--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "jyouells2000" jyouells@ wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], new.morning <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Re: Gay Liberals.....but child molesting Republicans
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > <snip>
> > > > > Which is why this current scandal is so important,
> > > > > > given its potential to make these folks realize how
> > > > > > empty are the claims of this movement's leaders.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Foley himself is just the straw the camel stepped
> > > > > > on and broke. It's what his behavior reveals about
> > > > > > the leaders that their hypocritical propaganda that
> > > > > > is really significant.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (Greenwald's great. But man, he does run on!)
> > > > > >
> > > > > I forget who it was here who said this Foley thing is a dodge
to
> > > > > divert attention from the crumbling Bush claim that "Great
White
> > > > > Father" Bush keeps us safe from terror in the "Homeland" (God,
I
> > > > > detest that word...).
> > > >
> > > > Wayback and Bhairitu.
> > > >
> > > > > I think a calculation was made by Rove and the Republican
> > > > > leadership to sacrifice Foley since it appears the House will
> > > > > go Democratic anyway, and take the attention away from
> > > > > Rice 'forgetting' a warning from the CIA re: 911, and other
> > > > > incidents that have recently come to light regarding the ever
> > > > > more transparent facade of Bush's "War on Terra".
> > > >
> > > > I think this is tinfoil-hattery, frankly.
> > > >
> > > > It's even now by no means a foregone conclusion that
> > > > the Republicans will lose the House, first; they're
> > > > still pouring money into the races like crazy.
> > > >
> > > > Second, the scandal has discredited the entire
> > > > Republican leadership and by extension Republicans
> > > > in general. If the Republicans are going to lose
> > > > the House, the administration certainly doesn't
> > > > want them to lose *big*; they'll want the margin
> > > > to be as narrow as possible, so every seat is
> > > > worth fighting for, with a strong leadership to
> > > > whip the remaining Republicans into an effective
> > > > opposition party.
> > > >
> > > > The administration is certainly going to *exploit*
> > > > the scandal however it can, to squeeze any
> > > > possible advantage out of it now that it's
> > > > happened, but it's been too vastly destructive
> > > > to the Republican effort for it to have been
> > > > worth it just as a distraction.
> > > >
> > > > Finally, the various other issues--Condi vs.
> > > > 9/11 and so on--can all be *finessed* to some
> > > > extent--which Republicans are very good at doing--
> > > > because they're fairly complicated, whereas the
> > > > Foley scandal is very clear-cut and easy for
> > > > voters to understand.
> > > >
> > > I agree with you, Judy. Good analysis.
> > >
> > > I agree too and was thinking along the lines of Judy when I read
some
> > > of the "deep" thinking conspiracy views. The House could be quite
> > > close. And any margin, either way, is important.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, I heard a serious report the other night
(Hardball
> > > or NewsHour) that due to recent things, the Senate may be up for
grabs
> > > -- long thought to be pretty safely Rep. Dems are "not behind" in
nine
> > > key races, and they only need six.
> > >
> > > Funny that such an new trend coincides with Invincibility Course.
> > >
> > > In the spring or early summer, MMY predicted the fall of some
> > > governments, specifically UK abd US. If that is meant in the
> > > parlimentary sense of a change of party, not a constitutional
> > > collapse, then the Rep gov't could fall in Nov if House and Senate
> > > change parties. Bush would be a lame Duck president, under heavy
> > > investigations, with no neither house behinde him. Approaching
> > > powerlessness.
> > >
> > He also predicted that people would start TM at $2500, pundits would
> > come to FFL, NLP would succeed, Peace Palaces would be built through
> > out the US, everybody would want yagya's, TM mall stores would
succeed
> > .... What makes you give more credence to the political predictions?
> >
>
> He never predicted that large numbers would learn at $2500. His stated
purpose all along
> was to entice elitists to start BECAUSE it was to expensive for
non-elitists. The pundits
> eventually WILL come to fairfield. I'm going to pass along my idea of
billing them as
> entertainers, which may circumvent any norrmal visa issues. The NLP's
main messages
> were placed before the public eye many times and some of them have
become mainstream
> issues (e.g. organc foods), so the NLP did have some positive effect
on the political
> landscape..
>
> And mall stores were a raja's idea, as far as I know and I HAVE seen
mall front massage
> and accuppuncture stores, so it wasn't as off-the-wall a concept as
you seem to think.
>

$2500 - it didn't entice the elitists - they are going elsewhere

Pundits as entertainers - won't work, pundits already enter as
religious, one at a time for temples.

NLP - a bust  - those ideas are coming up by other more conventional
avenues.

Mall stores for TM products - it wasn't proof of a marketing concept.
They know it works (Aveda(?), other spas), it was for TM products.

JohnY










To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to