Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: My opinion

Expand Messages
  • yawho2001
    ... wasn t the author.
    Message 1 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, "gergely" <gergely@v...> wrote:
      >No, capt jack has already written me privately and said that he
      wasn't the author.<

      After he accepted kudos for it.

      >None the less, it is a powerful statement. This kind of delusion I
      will willingly accept.<

      >Jack Gergely<

      Are you saying the statement is a delusion or are you saying you
      accept being deluded by CJ? The chances are the attributed author is
      also a delusion. Using a military title (MGySgt., USMC, Lt. Col.,
      etc.) when spinning Bushit for the Regressives is good practice.
      They lap it up. There is a good probability the author is a well
      paid propagandist who, like Dubyah, never served in combat or even
      served at all. There are truths, half truths and lies in the
      statement but that's politics and it'll get much worse as the half
      billion GOP dollars go to work in the "liberal" media this fall. As
      it stands now, Bush's billionaires are hard at work.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6217-2004Jun1.html

      "The White House is not a warm and fuzzy place these days, or so
      suggest two seminal articles from over the long weekend.

      In The Washington Post, Dana Milbank and Jim VandeHei describe the
      unprecedented ferocity of the Bush campaign's often deceptive anti-
      Kerry advertising blitz.

      And in the New York Times, David E. Sanger describes a spectacular
      loss of discipline in the White House, now riven by vicious
      backbiting.

      Meanwhile, Matthew Cooper writes in Time magazine that President Bush
      is now keeping Saddam Hussein's gun in his study. Unloaded, we are
      assured.

      Messages of Negativity

      In The Post, Milbank and VandeHei write: "Scholars and political
      strategists say the ferocious Bush assault on Kerry this spring has
      been extraordinary, both for the volume of attacks and for the
      liberties the president and his campaign have taken with the facts.
      Though stretching the truth is hardly new in a political campaign,
      they say the volume of negative charges is unprecedented -- both in
      speeches and in advertising.

      "Three-quarters of the ads aired by Bush's campaign have been attacks
      on Kerry. Bush so far has aired 49,050 negative ads in the top 100
      markets, or 75 percent of his advertising. Kerry has run 13,336
      negative ads -- or 27 percent of his total. ................"

      Janko
    • krejc@aol.com
      CJ, very well put. noreen [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 2 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        CJ,
        very well put.
        noreen


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • krejc@aol.com
        In a message dated 6/1/04 10:39:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, humblebe@intergrafix.net writes: These soldiers went there to free these people, but they didn’t
        Message 3 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 6/1/04 10:39:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
          humblebe@... writes:
          These soldiers went there to free these people, but
          they didn’t want to be freed, they didn’t ask for us to go there, but there
          we are.

          The terrorists did not want us there nor the extremists who were happy with
          the status quo. but the educated and thinking people did.
          in Desert Storm, the coalition pulled out prematurely because their goal of
          freeing Kuwait was accomplished and this pulling out left the people at the
          northern border (who helped us during the Desert Storm War) vulnerable to the
          madman of Baghdad who slaughtered them and used more poisonous weaponry on them.
          For one thing, i am pretty sure that we are not going to do this to them a
          second time.
          Noreen


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • krejc@aol.com
          In a message dated 6/1/04 1:46:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, sandman6294@yahoo.com writes: If you believe Jack S wrote that then you re very easily deluded,
          Message 4 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 6/1/04 1:46:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
            sandman6294@... writes:

            If you believe Jack S wrote that then you're very easily deluded, which
            based on your statements now and in the past, is easy to deduce.

            http://www.probush.com/remember.htm
            Who cares who authored it? i am glad for the reminder that all it takes for
            evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing.
            by the way, i don't recall CJ as signing his name to it.
            Noreen


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • John M,
            ... I and many other people do. It appears that you don t care if a person is honest as long as you benefit from their actions. If someone steals something
            Message 5 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              At 07:29 PM 6/1/2004 -0400, you wrote:
              >In a message dated 6/1/04 1:46:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
              >sandman6294@... writes:
              >
              >If you believe Jack S wrote that then you're very easily deluded, which
              >based on your statements now and in the past, is easy to deduce.
              >
              >http://www.probush.com/remember.htm
              >Who cares who authored it?

              I and many other people do. It appears that you don't care if a person is
              honest as long as you benefit from their actions. If someone steals
              something you like and gives it to you would you say who cares?

              >i am glad for the reminder that all it takes for evil to flourish is for
              >good men to do nothing. by the way, i don't recall CJ as signing his name
              >to it.
              >Noreen

              I don't believe cowboys going off half cocked to fight the "Axis of Evil"
              without the support of their traditional allies and good intelligence
              qualifies as "a good man doing something". The Pentagon's darling Ahmed
              Chalabi is now being cast adrift but only after the rigged intelligence he
              passed on was swallowed by an administration raring to go to war for
              political purposes.

