More dumb**** liberals...

On Aug 11, 6:59*pm, ST wrote:
On 8/11/08 6:44 PM, in article
, "Paul G."



wrote:
On Aug 11, 6:04*pm, ST wrote:

Why the hell do you think we want to listen to the same crap here!!!

Oh, thank you! *I just love that. The commander-in-chief sits on his
ass KNOWING the nation is under attack, and it's just a bunch of crap
to you. *This defines "conservatives". *No matter how cowardly and
incompetent a Republican is, they will still support Der Führer

You know, several hundred years ago some American liberals started a
revolution against King George III. *They had to fight American
conservatives who supported King George even though he was clearly an
incompetent boob. Nothing much has changed.

Thanks for reminding us all.
-Paul

You are a real ****in whiney idiot!

You guys think he does NOT do anything........ You cry!
He DOES do something..... You cry!!

Have you noticed how much better things are since Bush took office?
BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!
-Paul

In article ,
"Paul G." wrote:

On Aug 10, 12:55*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

Here's a clue - you have a say - what do you suppose your vote is? After
that you follow the majority will.


Heh heh! If only. Gore got more votes than Bush in 2000. We wouldn't
be in this mess if either Gore OR McCain had become president in 2001.
Only an incompetent of Bush's caliber could have screwed things up
this badly.

I'm not entirely sure whether the events of 9-11 would have happened under a
different admin. but I'm pretty certain that had Gore been president, he wold have
read the "bin Laden determined to attack in the US" memo instead of telling the
person who brought it to the briefing, "You've covered your ass, now." I'm also
pretty certain that we would not be mired in Iraq under a different admin.

There's a lot of reasons to think of the GWB administration as the worst but the
one that stands out in my mind is that this bunch has made the US a nation that
engages in indefinite detention without trial and (the biggest reason of all) one
that engages in torture.

--
tanx,
Howard

The bloody pubs are bloody dull
The bloody clubs are bloody full
Of bloody girls and bloody guys
With bloody murder in their eyes

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article ,
"Paul G." wrote:

I think we can all agree that losing wars is not the answer.

Especially not one that you start.

--
tanx,
Howard

The bloody pubs are bloody dull
The bloody clubs are bloody full
Of bloody girls and bloody guys
With bloody murder in their eyes

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

On Aug 12, 2:36*am, Howard Kveck wrote:


* *There's a lot of reasons to think of the GWB administration as the worst but the
one that stands out in my mind is that this bunch has made the US a nation that
engages in indefinite detention without trial and (the biggest reason of all) one
that engages in torture.

--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * tanx,
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Howard

* * * * * * * * * *The bloody pubs are bloody dull
* * * * * * * * * *The bloody clubs are bloody full
* * * * * * * * * *Of bloody girls and bloody guys
* * * * * * * * * *With bloody murder in their eyes

* * * * * * * * * * *remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Douglas_(Chicago)

Summary executions also helped both sides keep the detentions down for
folks out of uniform.
Bush is scum, but those aren't new in US history.
Bill C

On Aug 11, 6:48*pm, "Paul G." wrote:
On Aug 11, 3:25*pm, Scott wrote:

On Aug 11, 11:22*am, "Paul G." wrote:

On Aug 10, 12:55*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

Here's a clue - you have a say - what do you suppose your vote is? After
that you follow the majority will.

Heh heh! If only. Gore got more votes than Bush in 2000. *We wouldn't
be in this mess if either Gore OR McCain had become president in 2001..
Only an incompetent of Bush's caliber could have screwed things up
this badly.
-Paul

You do realize, don't you, that the concept of the "popular vote" has
no bearing on presidential elections?

Um... no bearing? *Of course the concept of "popular vote" has a
BEARING in presidential elections. *It's just not the deciding
factor. *I think we all know the archaic Electoral College decides the
election. It usually jibes with the popular vote, but a total of 3
times it hasn't. The 2000 election was the only modern exception, and
we all know how that has turned out. *Bush is the worst president in
history. *But maybe you'd beg to differ. I'd enjoy that. *The
Republican party line after 9/11 was that Bush did "exactly the right
thing" when he sat on his ass after being told "the nation is under
attack", and to my amazement a lot of the military seems to concur.

So why don't you tell us all how heroic Bush was on 9/11, how you
admire his courage and leadership as he sat on his ass while the
attacks continued, you know, based on your years of experience as a
warrior and "company commander"?

-Paul

OK, we get it. You don't like President Bush. Here's a question for
you: what exactly do YOU think he should've done during the 9/11
attacks?

