Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________-+__ isubtob

"jtees4" > wrote in message
...

> Are you threatening us? If so, we will kill you also,

Uh oh.

Me being a coward and all, I just shat my pants.

"George Bush: 1 for 1 in 2004." > wrote in message
news:1100007580.lNA+WKNjTetKp/eVJS6ONg@teranews...

> > You want us to send more troops to help you, bud?
>
> That will bring you up to an even 300.

I'd prefer them to leave, but GWB obviously wants them there, so our sucka
of a Prime Minister obeys like the lap dog he is.

> > Feeling safe or afraid of those big, bad terrorists right now?
>
> Completely safe and unafraid.

Cool. War on terror working then?

> > You're a xenophobic simpleton.
>
> And you're a coward. Were we truly xenophobic, we could really clean up
> this country.

If being a coward is not wanting to see incocents slaughtered for the sake
of a bunch of fat cats, then I'm the biggest yellow belly there is!

Yeehah! Look at my big old yeller gut!!!!!

When does your tour over there start, hard man?

"Jan Verschueren" > wrote in
:

> "JP" wrote...
>>> <snip>
>> Oh, you mean like Kerry has with the Kennedys and
>> the Heinz fortune ?
>
> What's his connection to the Kennedy family? -I've heard the reference
> before ("talks like a Kennedy"), but I can't really find a link?
>
> Jan.
> =---
>
>

The Kennedys run Massachusets. you will just have to accept that as
fact. I live 2500 miles away from there and it's just one of those things
everybody knows. Kerry's entire political career has been as the Junior
Senator from Mass. So pecking order alone puts Kerry under the thumb of
Ted Kennedy. Then add to that, when the Kerry DEMOCRATIC campaign was in
trouble last December, Teddy's Cheif of Staff, Mary Beth Cahill, was
brought on board to run the campaign. Suplanting several long time Kerry
staffers. Finally, the Campaign chairman was a longtime Kennedy employee,
one who has had plenty of sucess in the NE part of the country but several
big losses when running nation-wide campaigns..(sorry his name escapes me
right now)
The Republican and Democratic parties are made up of several regional
clans. Powerful folks in their own region often have little clout
nationwide, and vice-versa. So it's not some clandestine connection, just
the rule that everyone follows...little fish swim in the wake of big fish.
this goes for both parties.

dave henrie

Jan Verschueren > wrote in message
...
> "JP" wrote...
> >> <snip>
> > Oh, you mean like Kerry has with the Kennedys and
> > the Heinz fortune ?
>
> What's his connection to the Kennedy family? -I've heard the reference
> before ("talks like a Kennedy"), but I can't really find a link?
>
> Jan.
> =---

It's common knowledge. Kennedy ($ and influence) got him in the Senate to
begin with too.

Personally, I'm always amused when people whine about politician X and his
connections to y and/or z.

It's how the game works, (nothing new either, but people act like it is).
Always has, always well.







>
>

Uwe Schürkamp > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 07:13:26 -0600, JP wrote:
> >
> > Oh, you mean like Kerry has with the Kennedys and the Heinz fortune ?
>
> In all likelyhood, yes. Would it surprise you?
>
> Cheers,
>
> uwe
>
>
>
> --
> mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox)
> Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/
> Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E)
> GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61



No, I just find it amusing you slam Bush for the same thing Kerry and
every other politician does/has.

