to do is increase the threshold where you stop paying
"FICA" from your paychecks. Oh wait, that's taxing the rich, can't
have that....

So, unless the Republicans can come up with a candidate with something on
their mind other than big money, I have to vote something else. 3rd
party
won't cut it as has been proven in the past.

Voting 3rd party is like giving it to the Republicans, so I won't
vote 3rd party.

Last year nobody in these newsgroups could give me a reason
to vote for Bush. It's the economy stupid. What, I
should reward Bush for my income going way down....



Do you always wait to have other people tell you who to vote for?
Nevermind, I see now, you blue state looney liberals are not capable
of deciding which candidate to vote for on your own.

Last year nobody in these newsgroups could give me a reason
to vote for Bush. It's the economy stupid. What, I
should reward Bush for my income going way down....




Do you always wait to have other people tell you who to vote for?
Nevermind, I see now, you blue state looney liberals are not capable
of deciding which candidate to vote for on your own.


How do you figure that? I made my choice myself, and
heard nothing that justified changing my mind.