Back to the "popular vote" issue. First, and FOREMOST, there is no
such thing as a popular vote at the national level. It's an
artificial construct of the losing democrat party to whine about how
the worst president ever (your words, not mine) beat their best
candidate two times in a row.

Why doesn't the popular vote matter? Well, it's irrelevant. In many
states the outcome of the election is practically predetermined.
There will be many people who choose not to vote because within the
current system their vote won't influence anything. Would doing away
with the electoral college change that? You betcha! Would that be
the right thing to do? Hell, no. We'd end up w/ the residents of 5
or 6 major cities electing the president instead of it being
representative of the wishes of the ENTIRE country. You should know,
since you're so damned educated, that the electoral college was
instrumental in the formation of the republic in that the smaller
states wouldn't have joined the union if not for some guarantee of a
modicum of political power on the national level. You say the
electoral college is archaic, I say it's pure genius.

Tell me, you said you were a radar tech. In what capacity? IOW, were
you MI, FA, ADA, ??? Just curious. I spent a tour at Ft Huachuca and
met more whimpy-assed MI folks than anyone should ever be exposed to,
and for the most part they all thought they were so f...ng smart
'cause they were "educated" as you put it earlier, and so special
because they were "selected" to be MI. BS. I'm guessing you were one
of them.

Hah! All of the platoon sargeants and about half the men in my
infantry company were more educated than the typical MI soldier (or
junior officer). They just didn't use it as an excuse not to do the
grunt work (pun intended).

On Aug 12, 10:20*am, Scott wrote:

Tell me, you said you were a radar tech. *In what capacity? *IOW, were
you MI, FA, ADA, ??? *Just curious. *I spent a tour at Ft Huachuca and
met more whimpy-assed MI folks than anyone should ever be exposed to,
and for the most part they all thought they were so f...ng smart
'cause they were "educated" as you put it earlier, and so special
because they were "selected" to be MI. *BS. *I'm guessing you were one
of them.

I can second a lot of that being a comm puke (mobile) who worked with
a unit that did intercept stuff. We had the funky vans with all the
antennas saying come hit me, out there right behind you guys in the
mud. We had good intel folks with us, but the vast majority were back
at the Field Station intercepting US radio, and playing the piano in
the lounge. Getting up close and dirty was NOT on their agenda for the
career. They didn't get recruited toi the DPMT teams either for pretty
much the same reason, and we didn't trust them with a weapon.
Bill C

On Aug 12, 7:20*am, Scott wrote:
On Aug 11, 6:48*pm, "Paul G." wrote:



On Aug 11, 3:25*pm, Scott wrote:

On Aug 11, 11:22*am, "Paul G." wrote:

On Aug 10, 12:55*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

Here's a clue - you have a say - what do you suppose your vote is? After
that you follow the majority will.

Heh heh! If only. Gore got more votes than Bush in 2000. *We wouldn't
be in this mess if either Gore OR McCain had become president in 2001.
Only an incompetent of Bush's caliber could have screwed things up
this badly.
-Paul

You do realize, don't you, that the concept of the "popular vote" has
no bearing on presidential elections?

Um... no bearing? *Of course the concept of "popular vote" has a
BEARING in presidential elections. *It's just not the deciding
factor. *I think we all know the archaic Electoral College decides the
election. It usually jibes with the popular vote, but a total of 3
times it hasn't. The 2000 election was the only modern exception, and
we all know how that has turned out. *Bush is the worst president in
history. *But maybe you'd beg to differ. I'd enjoy that. *The
Republican party line after 9/11 was that Bush did "exactly the right
thing" when he sat on his ass after being told "the nation is under
attack", and to my amazement a lot of the military seems to concur.

So why don't you tell us all how heroic Bush was on 9/11, how you
admire his courage and leadership as he sat on his ass while the
attacks continued, you know, based on your years of experience as a
warrior and "company commander"?

-Paul

OK, we get it. *You don't like President Bush. *Here's a question for
you: *what exactly do YOU think he should've done during the 9/11
attacks?


Now this is getting interesting. Here's a "warriror" and "company
commander" asking ME, a mere camp follower REMF what the commander-in-
chief should have done on 9/11. I think it would be far more
interesting to hear a "company commander" state his opinion of George
"W"uss's leadership on 9/11. The video and timelines are available
online. We know exactly what the coward did. We can look into his eyes
and see a wuss who has no idea what to do, and therefore has no
business being commander-in-chief. We can watch his aides hovering
off to the left as they wait and wait for him to get off his ass.
Finally, he takes action! He picks up a children's book and starts
reading it!!!

