[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/23/07 1:22:29 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: that's why we have a republican form of government, we have representatives read the details of the legislation and know exactly what is being voted on. What a load of horseshit. Most Senators and House members, Democratic AND Republican, rarely ever read the full legislation they vote on, much less the details. If your legislator isn't doing his/her job, you fire them. Non-sequitur.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/22/07 4:20:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Much of the legislation the GOP has blocked has been overwhelmingly supported by the American people. The Webb amendment for longer breaks for our troops and the extension of SCHIP are just two examples. Then I suppose you have some evidence to back that claim up. CBS Poll: Overwhelming Support for SCHIP CBS News is out with a new poll (PDF format) that makes it clear how popular SCHIP - the State Children's Health Insurance Program - is among the American people. How about these numbers? WOULD YOU FAVOR OR OPPOSE EXPANDING SCHIP? Favor 81% Oppose 15 _http://www.cbsnews.http://www.http://www.cbhttp://www.chtt_ (http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/CBS_news_poll_101707.pdf) Via: _http://www.raisingkhttp://wwhttp://wwwhttp://www.http:_ (http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=10960) === Apparently there was no public poll on the Webb Amendment. However it was backed by the Military Officers Association of America representing over 370,000 military officers. I believe you left out my comment about the devil is in the details. Many more republicans would have supported the SCHIP program had it not raised the age of children to 25 in some states and allowed families earning up to eighty thousand dollars to be enrolled in it,that's why we have a republican form of government, we have representatives read the details of the legislation and know exactly what is being voted on.So yes, the SCHIP program is a popular idea , just not in the form that it was presented in the legislation. I can guarantee you the CBS poll didn't spell out the details when it asked if people were in favor of it or not. The Webb amendment is bad policy meant to tie the hands of the President. The President is Commander in Chief, not the Congress. I'm sure the Military Officers Association of America would also back legislation giving every soldier a million dollar life insurance policy as well. Can't blame them for that, it's just not practical. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/22/07 4:20:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Much of the legislation the GOP has blocked has been overwhelmingly supported by the American people. The Webb amendment for longer breaks for our troops and the extension of SCHIP are just two examples. Then I suppose you have some evidence to back that claim up. CBS Poll: Overwhelming Support for SCHIP CBS News is out with a new poll (PDF format) that makes it clear how popular SCHIP - the State Children's Health Insurance Program - is among the American people. How about these numbers? WOULD YOU FAVOR OR OPPOSE EXPANDING SCHIP? Favor 81% Oppose 15 _http://www.cbsnews.http://www.http://www.cbhttp://www.chtt_ (http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/CBS_news_poll_101707.pdf) Via: _http://www.raisingkhttp://wwhttp://wwwhttp://www.http:_ (http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=10960) === Apparently there was no public poll on the Webb Amendment. However it was backed by the Military Officers Association of America representing over 370,000 military officers. I believe you left out my comment about the devil is in the details. Many more republicans would have supported the SCHIP program had it not raised the age of children to 25 in some states and allowed families earning up to eighty thousand dollars to be enrolled in it, that's why we have a republican form of government, we have representatives read the details of the legislation and know exactly what is being voted on. What a load of horseshit. Most Senators and House members, Democratic AND Republican, rarely ever read the full legislation they vote on, much less the details. So yes, the SCHIP program is a popular idea , just not in the form that it was presented in the legislation. I can guarantee you the CBS poll didn't spell out the details when it asked if people were in favor of it or not. Maybe this is why - Bush lied about it Bush's $83,000 Lie About SCHIP One of most egregious canards being propogated by the White House about the SCHIP expansion is that it will provide health insurance for the wealthy. President Bush claimed at a press conference last week that Congress made a decision to expand the eligibility up to $80,000. He repeated it in his Saturday radio address: BUSH: Their proposal would result in taking a program meant to help poor children and turning it into one that covers children in some households with incomes of up to $83,000 a year. [9/22/07] And the White House echoed the false talking point today in its official veto message to Congress: [T]he current bill goes too far toward federalizing health care and turns a program meant to help low-income children into one that covers children in some households with incomes of up to $83,000 a year. If H.R. 976 were presented to the President in its current form, he would veto the bill. However, no such proposal exists. The $83,000 figure comes from a request from New York to cover children in some slightly higher-income households because of the state's high cost of living, but the final Congressional agreement put the poorest children first in line for benefits. Center for American Progress health care analyst Jeanne Lambrew notes that the section 106 of the bill specifically ensures that there will not be any expansion of eligibility. It overwhelming targets resources to low-income children and it discourages expansion to families with more moderate incomes by lowering the share the federal government will pay for such coverage. Angered by the White House's false spin, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) fired back: The president's understanding of our bill is wrong, Grassley said, his voice rising with anger. I urge him to reconsider his veto message based on a bill we might pass, not something someone on his staff told him wrongly is in my bill. Bush isn't concerned about doling out tax cuts to the wealthy, but the mere false pretense of the well-off receiving health care is enough to make him veto benefits for 10 million children. All links here: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/25/83000-schip/ The Webb amendment is bad policy meant to tie the hands of the President. That's only your opinion. Apparently people like you are more worried about Bush's hands than the conditions for the troops. The President is Commander in Chief, not the Congress. While the President's authority as Commander in Chief includes the discretion to control military forces in the field and matters related to the national defense, he does not have the unchecked power to regulate the armed forces or to determine the appropriate troop levels and force composition. The Constitution expressly authorizes the Congress, among other things, to provide for the common Defense, U.S. Const., Art. I, § 8, cl. 1; to raise and support
