On 2/6/07, Denstizzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you watch Fox News you saw it. The Right was quick to bash those > who opposed, and you know it. And nobody said anything (how I felt).
Why is it you can never back up anything you say? Come on, one link can't be that hard. > And a sexual case was far more important than [fill in the blank]. > Or at least interesting. Entertaining? eh. Y'all can do whatever you > want, you know, that's fine, but at least try to have a sense of proportion. Should we ignore all the women that complain about sexual abuse? Why are you comparing Clintons abuses of power to these made up charges anyway? > I do. There's a reason we want things to be as "transparent" as possible, You're making up things to be paranoid about, it's sad. > Ah. At that "higher level"-- I git cha. That's too stupid a comment to respond to. > There was a nifty PBS show about memory on the other night. > Did you know people can implant "false" memories into others? What are you smoking :) > Dude, we radically shifted our power structure when Bush2 took office. > All manner of things changed, the least of which was how close we > were with China, etc. I wonder what it would've been like had Gore won. You mean because he's tight with the Buddhists and his admin sold them satellite technology? > one merely failed to add(or subtract) the jobs he'd lost, 2.5 mil or > whatever. Don't forget the 10 million added to the workforce that mostly have jobs. > I saw him say basically the same thing on live t.v.. That doesn't work in a debate. Nice try. > My point is he thinks Now you read minds, that explains everything. > Perhaps you can tell me if it was Saudi Arabia or Iraq that had the closer > ties with the terrorists who actually attacked us? Do you think we should attack every country that has a citizen commit a crime here? Those people weren't acting for the Saudi Government. Saddam order his men to shoot down the American and British Jets. He also paid terrorist reward money. > It's easier. Too easy as it was. Now it's insane. It isn't easier. You seem to think anyone working for the government can set up a tap at will just for shits and giggles. > On it's own? I don't know, it seems to keep reoccurring. Let's hope we > don't start throwing people in concentration camps. WTF? > Seriously, you don't > see what's "bad" about not having privacy? I have my privacy, if you think you don't you are misled. > Just a reference to the government spying on everyone they can. You mean like in the Clinton days? I think that program expired. > That's almost precisely what HAS gone away, Sam. That's a pig part of what > I'm bitching about. =-) You need to read about program and stay away from left-wing blogs. > See, I bet those were all "bad" republicans. Probably threatened him. That's it. > Which brings up an interesting point-- how many hops can they legally take? > Is it spelled out anywhere? Where is the oversight? Got Data? > > My point being, I really don't want people (even decent, god fearing people) > to be able to do a "google" through my personal stuff. And if someone who > called someone who called someone makes me fair game... that's weak. Easy fix: unsubscribe from all email groups. Maybe you should even unplug your computer. > If *I* put it out there, like with this list n' google, so be it. My > problem is with > the spying on ourselves and ease of it. When you need so many "taps" that > even time travel isn't "good enough", there is a problem, Sam! Are you watching the sci-fi channel again? > I don't think so. And how do you cut taxes and increase spending? > Well, I mean... I've seen how it's done. Because of the tax cuts, the tax revenue is the highest it's ever been. I think the deficit is 1% of the GDP, the lowest it has ever been. It's what happens when the economy is working. > Doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to negotiate prices. Who says we don't? Or do you want the man to set the price like in socialized nations. > > stereotype. As for Aids research, who gave the most money? > I don't know, who? Bush - $15 billion > Nonsense. Patent nonsense. Documented Nonsense! It was the WH > that kept fuxing up. Obviously. Thus, the "16 words" or whatnot. > Load of bull, might I add. =] Wilson lied, all the rest was fact. > But when he started to comply, it wasn't good enough, fast enough, > or whatever. In a 13 year span, how does that work? Every time he changed his mind and didn't cooperate, until the ships arrived, then he really meant what he said. Right ;) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:227250 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
