on Bush and his crashes

Todd Kuzma wrote:

I, for one, don't feel comfortable with
anyone using gestapo tactics to squelch not just
disagreement, but the remote *possbility* of disagreement.


Your head is up your ass.


You are honestly saying that US political opponents of Bush are being murdered
en masse?


"Death is the solution to all problems...No man, no problem." -- Joseph Stalin


Sure, you're uncomfortable, who wouldn't be with their head stuck up their ass?
You're so dyslexic, you're confused as to the cause.



I guess sKerry isn't as bad a flip-flopper as claimed, LOL:
_John Kerry's Monstrous Record on Civil Liberties_, Reason Magazine
"Has a politician who seven years ago proposed all electronic transfers be
monitored changed his views on civil liberties? Officials from Kerry's Senate
office and presidential campaign promised to have someone answer questions about
his civil liberties positions, but no one ever had. A close look at his
campaign's statements on the PATRIOT Act, however, reveals that there is less to
his opposition than meets the eye."
http://reason.com/hod/jb072604.shtml

gwhite wrote:

Todd Kuzma wrote:

I, for one, don't feel comfortable with
anyone using gestapo tactics to squelch not just
disagreement, but the remote *possbility* of disagreement.

Your head is up your ass.

You are honestly saying that US political opponents of Bush are being murdered
en masse?

If you want to argue with my use of the word "gestapo,"
fine, but that doesn't change my point. Don't use word
games to avoid the issue. You know exactly what I mean
since I not only specified the actions which I consider to
be "gestapo tactics" but I provided a link to a news story
about them.

Sure, you're uncomfortable, who wouldn't be with their head stuck up their ass?
You're so dyslexic, you're confused as to the cause.

I'm not sure what you mean. Is this anything more than a
cryptic attempt at an insult?

I guess sKerry isn't as bad a flip-flopper as claimed, LOL:

And what does this have to do with the issue that I raised?

Todd Kuzma
Heron Bicycles
Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery
LaSalle, Il 815-223-1776
http://www.heronbicycles.com
http://www.tullios.com

gwhite wrote:

Todd Kuzma wrote:

I, for one, don't feel comfortable with
anyone using gestapo tactics to squelch not just
disagreement, but the remote *possbility* of disagreement.

Your head is up your ass.

You are honestly saying that US political opponents of Bush are being murdered
en masse?

If you want to argue with my use of the word "gestapo,"
fine, but that doesn't change my point. Don't use word
games to avoid the issue. You know exactly what I mean
since I not only specified the actions which I consider to
be "gestapo tactics" but I provided a link to a news story
about them.

Sure, you're uncomfortable, who wouldn't be with their head stuck up their ass?
You're so dyslexic, you're confused as to the cause.

I'm not sure what you mean. Is this anything more than a
cryptic attempt at an insult?

I guess sKerry isn't as bad a flip-flopper as claimed, LOL:

And what does this have to do with the issue that I raised?

Todd Kuzma
Heron Bicycles
Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery
LaSalle, Il 815-223-1776
http://www.heronbicycles.com
http://www.tullios.com

Chris B. wrote:

"One of the great cliches of liberal criticism of the Christian right
is the idea that these people are wrongheaded because they profess to
know the will of God.

Probably as misguided as a liberal claiming to know the will of
Republicans... ;-)

If I claimed to know the innermost thoughts and motivations of insert
minority group here, I'd be shouted down...

And besides, if all we were looking for is "opponents", we'd just all
vote Kerry and would have lobbied to get Clinton to stick around past
two terms. ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

H.L. Mencken put that one best, and perhaps
first: "It is only the savage, whether of the African bush or the
American gospel tent, who pretends to know the will and intent of God
exactly and completely."