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/23/07 1:22:29 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm curious to see the results of the military vote in the '08 elections. It's clear that our troops are not gung ho about Bush's bullshit Iraq war. Oh, they'll love Hillary! ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/23/07 1:22:29 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: that's why we have a republican form of government, we have representatives read the details of the legislation and know exactly what is being voted on. What a load of horseshit. Most Senators and House members, Democratic AND Republican, rarely ever read the full legislation they vote on, much less the details. If your legislator isn't doing his/her job, you fire them. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/21/07 4:33:16 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well then it must be the will of the people that they do it. Nope. Much of the legislation the GOP has blocked has been overwhelmingly supported by the American people. The Webb amendment for longer breaks for our troops and the extension of SCHIP are just two examples. Then I suppose you have some evidence to back that claim up. Remember, the devil is in the details of the proposed legisation. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/21/07 4:33:16 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well then it must be the will of the people that they do it. Nope. Much of the legislation the GOP has blocked has been overwhelmingly supported by the American people. The Webb amendment for longer breaks for our troops and the extension of SCHIP are just two examples. Then I suppose you have some evidence to back that claim up. CBS Poll: Overwhelming Support for SCHIP CBS News is out with a new poll (PDF format) that makes it clear how popular SCHIP - the State Children's Health Insurance Program - is among the American people. How about these numbers? WOULD YOU FAVOR OR OPPOSE EXPANDING SCHIP? Favor 81% Oppose 15 http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/CBS_news_poll_101707.pdf Via: http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=10960 === Apparently there was no public poll on the Webb Amendment. However it was backed by the Military Officers Association of America representing over 370,000 military officers. ---The fact that the GOP blocked this amendment speaks loudly of their colossally hypocritical claims of supporting the troops and falsely and repeatedly bloviating that the Democrats don't.--- In a written statement presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee in March, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James T. Conway said that [t]he current deployment cycle requires commanders to focus solely on those skill sets required to accomplish the mission in Iraq and Afghanistan, adding, [t]he result of this strain is evident in the Marine Corps' limited ability to provide trained forces to project power in support of other contingencies. ... To fulfill our mandate to be 'most ready when the Nation is least ready,' our deployment cycles must not only support training for irregular warfare, they must also provide sufficient time for recovery, maintenance, and training for other contingency missions. While active-duty Marines currently spend seven months deployed in return for six months or less at home, Conway told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he would like to return to a 1:2 deployment-to-dwell ratio -- spending two months at home for each month deployed -- under which the Marines previously operated. Similarly, in answers to the advance questions that Gen. George W. Casey submitted to the Senate Armed Services Committee in February as part of his nomination to become Army chief of staff, Casey stated that the Army minimum goal for Active Component units is a 1:2 deployment-to-dwell ratio. Casey said: we've returned units to Iraq with less than 12 months at home station in order to meet the requirements on the ground. However, this pace exacts a toll on the force--on equipment, on Soldiers, and on their families. Links here: http://mediamatters.org/items/200709200011
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
do.rflex wrote: CBS Poll: Overwhelming Support for SCHIP Giving families a refundable tax credit or deduction against payroll taxes to buy health insurance would let them choose a plan that meets their needs, a plan that included the coverage and doctors they want. Also, if they change or lose their job, it would be portable and they wouldn't lose their coverage. Read more: After The Veto, Let Uninsured Have A Choice: http://tinyurl.com/32oqz8
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 10/20/07 6:41:39 A.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: He also fails to acknowledge that Congress isn't a 'Democratic' Congress. Sixty votes are required to freely pass legislation in the Senate and the Senate is as follows: Democratic Senators 49 Republican Senators 49 Independent 1 Connecticut for Lieberman Party 1 AND, a 2/3 majority is required to pass bills in the House: House of Representatives Democratic Representatives 233 Republican Representatives 200 Who sets the agenda's in the House and the Senate? Reid and Pelosi? Non sequitur. The Republicans are filibustering anything they don't like, so a simple majority means nothing any more. Exactly: Reid: Republican Obstruction Has Gotten So Bad That Now They're Blocking Bills That They Actually Support. AP News: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070630/democrats-agenda/ Conservatives boast about the success of their strategy in discrediting the new majority. As Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., put it, the strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. So far it's working for us. Subverting Majority Rule By Robert Borosage Common Sense, September 20, 2007 http://commonsense.ourfuture.org/subverting_majority_rule The Republican obstruction campaign continues. Yesterday, the Republican minority in the Senate filibustered and blocked two measures that had majority support in the House, and bipartisan majority support in the Senate. Republicans continue to filibuster at a pace three