That was Bush's defining moment. After that it was crystal clear that
he did not belong in the Oval Office. If he were truly a patriot he
would have immediately resigned for the good of the country. Cheney
has other problems, but at least he knows how to take charge.

So what exactly do *I* think he should have done? The obvious. Excuse
himself, assess the situation, consult with his advisers and order the
appropriate actions. Two obvious things that needed to be done were
ordering all aircraft in the US grounded, and shootdowns of hijacked
aircraft if necessary. Only the president has the authority to order
shootdowns of civilian airliners. We now know that that while "W"uss
was sitting on his ass there were still two hijacked planes in the
air, but there could have been a dozen, or other coordinated attacks
in progress. The coward had no way of knowing, since he froze and
therefore couldn't assess the situation.

McCain is no wuss, here's what he did in response to Russia's
incursion into Georgia: "When fighting erupted, the presumptive
Republican presidential candidate got on the phone to gather details
and issued a statement Friday summarizing the situation, tagging
Russia as the aggressor and demanding it withdraw its forces from the
sovereign territory of Georgia." That's presidential. The country is
going to be way better off with either McCain or Obama in office.

Back to the "popular vote" issue. *First, and FOREMOST, there is no
such thing as a popular vote at the national level.

As I said there has only been one case in modern history where the
Electoral College did not jibe with the popular vote, and the results
have been disastrous. I really only care about results. I suspect
you're happy with the status quo because it delivers the results you
want. Pretty funny that the people who go on and on about bringing
democracy to Iraq don't want democracy here.


Tell me, you said you were a radar tech. *In what capacity? *IOW, were
you MI, FA, ADA, ??? *Just curious. *

None of the above. I was in AC&W, heavy ground radar. The poor Iraqis
in AC&W were the first to get it, they were high priority targets
taken out with cruise missiles to blind the Iraqi air defenses. Poor
li'l REMF's never knew what hit them...


Hah! *All of the platoon sargeants and about half the men in my
infantry company were more educated than the typical MI soldier (or
junior officer). *They just didn't use it as an excuse not to do the
grunt work (pun intended).

Hmmnnn... now that's interesting. You sure you were a company
commander? I was a sergeant when I got out, so I know how to spell
"sergeant", but you don't. Now that seems odd to me. You wouldn't be
bull****ting us would you?
-Paul

On Aug 12, 8:14*am, Bill C wrote:
On Aug 12, 10:20*am, Scott wrote:

Tell me, you said you were a radar tech. *In what capacity? *IOW, were
you MI, FA, ADA, ??? *Just curious. *I spent a tour at Ft Huachuca and
met more whimpy-assed MI folks than anyone should ever be exposed to,
and for the most part they all thought they were so f...ng smart
'cause they were "educated" as you put it earlier, and so special
because they were "selected" to be MI. *BS. *I'm guessing you were one
of them.

I can second a lot of that being a comm puke (mobile) who worked with
a unit that did intercept stuff.

Heh heh! You pathetic camp follower REMF! Clearly not a
warrior. ;-))
-Paul

Paul G. wrote:
Heh heh! You pathetic camp follower

Stop knocking, tapping or nailing camp followers. In past centuries some
of them could give you the clap.

On Aug 12, 1:21*pm, "Paul G." wrote:
On Aug 12, 8:14*am, Bill C wrote:

On Aug 12, 10:20*am, Scott wrote:

Tell me, you said you were a radar tech. *In what capacity? *IOW, were
you MI, FA, ADA, ??? *Just curious. *I spent a tour at Ft Huachuca and
met more whimpy-assed MI folks than anyone should ever be exposed to,
and for the most part they all thought they were so f...ng smart
'cause they were "educated" as you put it earlier, and so special
because they were "selected" to be MI. *BS. *I'm guessing you were one
of them.

I can second a lot of that being a comm puke (mobile) who worked with
a unit that did intercept stuff.

Heh heh! You pathetic camp follower REMF! * Clearly not a
warrior. *;-))
-Paul

Nope, not in the same way the guys like Scott out on the sharp end
are. No fantasy here. Way too many friends, and family members out
there for me to BS. I fall somewhere in between, so does the wife
though she was admin/personell/staffing. Lots of posts, including
Landstuhl RMC, you may have heard of it, for her making sure the folks
out there got taken care of. Same for the Ranger Bat. at Ft. Lewis, or
the Trans guys running ammo in Somalia and Rhwanda.
We know where we fit, and know what the real deal is. She's still
taking care of the folks today too.
Bill C