Jan Verschueren > wrote in message
...
> Dave Henrie wrote:
>
> >>> <snip>
> > So a diploma from Harvard is proof of moron-hood eh? I guess my
> > little ol Washington State University 4year degree then must equal
> > something below that, below moron.
> > Sub-Moron...I like that..
>
> See also Uwe's reply. President Bush simply doesn't project the image of a
> university graduate.
>
> Even sub-morons like you come up with more thoughtfull stuff than he does
at
> times. <vbg>
>
> >>> <snip>
> > No I don't care what the rest of the world thinks. Why should I?
>
> You might want to travel abroad and feel welcome some day ?
>
> >>> <snip>
> > Methinks Neville Chamberlin is alive and well. Let me get this
> > straight, BEFORE President Bush was elected, the people of the USA
> > were loved and endeared by all the world right? So WHY whould our
> > embassies be bombed when we were so loved? Why would our men
> > stationed in Europe get attack via nightclub bombing? Why would our
> > ships be attacked? Why would our civilians be murdered? <snip>
>
> You got that wrong. The OP meant that apart from a few moslim terrorists
> (and moslim rednecks in a few selected countries) nobody had a particular
> beef with the Americam people themselves. That has changed.
>
> >>> <snip>
> > If we get hit again, it will mean we face a determined foe who is
> > hiding behind the myth of religion to justify the killing of anyone
> > they choose. Tell me Zarkowie is a zealot, he's nothing more than a
> > murderer, somebody who delights in others pain...well, let me tell ya
> > folks..the world is full of those types...we have plenty right here
> > in the good ol US of A. Our economy DID suffer from the 2nd and 3rd
> > attacks on the world trade towers, but we have pulled ourselves up
> > and out. How is the French Economy doing these days? Near Double
> > Digit unemployment last I heard. The Germans? I'm sure those in the
> > Eastern provinces are basking the glow of a healthy economy.
>
> We have our problems, sure, but we don't try to offload them on the rest
of
> the world by making our currency cheaper, for example. We also didn't make
> it harder on ourselves by starting a war in the Middle East thus hiking up
> the oil price.
>
> > Again, blather all you want about somebody whom you appear not to
> > have much knowledge. But your blind comments about President Bush
> > and HIS polices seem to have not been carefully thought out. We are
> > America. We are bigfatdumblazy but if not for us, how many peoples
> > of the world would still live under oppression? How many languages
> > would Europe have?(just one Herr Knowitall)
>
> Yeah, and it took us nearly 50 years to get back to a situation where a
> single currency was universally accepted. Thanks a bunch! <g>
>
> > Who feeds the world?
> > Who commits more money than the rest of the planet to fight aids,
> > hunger, devastation?
>
> Per capita it's the Norwegians, I think.
>
> BTW, who hasn't signed the Kioto agreement?
>
> > Who put our children's lives in harm's way to
> > defend Europe after World War II?
>
> We had nukes pointing at us too, dude.
>
>
> > Who stood up in Europe and said ENOUGH when the
> > Serbs were cleansing Yugoslavia?
>
> <cough> Bosnia-Herzegovina <cough>
>
> A UN-approved military intervention led by US armed forces, correct, but,
to
> borrow your reasoning with regard to the humanitarian aid, we Belgians,
> e.g., sent *HALF* our airforce there.
>
> > <snip>
> > You may not like us, too bad, I've met many good folks here. I
> > suppose your vision of America is that all near 300million are the
> > same.
>
> Of course not, it's just that even if you look beyond the surface you come
> away shaking your head in disbelief.
>
> > <snip>
> > Until China fully modernizes and becomes a consumer
> > nation, you need us much more than we need you.
>
> Try us.
>
> > If you like to turn your back, feel free. But put your hands in your
> > pockets...the world has too long benefitted from the generosity of the
> > United States of America with little real payback.
>
> LOL...
>
> > Finally again, since this has been a long retort...just what single
> > policy implemented by President George W Bush forced Osama Bin Laden
> > to attack civilians in New York City?
>
> Regardless of what reasons Osama cares to hide behind, those acts are
> inexcusable and were condemned throughout the world. It's just that the US
> felt it had to hit someone, anyone in reply which goes against the grain
> here. Nobody would have protested if you'd gotten Bin Laden and blew him
up
> on live television, but he's still out there (and plotting against you as
we
> speak... no amount of invading and reshaping of political landscapes in
> moslim countries is going to stop him).
>
> Terrorism happens here too, but we focus our efforts on destroying their
> networks, not taking it out on Luxemburg.
>
> Jan./European intelligentia snob. ;-)
> =--

Whew, for someone, in another thread, who was worried about an ot topic
bothering ng users.......<g>

Email here too, eh ?

"Dave Henrie" > wrote in message
. 97.136...

> If it was ok for President Clinton to send missles into Africa and
> Afghanistan, then why is he not also the target of your ire?

Not that I usually agree with DGF, but I don't think he said anything about
Clinton at all - positive or negative (mighta missed it). GWB *is* the
current prez, is he not? Surely, then, he is the legitimate target of ire.
Clinton is past, Bush is present.

Just because Clinton may have wiped out a gazillion bajillion innocents
doesn't make Bush any less of a git.

"Mark Davison" > wrote in
:

> Not that I usually agree with DGF, but I don't think he said anything
> about Clinton at all - positive or negative (mighta missed it). GWB
> *is* the current prez, is he not? Surely, then, he is the legitimate
> target of ire. Clinton is past, Bush is present.
>
> Just because Clinton may have wiped out a gazillion bajillion
> innocents doesn't make Bush any less of a git.

Indeed it does not affect the reputation of President Bush in any way,
good or bad. But to insult and demonize the President while ignoring the
same from past Presidents shows not a horror of war but a horror of
Republican war. That is, to me at least, a shallow pool. So I give DGF
free reign to besmirch the sitting President, just so long as he can
justify his scorn by showing proof of equal emotion against left leaning
administrations. Otherwise his invective is just polictical scat.
(wow, THAT just popped into my head...I like it...hehehehe)

dave henrie

"JP" wrote...
>>
> Whew, for someone, in another thread, who was worried about
> an ot topic bothering ng users.......<g>
>
> Email here too, eh ?

Same thread. I meant users of other newsgroups... this thread spilled over
from another newsgroup to ours.

Dave is a regular here, so I have no bones about discussing something off
topic with him. But you're right, nothing of general interest in this branch
of the discussion. Sorry.

Jan.
=---

"Uwe Schürkamp" wrote...
>>> <snip>
>> See also Uwe's reply. President Bush simply doesn't project the
>> image of a university graduate.
>
> In all fairness, I probably don't convey the image of a
> physicist, either. Ask me how the light on your bicycle
> works and you'll have me stuttering and groping for
> handholds ;-)

First off, I'd be impressed if you knew what kind of light I have on my
bicycle. ;-)

Secondly, you do come across as a university graduate through your use of
language, construction of your argument and wit when posting.

It's one thing to have had a highly specialized training (what kind of
physicyst are you?) and then being unable to completely explain (or put into
laymans terms) how an every day item works. It's quite another to hold an
office at the head of the largest economy in the world and then seemingly
not thinking through the consequences of invading another country. As gaffes
go, the latter is on an entirely different level.

Jan.
=---