times anything ever seen before, in a systematic effort to block popular reforms. Fifty-six Senators, including six Republicans, supported the resolution offered by Sen. James Webb, D-Va., and Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., to guarantee the soldiers fighting in Iraq adequate home rotations. This sensible bill vital to the mental health and readiness of the soldiers on the front line was blocked because the remaining Republican senators lined up with their leadership to filibuster it. Similarly, 56 Senators, including six Republicans, supported the legislation introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Sen. Arlen Spector, R-Pa., to restore the fundamental right of court review for those detained under suspicion of terrorism. Once more the will of the bipartisan majority was subverted by the filibuster strategy of a partisan minority. Republicans are filibustering so many bills that the press has begun to cover this extreme tactic as business as usual. The front-page Washington Post story covering the Webb proposal is headlined Senate bill short of sixty votes needed. The article says the proposal failed on a 56 to 44 vote, with 60 votes needed for passage. The article never tells the reader that the reason majority rule was frustrated was because of a Republican filibuster that requires 60 votes to overcome. The New York Times coverage GOP minority prevails is the subtitle was somewhat better. In its fourth paragraph, the article reports that the proposal fell four votes short of the 60 needed to prevent a filibuster. In fact, the 60 votes are needed to overcome a filibuster, not prevent it. Both papers reported the filibuster correctly on the habeas corpus legislation. It is vital that the press get this right and that the media expose the extraordinary scope of the Republican strategy of obstruction. Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, has announced that Republicans will filibuster every controversial measure. They are making majority rule the exception rather than the routine in the Senate. Never has any party been so brazen or systematic in using the filibuster to block the majority. A partisan minority of Senators has used the filibuster to block efforts to bring the troops home from Iraq, to frustrate passage of clean energy legislation, to block giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs, and much more. Their strategy is clear and very likely to work. The public expects the party in charge to get things done. Excuses are largely dismissed as political bickering. The Republican minority blocks popular reforms and then charges Democrats with running a do-nothing Congress. For scandal-stained Republican legislators yoked to an unpopular president pursing an unpopular debacle in Iraq, this may be their best hope for survival. It works, of course, only if the public doesn't learn of it. So how these stories are covered is critical. Citizens need to be told each time why the bipartisan majorities are frustrated, why the super-majority of 60 votes is needed, and who is responsible. Reporters should be reporting on the Republican strategy, and exposing the cynical calculation behind it. These measures did not fail for lack of bipartisan, majority
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 10/20/07 6:41:39 A.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: He also fails to acknowledge that Congress isn't a 'Democratic' Congress. Sixty votes are required to freely pass legislation in the Senate and the Senate is as follows: Democratic Senators 49 Republican Senators 49 Independent 1 Connecticut for Lieberman Party 1 AND, a 2/3 majority is required to pass bills in the House: House of Representatives Democratic Representatives 233 Republican Representatives 200 Who sets the agenda's in the House and the Senate? Reid and Pelosi? Non sequitur. The Republicans are filibustering anything they don't like, so a simple majority means nothing any more. Exactly: Reid: Republican Obstruction Has Gotten So Bad That Now They're Blocking Bills That They Actually Support. AP News: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070630/democrats-agenda/ Conservatives boast about the success of their strategy in discrediting the new majority. As Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., put it, the strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. So far it's working for us. Another very important way it's working for them is that filibustering a bill that has the support of the American people but is opposed by the White House excuses Bush from having to take responsibility for vetoing it. Subverting Majority Rule And that's exactly what it is.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/20/07 5:31:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 10/20/07 6:41:39 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He also fails to acknowledge that Congress isn't a 'Democratic' Congress. Sixty votes are required to freely pass legislation in the Senate and the Senate is as follows: Democratic Senators 49 Republican Senators 49 Independent 1 Connecticut for Lieberman Party 1 AND, a 2/3 majority is required to pass bills in the House: House of Representatives Democratic Representatives 233 Republican Representatives 200 Who sets the agenda's in the House and the Senate? Reid and Pelosi? And? U, Democrat Congress means that the Democrats control the House and the Senate, hold the majority and leadership positions, control the committees, decide what legislative bills will come to the floor to be voted on and just as importantly, which ones will not. That was the case when the Congress was referred to as a Republican House and Senate. It doesn't mean that either side can pass their agenda without bipartisan support and to get that, there must be agreement on the details of a bill. I'm sure you've heard the saying, the devil is inside the details. You whine and complain about Republican obstructionism now and say they are standing in the way of the will of the people when Democrats have done the very same thing since '94. So, turn about is fair play,wouldn't you say? Losing control of the legislative initiative or even the White House isn't a disaster, it's just a delay in advancing ones agenda. It's kind of like football. You get the ball for four downs and as long as you make the required progress, you get to keep it, until you score. The Constitution are the rules and the voters are the referees. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip You whine and complain about Republican obstructionism now and say they are standing in the way of the will of the people when Democrats have done the very same thing since '94. Nope. The Republicans are doing it *far more*--three times as much, in fact--than the Democrats ever did (or previous Republicans ever did, for that matter).