These criticisms sound like they make sense. But I think they are a
little off-base. The problem not only with fundamentalist Christians
but with Republicans in general is not that they act on blind faith,
without thinking. The problem is that they are incorrigible doubters
with an insatiable appetite for Evidence. What they get off on is not
Believing, but in having their beliefs tested. That's why their
conversations and their media are so completely dominated by
implacable bogeymen: marrying gays, liberals, the ACLU, Sean Penn,
Europeans and so on. Their faith both in God and in their political
convictions is too weak to survive without an unceasing string of real
and imaginary confrontations with those people -- and for those
confrontations, they are constantly assembling evidence and facts to
make their case.

But here's the twist. They are not looking for facts with which to
defeat opponents. They are looking for facts that ensure them an
ever-expanding roster of opponents. They can be correct facts,
incorrect facts, irrelevant facts, it doesn't matter. The point is not
to win the argument, the point is to make sure the argument never
stops. Permanent war isn't a policy imposed from above; it's an
emotional imperative that rises from the bottom. In a way, it actually
helps if the fact is dubious or untrue (like the Swift-boat business),
because that guarantees an argument. You're arguing the particulars,
where you're right, while they're arguing the underlying generalities,
where they are.

Once you grasp this fact, you're a long way to understanding what the
Hannitys and Limbaughs figured out long ago: These people will swallow
anything you feed them, so long as it leaves them with a demon to
wrestle with in their dreams."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...how-guide=true

Chris B. wrote:

"One of the great cliches of liberal criticism of the Christian right
is the idea that these people are wrongheaded because they profess to
know the will of God.

Probably as misguided as a liberal claiming to know the will of
Republicans... ;-)

If I claimed to know the innermost thoughts and motivations of insert
minority group here, I'd be shouted down...

And besides, if all we were looking for is "opponents", we'd just all
vote Kerry and would have lobbied to get Clinton to stick around past
two terms. ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

H.L. Mencken put that one best, and perhaps
first: "It is only the savage, whether of the African bush or the
American gospel tent, who pretends to know the will and intent of God
exactly and completely."

These criticisms sound like they make sense. But I think they are a
little off-base. The problem not only with fundamentalist Christians
but with Republicans in general is not that they act on blind faith,
without thinking. The problem is that they are incorrigible doubters
with an insatiable appetite for Evidence. What they get off on is not
Believing, but in having their beliefs tested. That's why their
conversations and their media are so completely dominated by
implacable bogeymen: marrying gays, liberals, the ACLU, Sean Penn,
Europeans and so on. Their faith both in God and in their political
convictions is too weak to survive without an unceasing string of real
and imaginary confrontations with those people -- and for those
confrontations, they are constantly assembling evidence and facts to
make their case.

But here's the twist. They are not looking for facts with which to
defeat opponents. They are looking for facts that ensure them an
ever-expanding roster of opponents. They can be correct facts,
incorrect facts, irrelevant facts, it doesn't matter. The point is not
to win the argument, the point is to make sure the argument never
stops. Permanent war isn't a policy imposed from above; it's an
emotional imperative that rises from the bottom. In a way, it actually
helps if the fact is dubious or untrue (like the Swift-boat business),
because that guarantees an argument. You're arguing the particulars,
where you're right, while they're arguing the underlying generalities,
where they are.

Once you grasp this fact, you're a long way to understanding what the
Hannitys and Limbaughs figured out long ago: These people will swallow
anything you feed them, so long as it leaves them with a demon to
wrestle with in their dreams."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...how-guide=true

wrote:

The preferred method of murder by anthrax, however, is to introduce lots
of the spores into a cut or even inject them. For an example, see "Some
Buried Caesar," the 1939 Nero Wolfe mystery in which Archie Goodwin first
meets Lily Rowan. Rex Stout was fond of poisons, so there are also
mysteries in which tetanus is used. Alas, no Nero Wolfe mysteries that I
remember feature bicycles, possibly because Wolfe's lazy obesity keeps
him house-bound and possibly because bicycle messengers became popular in
New York City only after Stout's era.

I also can't imagine the more mobile Archie on a bicycle by choice,
although he would regularly walk 30 blocks; it just doesn't seem like his
style.

Possibly Fritz?