              You imply a decrepit tin horn dictator is a world threat? Most of the
              world didn't think so. No navy, no air force, an army with antiquated
              weapons systems? Yes, you can kill people, and they are doing so, with low
              tech weapons but the outcome was never in doubt. A good analogy would be
              the Polish horse cavalry fighting the German Panzer divisions, which they
              did in 1939. You might call it a brave but it was certainly a futile
              act. Did he make the world a safer place? I don't think so. He may have
              increased the number of terrorists.

              As for Jack S signing his name, when you post a long statement without
              using quotes and giving credit to the author or providing the source, it's
              called plagiarism. The subject was My Opinion and it was posted by him.
              Jack G commented:

              "WOW!! I don't always agree with your statements Jack, but, I sure do this
              one! Well said! Bravo!!"

              and Jack S replied:

              "Thank you Jack.
              CJ"

              Janko
            • capt jack
              Well put Noreen. CJ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Message 6 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Well put Noreen.

                CJ


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • yawho2001
                ... I and many other people do. It appears that you don t care if a person is honest as long as you benefit from their actions. If someone steals something
                Message 7 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, krejc@a... wrote:
                  >Who cares who authored it?<

                  I and many other people do. It appears that you don't care if a
                  person is honest as long as you benefit from their actions. If
                  someone steals something you like and gives it to you would you say
                  who cares?

                  >i am glad for the reminder that all it takes for evil to flourish is
                  for good men to do nothing.<

                  I don't believe a cowboy president going off half cocked to fight a
                  preemptive war against the "Axis of Evil" without the support of our
                  traditional allies and good intelligence qualifies as "a good man
                  doing something". The Pentagon's darling Ahmed Chalabi is now being
                  cast adrift but only after the rigged intelligence he passed on was
                  swallowed by an administration raring to go to war for political
                  purposes.

                  You imply a decrepit tin horn dictator is a world threat. Many
                  Americans and most of the world didn't think so. No navy, no air
                  force, an army with antiquated weapons systems. Yes, you can kill
                  people with low tech weapons but the outcome was never in doubt. A
                  good analogy would be the Polish horse cavalry fighting the German
                  Panzer divisions, which they did in 1939. You might call it a brave
                  act but it was also certainly a futile act. Did he make the world a
                  safer place? I don't think so. He may have increased the number of
                  terrorists and the odds of doing more damage here and abroad.

                  >by the way, i don't recall CJ as signing his name to it.
                  Noreen<

                  As for Jack S signing his name, when you post a long statement
                  without using quotes and giving credit to the author or providing the
                  source, it's called plagiarism. The subject was My Opinion and it
                  was posted by CJ. Jack G commented:

                  "WOW!! I don't always agree with YOUR statements Jack, but, I sure do
                  this one! Well said! Bravo!!"

                  and Jack S replied:

                  "Thank you Jack.
                  CJ"

                  Janko
                • capt jack
                  Three-quarters of the ads aired by Bush s campaign have been attacks on Kerry. Bush so far has aired 49,050 negative ads in the top 100 markets, or 75 percent
                  Message 8 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "Three-quarters of the ads aired by Bush's campaign have been attacks
                    on Kerry. Bush so far has aired 49,050 negative ads in the top 100
                    markets, or 75 percent of his advertising. Kerry has run 13,336
                    negative ads -- or 27 percent of his total. ................"

                    Janko

                    I guess there is just a lot more negative things about Kerry than there is about Bush! :-)

                    CJ


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • yawho2001
                    ... attacks ... there is about Bush! :-) ... Gee, I guess it s because he has money to burn given by the people he gave almost a trillion in tax cuts. He
                    Message 9 of 20 , Jun 1, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, capt jack <captjack00@y...>
                      wrote:
                      > "Three-quarters of the ads aired by Bush's campaign have been
                      attacks
                      > on Kerry. Bush so far has aired 49,050 negative ads in the top 100
                      > markets, or 75 percent of his advertising. Kerry has run 13,336
                      > negative ads -- or 27 percent of his total. ................"
                      >
                      > Janko
                      >
                      > I guess there is just a lot more negative things about Kerry than
                      there is about Bush! :-)
                      >
                      > CJ

                      Gee, I guess it's because he has money to burn given by the people he
                      gave almost a trillion in tax cuts. He can't win on substantive
                      issues so he hopes idiots will buy his Bushit. I see you've bought it.

                      Janko
                    • capt jack
                      Gee, I guess it s because he has money to burn... I assume you are talking about J. gigolo Kerry in that statement, as if he doesnt have millions at his
                      Message 10 of 20 , Jun 2, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        "Gee, I guess it's because he has money to burn... "



                        I assume you are talking about J. "gigolo" Kerry in that statement, as if he doesnt have millions at his disposal and more available from his women and supporters.

                        CJ


                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.