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: snip You whine and complain about Republican obstructionism now and say they are standing in the way of the will of the people when Democrats have done the very same thing since '94. Nope. The Republicans are doing it *far more*--three times as much, in fact--than the Democrats ever did (or previous Republicans ever did, for that matter). From the Washington Monthly: GOP FILIBUSTERSI see that Republicans have successfully filibustered two more bills today: one to give a House seat to the District of Columbia (57-42) and one to restore habeas corpus rights to terrorism suspects (56-43). That seems like a good excuse to rerun this chart that McClatchy put together a couple of months ago. As you can see, Republicans aren't just obstructing legislation at normal rates. They're obstructing legislation at three times the usual rate. They're absolutely desperate to keep this stuff off the president's desk, where the only choice is to either sign it or else take the blame for a high-profile veto. As things stand, though, Republicans will largely avoid blame for their tactics. After all, the first story linked above says only that the DC bill came up short in the Senate and the second one that the habeas bill fell short in the Senate. You have to read with a gimlet eye to figure out how the vote actually broke down, and casual readers will come away thinking that the bills failed because of some kind of generic Washington gridlock, not GOP obstructionism. So, for the record, here are the votes. On the habeas bill, Democrats and Independents voted 50-1 in favor. Republicans voted 42-8 against. On the DC bill, Democrats and Independents voted 49-1 in favor. Republicans voted 41-8 against. Would it really be so hard for reporters to make it clear exactly who's responsible for blocking these bills? Here's the chart showing the numbers: http://tinyurl.com/2cn29a http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_09/012097.php
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/21/07 12:05:37 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , [EMAIL PROTECTED], MDi snip You whine and complain about Republican obstructionism now and say they are standing in the way of the will of the people when Democrats have done the very same thing since '94. Nope. The Republicans are doing it *far more*--three times as much, in fact--than the Democrats ever did (or previous Republicans ever did, for that matter). Well then it must be the will of the people that they do it. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 4:59:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. I should have added according to Zogby. Yes. You should have. Why? Do you not accept Zogby's polling results when it comes to Congress, but accept the results when they regard Bush's ? Now the wingnut argues with himself just to attempt to make it look like he's arguing with me. Typical immature winger inanity. He also fails to acknowledge that Congress isn't a 'Democratic' Congress. Sixty votes are required to freely pass legislation in the Seante and there are only
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 4:59:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. I should have added according to Zogby. Yes. You should have. Why? Do you not accept Zogby's polling results when it comes to Congress, but accept the results when they regard Bush's ? CORRECTED: Now the wingnut argues with himself just to attempt to make it look like he's arguing with me. Typical immature winger inanity. He also fails to acknowledge that Congress isn't a 'Democratic' Congress. Sixty votes are required to freely pass legislation in the Senate and the Senate is as follows: Democratic Senators49 Republican Senators49 Independent 1 Connecticut for Lieberman Party 1 AND, a 2/3 majority is required to pass bills in the House: House of Representatives Democratic Representatives 233 Republican Representatives 200
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 11:36:20 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Congress is getting a low rating, almost as low as Dick Cheney because the cowards (yes Democrats too) are not doing what the American people want and impeaching Bush and Cheney. Show me a poll that reflects this statement. That's a cop out. Instead why don't you find some articles that refute my statement. The right wingers are getting desperate as their power and influence is rapidly dwindling. The American people are now seeing through their false ideological blatherings. And because of this the wingnuts are coming out in even more exaggerated expressions of their same kind of outrageous, dishonest and arrogant behavior that they've become accustomed to getting away with within the context of 9/11. Well, they've long ago used up that capital by abusing it to deceive the public to push forward their losing agenda. The 2008 elections are nearing and they're just freaking out. They know they're going to crash in flames in this election - yet they still can't get themselves to admit that they are wrong.
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? Nope. Gore had been wearing earth tones on his own hook since the beginning of his campaign back in early 1999, well before he hired Wolf as a consultant; and Wolf never gave him wardrobe advice in any case. Both stories--that he had suddenly begun wearing earth tones to beef up his campaign, and that Wolf was advising him on wardrobe--were simply made up by the So-Called Lib'rul Media as part of their War Against Gore, the war that played a major role in putting Bush in the White House.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/20/07 6:41:39 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He also fails to acknowledge that Congress isn't a 'Democratic' Congress. Sixty votes are required to freely pass legislation in the Senate and the Senate is as follows: Democratic Senators 49 Republican Senators 49 Independent 1 Connecticut for Lieberman Party 1 AND, a 2/3 majority is required to pass bills in the House: House of Representatives Democratic Representatives 233 Republican Representatives 200 Who sets the agenda's in the House and the Senate? Reid and Pelosi? ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/20/07 6:41:39 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He also fails to acknowledge that Congress isn't a 'Democratic' Congress. Sixty votes are required to freely pass legislation in the Senate and the Senate is as follows: Democratic Senators 49 Republican Senators 49 Independent 1 Connecticut for Lieberman Party 1 AND, a 2/3 majority is required to pass bills in the House: House of Representatives Democratic Representatives 233 Republican Representatives 200 Who sets the agenda's in the House and the Senate? Reid and Pelosi? And?