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

wrote:

The preferred method of murder by anthrax, however, is to introduce lots
of the spores into a cut or even inject them. For an example, see "Some
Buried Caesar," the 1939 Nero Wolfe mystery in which Archie Goodwin first
meets Lily Rowan. Rex Stout was fond of poisons, so there are also
mysteries in which tetanus is used. Alas, no Nero Wolfe mysteries that I
remember feature bicycles, possibly because Wolfe's lazy obesity keeps
him house-bound and possibly because bicycle messengers became popular in
New York City only after Stout's era.

I also can't imagine the more mobile Archie on a bicycle by choice,
although he would regularly walk 30 blocks; it just doesn't seem like his
style.

Possibly Fritz?

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

===============================
THE DAILY MIS-LEAD
www.Misleader.org
===============================

BUSH MISLEADS ON OSAMA BIN LADEN

At last night's debate President Bush claimed that, contrary to
Sen. John Kerry's assertion, he never said he was "not that concerned"
about Osama Bin Laden. Bush chastised Kerry saying, "Gosh, I don't
think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. That's kind
of one of those exaggerations."[1] Bush was completely wrong.

At March 13, 2002 press conference, Bush said "So I don't know where
he [Osama Bin Laden] is. You know, I just don't spend that much time
on him...I truly am not that concerned about him."[2] Watch the video
of Bush's remarks:

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1310344&l=62685

Sources:

1. "Transcript of Debate Between Bush and Kerry, With Domestic Policy
the Topic," New York Times, 10/13/04:
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1310344&l=62686.

2. "President Bush Holds Press Conference," The White House, 3/13/02:
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1310344&l=62687.

Jobst Brandt

===============================
THE DAILY MIS-LEAD
www.Misleader.org
===============================

BUSH MISLEADS ON OSAMA BIN LADEN

At last night's debate President Bush claimed that, contrary to
Sen. John Kerry's assertion, he never said he was "not that concerned"
about Osama Bin Laden. Bush chastised Kerry saying, "Gosh, I don't
think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. That's kind
of one of those exaggerations."[1] Bush was completely wrong.

At March 13, 2002 press conference, Bush said "So I don't know where
he [Osama Bin Laden] is. You know, I just don't spend that much time
on him...I truly am not that concerned about him."[2] Watch the video
of Bush's remarks:

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1310344&l=62685

Sources:

1. "Transcript of Debate Between Bush and Kerry, With Domestic Policy
the Topic," New York Times, 10/13/04:
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1310344&l=62686.

2. "President Bush Holds Press Conference," The White House, 3/13/02:
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1310344&l=62687.

Jobst Brandt

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:37:58 -0700, Benjamin Lewis
wrote:

wrote:

The preferred method of murder by anthrax, however, is to introduce lots
of the spores into a cut or even inject them. For an example, see "Some
Buried Caesar," the 1939 Nero Wolfe mystery in which Archie Goodwin first
meets Lily Rowan. Rex Stout was fond of poisons, so there are also
mysteries in which tetanus is used. Alas, no Nero Wolfe mysteries that I
remember feature bicycles, possibly because Wolfe's lazy obesity keeps
him house-bound and possibly because bicycle messengers became popular in
New York City only after Stout's era.

I also can't imagine the more mobile Archie on a bicycle by choice,
although he would regularly walk 30 blocks; it just doesn't seem like his
style.

Possibly Fritz?

Dear Benjamin,

Curse you, now I have to re-read a lot of mysteries whose
plots I never follow!

(I read them only for the constant battle between Archie and
Nero, who could give lessons in obnoxiousness to even the
most hardened rec.bicycles.tech posters.)

Somewhere in the jumble-heap of why "The Two Noble Kinsmen"
was not written by Shakespeare (look at the opening scene!)
and the differences between the orginal and the Disney
editions of "The Sword in the Stone" (cuts in White's
allusions to Elizabethan drama)--somewhere in there is a
faint memory of Fritz Brenner riding a bicycle.

There are only fifty or so Nero Wolfe novels and books, so
it shouldn't take more than a few days to skim them all.

Sullenly,

Carl Fogel