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/20/07 6:41:39 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He also fails to acknowledge that Congress isn't a 'Democratic' Congress. Sixty votes are required to freely pass legislation in the Senate and the Senate is as follows: Democratic Senators 49 Republican Senators 49 Independent 1 Connecticut for Lieberman Party 1 AND, a 2/3 majority is required to pass bills in the House: House of Representatives Democratic Representatives 233 Republican Representatives 200 Who sets the agenda's in the House and the Senate? Reid and Pelosi? Non sequitur. The Republicans are filibustering anything they don't like, so a simple majority means nothing any more.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 7:38:30 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? You wanted evidence the country is growing more fascist. Read the article, asshole. I did. And it's pure emotionalism and hyperbole, fool! It's based on facts, bwana. Are you the classic less than bright redneck? Haven't you noticed your boy George is at 24% approval now? He's tied with Nixon when Nixon walked out of the White House in shame. Based on facts? Prove it! Are you the kind of fool that believes everything you read, especially from a fellow left winger ? What are Reid and Pelosi doing about it? Twenty-four percent, who's poll? Last I saw it was in the thirties. How about that 11% approval rating for that Democrat congress? Don't count on Bush walking out any time soon. He will be a pain in the butt to Reid/Pelosi till then. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 6:32:33 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. Won't Back Down By: Naomi Wolf Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? ...famous for dressing Al Gore in Earth Tones and for channelling a 13-year-old boy who may or may not have been Jesus... ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 11:36:20 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Congress is getting a low rating, almost as low as Dick Cheney because the cowards (yes Democrats too) are not doing what the American people want and impeaching Bush and Cheney. Show me a poll that reflects this statement. That's a cop out. Instead why don't you find some articles that refute my statement.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 4:42:41 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , [EMAIL PROTECTED], MDi In a message dated 10/19/07 8:40:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Last I saw it was in the thirties. How about that 11% approval rating for that Democrat congress? Nope. Congress is rated higher than boy George at 27%: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. Uh, huh ...how does that differ from what I said? A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. Apparently you're either blind or mentally retarded: CBS Poll dated - 10/12-16/07 - Approval of Congress at 27% Evidently you can't read or you refuse to accept the Zogby poll results which stated that A Paltry 11% gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. That line was right under the line giving Bush a 24% approval rating. So what are you doing, shopping your poll numbers? Zogby gives Bush lower numbers so you quote it but CBS gives Congress higher numbers so you use that. You might want to read the entire Zogby Poll over and you will see Congress getting 11% approval rating, two months in a row! ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 3:52:50 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 10/19/07 11:36:20 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: Congress is getting a low rating, almost as low as Dick Cheney because the cowards (yes Democrats too) are not doing what the American people want and impeaching Bush and Cheney. Show me a poll that reflects this statement. That's a cop out. Instead why don't you find some articles that refute my statement. Bwahhahahahahaah. No, your's is the cop out. You make a claim. I'm just saying,*back it up*. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 4:59:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. I should have added according to Zogby. Yes. You should have. Why? Do you not accept Zogby's polling results when it comes to Congress, but accept the results when they regard Bush's ? ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 8:40:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Last I saw it was in the thirties. How about that 11% approval rating for that Democrat congress? Nope. Congress is rated higher than boy George at 27%: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. Uh, huh ...how does that differ from what I said? A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. Apparently you're either blind or mentally retarded: CBS Poll dated - 10/12-16/07 - Approval of Congress at 27% SOURCE [as I posted previously]: http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 11:14:19 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 10/19/07 8:40:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a messag Last I saw it was in the thirties. How about that 11% approval rating for that Democrat congress? Nope. Congress is rated higher than boy George at 27%: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. I should have added according to Zogby. Yes. You should have.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
THYPERLINK http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/bob+dylan/talkin+world+war+iii+blues_20021598. htmlalkin’ World War III Blues Talkin' World War III Blues was a spontaneous composition created in the studio during Dylan's final session for The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan. Some time ago a crazy dream came to me, I dreamt I was walkin into world war three, I went to the doctor the very next day To see what kinda words he could say. He said it was a bad dream. I wouldnt worry bout it none, though, They were my own dreams and they’re only in my head. I said, hold it, doc, a world war passed through my brain. He said, nurse, get your pad, this boys insane, He grabbed my arm, I said ouch! As I landed on the psychiatric couch, He said, tell me about it. Well, the whole thing started at 3 oclock fast, It was all over by quarter past. I was down in the sewer with some little lover When I peeked out from a manhole cover Wondering who turned the lights on. Well, I got up and walked around And up and down the lonesome town. I stood a-wondering which way to go, I lit a cigarette on a parking meter And walked on down the road. It was a normal day. Well, I rung the fallout shelter bell And I leaned my head and I gave a yell, Give me a string bean, Im a hungry man. A shotgun fired and away I ran. I dont blame them too much though, I know I look funny. Down at the corner by a hot-dog stand I seen a man, I said, howdy friend, I guess theres just us two. He screamed a bit and away he flew. Thought I was a communist. Well, I spied a girl and before she could leave, Lets go and play adam and eve. I took her by the hand and my heart it was thumpin When she said, hey man, you crazy or sumpin, You see what happened last time they started. Well, I seen a cadillac window uptown And there was nobody aroun, I got into the drivers seat And I drove 42nd street In my cadillac. Good car to drive after a war. Well, I remember seein some ad, So I turned on my conelrad. But I didnt pay my con ed bill, So the radio didnt work so well. Turned on my player- It was rock-a-day, johnny singin, Tell your ma, tell your pa, Our loves are gonna grow ooh-wah, ooh-wah. I was feelin kinda lonesome and blue, I needed somebody to talk to. So I called up the operator of time Just to hear a voice of some kind. When you hear the beep It will be three oclock, She said that for over an hour And I hung it up. Well, the doctor interrupted me just about then, Sayin, hey Ive been havin the same old dreams, But mine was a little different you see. I dreamt that the only person left after the war was me. I didnt see you around. Well, now time passed and now it seems Everybodys having them dreams. Everybody sees themselves walkin around with no one else. Half of the people can be part right all of the time, Some of the people can be all right part of the time. I think abraham lincoln said that. Ill let you be in my dreams if I can be in yours, I said that. HYPERLINK http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/bob+dylan/Bob Dylan lyrics No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.1/1078 - Release Date: 10/18/2007 5:47 PM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 11:14:19 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 10/19/07 8:40:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a messag Last I saw it was in the thirties. How about that 11% approval rating for that Democrat congress? Nope. Congress is rated higher than boy George at 27%: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. I should have added according to Zogby. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 8:40:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Last I saw it was in the thirties. How about that 11% approval rating for that Democrat congress? Nope. Congress is rated higher than boy George at 27%: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 7:38:30 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? You wanted evidence the country is growing more fascist. Read the article, asshole. I did. And it's pure emotionalism and hyperbole, fool! It's based on facts, bwana. Are you the classic less than bright redneck? Haven't you noticed your boy George is at 24% approval now? He's tied with Nixon when Nixon walked out of the White House in shame. Twenty-four percent, who's poll? Bush sinks to 24% approval - Reuters/Zogby: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071017/pl_nm/usa_politics_poll_dc_1 Bush's current 24% record is tied with Dick's lowest... that's the same approval rating that Nixon had the day he walked out of the White House in shame. Nixon (Gallup) 8/1974 Approve 24% Disapprove 66% CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/02/opinion/polls/main1005327.shtml Last I saw it was in the thirties. How about that 11% approval rating for that Democrat congress? Nope. Congress is rated higher than boy George at 27%: CBS Poll 10/12-16/07: 27% Americans approve of Congress' job http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm Don't count on Bush walking out any time soon. Uh...everyone knows Bush won't be out until the end of his term. You think that's news? He will be a pain in the butt to Reid/Pelosi till then. Classic right wing freak show response. Bush has been *much more* than a pain in the butt to the American people for over 6 1/2 years and the American people have had enough. Denial of reality is quite necessary for you to sustain your anti-American ideology. Can you admit why your boy George and the GOP are on a fast sinking political ship? I doubt it. That's an example of you're denial of reality.
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 7:18:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? You wanted evidence the country is growing more fascist. Read the article, asshole. I did. And it's pure emotionalism and hyperbole, fool! It's based on facts, bwana. Are you the classic less than bright redneck? Haven't you noticed your boy George is at 24% approval now? He's tied with Nixon when Nixon walked out of the White House in shame. See video clip of Nixon, the man boy George partially emulates: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejvyDn1TPr8
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 7:26:32 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 10/19/07 7:18:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a messag Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? You wanted evidence the country is growing more fascist. Read the article, asshole. I did. And it's pure emotionalism and hyperbole, fool! _Breitbart.tv » Stark Raving Mad: Congressman Accuses President of Deriving ‘ Amusement’ from American War Dead_ (http://breitbart.tv/html/6912.html) If Bush were a fascist, Stark would be in prison with no bail. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 7:18:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? You wanted evidence the country is growing more fascist. Read the article, asshole. I did. And it's pure emotionalism and hyperbole, fool! ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 6:32:33 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. Won't Back Down By: Naomi Wolf Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? You wanted evidence the country is growing more fascist. Read the article, asshole.
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/18/07 2:48:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: His legacy will be the worst president in history and if anyone in congress has enough balls he'll serve it out in Leavenworth. The country is growing more and more fascist day by day. Sorry, that's Jimmy Carter's legacy. Jimmy Carter didn't violate national and international laws. Dubya' has arrogantly and blatantly done so. Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. Won't Back Down By: Naomi Wolf Naomi Wolf is the author of The End of America: A Letter of Warning To A Young Patriot. I wish people would stop breaking into tears when they talk to me these days. I am traveling across the country at the moment Colorado to California speaking to groups of Americans from all walks of life about the assault on liberty and the ten steps now underway in America to a violently closed society. The good news is that Americans are already awake: I thought there would be resistance to or disbelief at this message of gathering darkness but I am finding crowds of people who don't need me to tell them to worry; they are already scared, already alert to the danger and entirely prepared to hear what the big picture might look like. To my great relief, Americans are smart and brave and they are unflinching in their readiness to hear the worst and take action. And they love their country. But I can't stand the stories I am hearing. I can't stand to open my email these days. And wherever I go, it seems, at least once a day, someone very strong starts to cry while they are speaking. In Boulder, two days ago, a rosy-cheeked thirtysomething mother of two small children, in soft yoga velours, started to tear up when she said to me: `I want to take action but I am so scared. I look at my kids and I am scared. How do you deal with fear? Is it safer for them if I act or stay quiet? I don't want to get on a list.' In DC, before that, a beefy, handsome civil servant, a government department head probably a Republican confides in a lowered voice that he is scared to sign the new ID requirement for all government employees, that exposes all his most personal information to the State but he is scared not to sign it: `If I don't, I lose my job, my house. It's like the German National ID card,' he said quietly. This morning in Denver I talked for almost an hour to a brave, much-decorated high-level military leader who is not only on the watch list for his criticism of the administration his family is now on the list. He has undertaken many dangerous combat missions in his service to his country over the course of his career, but his voice cracks when he talks about the possibility that he is exposing his children to harassment. Jim Spencer, a former columnist for the Denver Post who has been critical of the Bush administration, told me today that I could use his name: he is on the watch list. An attorney contacts me to say that she told her colleagues at the Justice Department not to torture a detainee; she says she then faced a criminal investigation, a professional referral, saw her emails deleted and now she is on the watch list. I was told last night that a leader of Code Pink, the anti-war women's action group, was refused entry to Canada. I hear from a tech guy who works for the airlines again, probably a Republican that once you are on the list you never get off. Someone else says that his friend opened his luggage to find a letter from the TSA saying that they did not appreciate his reading material. Before I go into the security lines, I find myself editing my possessions. In New York's LaGuardia, I reluctantly found myself putting a hardcover copy of Tara McKelvey's excellent Monstering, an expose of CIA interrogation practices, in a garbage can before I get in the security line; it is based on classified information. This morning at my hotel, before going to the airport, I threw away a very nice black T-shirt that said `We Will Not be Silenced' with an Arabic translation that someone had given me, along with a copy of poems written by detainees at Guantanamo. In my America we are not scared to get in line at the airport. In my America, we will not be silenced. More times than I can count, courageous and confident men and women who are telling me about speaking up, but who are risking what they see as the possible loss of job, home or the ability to pay for grown kids' schooling, start to choke up. Yesterday a woman in one gathering started to cry simply while talking about the degradation of her beloved country. And always the questions: what do we do? It is clear from this inundation of personal stories of abuse and retribution against ordinary Americans that a network of criminal behavior and intention is catching up more and more mainstream citizens in its grasp. It
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/19/07 8:40:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Last I saw it was in the thirties. How about that 11% approval rating for that Democrat congress? Nope. Congress is rated higher than boy George at 27%: Try reading the polls you site.Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low. So Congress' positive poll numbers are a fraction of Bush's. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com Congress is getting a low rating, almost as low as Dick Cheney because the cowards (yes Democrats too) are not doing what the American people want and impeaching Bush and Cheney. They are afraid of being called soft on terror when they return to their districts but what they are now finding is they are being called soft of Bush. I think, as Nader points out in this video, they have been blackmailed: http://youtube.com/watch?v=rIO-tCPSfHA Naomi Kline argued here how America is going fascist. But I think one has to be brain dead not to see America is going fascist (or you don't understand *what* fascism is). http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Naomi_Klein_explains_how_we_willingly_1013.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/18/07 9:46:21 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sorry, that's Jimmy Carter's legacy. Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. Try reading the news. We've lost habeas corpus. We now know that Bushco had the telecoms snooping through our emails before 9-11. The telecoms should NOT be granted immunity from prosecution for the snooping. We have unwarranted search and seizures. We have the cops tasering innocent people. We have stuck on the do not fly list who don't belong there but can't get off it. And on and on and on. My goodness, well I guess Lincoln was a precursor to Adolf Hitler since he suspended Habeas Corpus as well. And Roosevelt? How about throwing all those *Japs* in concentration camps and spying on the Kraut/Americans in the US. So Bush has cops tasering innocent people? Ha! Those were campus police, under the control of a University President who hosted John Kerry to speak. Kerry could have done more to prevent *Don't tase me Bro* from getting what he deserved better than Bush could have. If Bush were half the Fascist you seem to think he is, there would be no *Bundestag*( Congress), no articles critical of him or his administration printed, your e-mail investigated by the FBI and on and on and on. IMAGE: The America We Used to Know http://www.bartcop.com/usa-mssing.jpg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 11:36:20 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Congress is getting a low rating, almost as low as Dick Cheney because the cowards (yes Democrats too) are not doing what the American people want and impeaching Bush and Cheney. Show me a poll that reflects this statement. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/19/07 6:32:33 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. Won't Back Down By: Naomi Wolf Who on God's earth is Naomi Wolf? Wasn't she the one that dressed Al Gore in earth tones? ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/18/07 9:15:43 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --Not Fascist, but rather: religious fundamentalist.--Not takeover with various fundies in the Pentagon and Military. The fundies will have difficulty throwing their support to Giulianni, thus giving the next election to a Democrat. In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , [EMAIL PROTECTED], MDi In a message dated 10/18/07 2:48:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: His legacy will be the worst president in history and if anyone in congress has enough balls he'll serve it out in Leavenworth. The country is growing more and more fascist day by day. I think the country has been pretty much in the control of *fundies* since it's inception. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/18/07 9:46:21 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sorry, that's Jimmy Carter's legacy. Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. Try reading the news. We've lost habeas corpus. We now know that Bushco had the telecoms snooping through our emails before 9-11. The telecoms should NOT be granted immunity from prosecution for the snooping. We have unwarranted search and seizures. We have the cops tasering innocent people. We have stuck on the do not fly list who don't belong there but can't get off it. And on and on and on. My goodness, well I guess Lincoln was a precursor to Adolf Hitler since he suspended Habeas Corpus as well. And Roosevelt? How about throwing all those *Japs* in concentration camps and spying on the Kraut/Americans in the US. So Bush has cops tasering innocent people? Ha! Those were campus police, under the control of a University President who hosted John Kerry to speak. Kerry could have done more to prevent *Don't tase me Bro* from getting what he deserved better than Bush could have. If Bush were half the Fascist you seem to think he is, there would be no *Bundestag*( Congress), no articles critical of him or his administration printed, your e-mail investigated by the FBI and on and on and on. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To All Members: Will Bush take us to another war before he leaves office? Please, see the article below: Bush: Threat of World War III if Iran goes nuclear By Matt Spetalnick. Wed Oct 17, 2:33 PM ET ...and, of course, if he does, he can suspend or cancel next year's election, thanks to one of his recent amusing Presidential Decrees. Am I right about this? uns.
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
Bush's popularity here in the USA has gone down drastically because of the war in Iraq. He is lucky no one in Congress has motioned for impeachment. His saber rattling with Iran and Russia would certainly raise many questions about his capacity to lead a nation. As of now, he is considered by most Americans as a lame duck president. He should just serve out his time and retire like all other presidents to preserve his legacy, whatever that might be. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All Members: Will Bush take us to another war before he leaves office? Please, see the article below: Bush: Threat of World War III if Iran goes nuclear By Matt Spetalnick. Wed Oct 17, 2:33 PM ET ...and, of course, if he does, he can suspend or cancel next year's election, thanks to one of his recent amusing Presidential Decrees. Am I right about this? uns.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
John wrote: Bush's popularity here in the USA has gone down drastically because of the war in Iraq. He is lucky no one in Congress has motioned for impeachment. His saber rattling with Iran and Russia would certainly raise many questions about his capacity to lead a nation. As of now, he is considered by most Americans as a lame duck president. He should just serve out his time and retire like all other presidents to preserve his legacy, whatever that might be. His legacy will be the worst president in history and if anyone in congress has enough balls he'll serve it out in Leavenworth. The country is growing more and more fascist day by day. The Democrats aren't helping any as they are kissing the asses of the corporations too. I think that congress has been blackmailed that if they do anything against Bush something bad will happen and if they even admit they've been blackmailed something bad will happen. The French sure have more courage than the American sheeple: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087sid=auFu4fx7WyZg It would be sheer fantasy to imagine anything like that happening here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
Bhairitu wrote: His legacy will be the worst president in history and if anyone in congress has enough balls he'll serve it out in Leavenworth. The country is growing more and more fascist day by day. Oh Gawd - you sound really, really scared! The Democrats aren't helping any as they are kissing the asses of the corporations too. If you had any balls you'd unsubscribe from ComCast and get the hell out of the country. I think that congress has been blackmailed that if they do anything against Bush something bad will happen and if they even admit they've been blackmailed something bad will happen. Get real! The Dems can't even capture Osama bin Laden. The French sure have more courage than the American sheeple: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087sid=auFu4fx7WyZg It would be sheer fantasy to imagine anything like that happening here. Yeah, the French transport strike is aimed at opposing Sarkozy's plans to roll back pension privileges that carry an annual price tag of 5 billion euros ($7.1 billion)!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/18/07 2:48:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: His legacy will be the worst president in history and if anyone in congress has enough balls he'll serve it out in Leavenworth. The country is growing more and more fascist day by day. Sorry, that's Jimmy Carter's legacy. Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
In a message dated 10/18/07 8:36:24 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To All Members: Will Bush take us to another war before he leaves office? Please, see the article below: Bush: Threat of World War III if Iran goes nuclear By Matt Spetalnick. Wed Oct 17, 2:33 PM ET ...and, of course, if he does, he can suspend or cancel next year's election, thanks to one of his recent amusing Presidential Decrees. Am I right about this? uns. No. Elections have never been suspended during a time of war. Iran won't be armed with nuclear capabilities before 2008 elections. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
--Not Fascist, but rather: religious fundamentalista near takeover with various fundies in the Pentagon and Military. The fundies will have difficulty throwing their support to Giulianni, thus giving the next election to a Democrat. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/18/07 2:48:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: His legacy will be the worst president in history and if anyone in congress has enough balls he'll serve it out in Leavenworth. The country is growing more and more fascist day by day. Sorry, that's Jimmy Carter's legacy. Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: World War III?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/18/07 2:48:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: His legacy will be the worst president in history and if anyone in congress has enough balls he'll serve it out in Leavenworth. The country is growing more and more fascist day by day. Sorry, that's Jimmy Carter's legacy. Please explain how the country is growing more and more Fascist day by day. Try reading the news. We've lost habeas corpus. We now know that Bushco had the telecoms snooping through our emails before 9-11. The telecoms should NOT be granted immunity from prosecution for the snooping. We have unwarranted search and seizures. We have the cops tasering innocent people. We have stuck on the do not fly list who don't belong there but can't get off it. And on and on and on.
