At 08:55 AM 10/22/2004, John Testa wrote:
>I think I already mentioned I'm done with this.
>
>Words.
>
>Falling.
>
>Deaf ears.
brilliant debate strategy - say your peace and run away to avoid hearing a
counter argument.
>John Testa
>SLPS Homewood
>708-647-4346
>[log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
> Brice
> Yokem
>
> <[log in to unmask] To:
> [log in to unmask]
> > cc:
>
> Sent by: HP-3000 Subject: Re: [HP3000-L]
> OT: US Politics
> Systems
>
> Discussion
>
> <[log in to unmask]
>
> TC.EDU>
>
>
>
>
>
> 10/21/2004
> 05:20
>
> PM
>
> Please respond
> to
>
> Brice
> Yokem
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>1. I do not doubt that GWB is not as smart as JK, but he is is sticking
>with his position, even if it is wrong. JK is taking whatever position
>which is expedient at the moment.
>
>--------------------------
>
>2. "Miachiavellian diplomacy" is an oxymoron.
>
>--------------------------
>
>Patently false, and false on it's face. I do not know why you continue to
>hold such a false position.
>
>Machiavellian
>1. cunning and unscrupulous: using clever trickery, amoral methods, and
>expediency to achieve a desired goal, especially in politics (
>disapproving )
>
>diplomacy
>1. international relations: the management of communication and
>relationships between nations by members and employees of each nation’s
>government
>
>So it is not possible to manage communications which are deceitful?
>The two definitions are not mutually exclusive. They do not mean the same
>thing, but I did not say they did.
>
>---------------------
>
>3. Yes, Bush has basically come to the conclusion that the justification
>for the war in Iraq is now that Sadam Hussein had vague plans to produce
>weapons of mass destruction "sometime in the future", even though the
>latest full investigation came to the distinct, inarguable conclusion that
>there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq nor have there been for
>the last ten years.
>
>----------------------
>
>They did find some. There are also chemical plants which were not
>technically illegal, but could be converted to poison gas. There were
>portable labs which could be used to create weaponized disease.
>
>----------------------
>
>How is Kerry an improvement?
>
>1. He's not a religious fool. I truly think George Bush has the
>intelligence of a penlight.
>
>----------------------
>
>No he is a fast talker and a Machiavellian politician in the purest sense.
>He will say whatever he thinks you will believe.
>
>----------------------
>
>2. He knows how to communicate his ideas.
>
>----------------------
>
>So did Adolph Hitler. This is just a slick way of saing he knows how
>to tell you what he want's you to hear.
>
>----------------------
>
>3. Apparently, Kerry's interested in listening to others' opinions and
>reviewing facts, something in which I believe (and history has proved this
>to be true)
>
>----------------------
>
>Right, listen to others opinions and tailor your response to fit.
>
>----------------------
>
>Primarily, I am in favor of the rights of individuals to do with their
>lives what they wish including the ingesting of whatever drugs they want,
>removal of fetuses they don't want, and marrying whomever they want.
>
>----------------------
>
>But not spend the money they earn how they want? This is a classic
>example of Civil Rights trumping Economic Rights, so why would your
>conscience have you vote Libertarian?
>
>----------------------
>
>I am in favor of stem cell research.
>
>----------------------
>
>As it turns out, there is a method emerging where stem cells can be
>made available without a fetus being involved. It would make a persons
>own cells devolve back into a stem cell, which would be ideal because
>the patient could have their own cells used to treat them.
>
>----------------------
>
>Religion, to me, is frightening and ominous when it comes to its imposition
>upon politics and governmental policies.
>
>----------------------
>
>I have to agree with you, except I would take out the word Religion and
>put in the word Zealots. There are plenty of those who are not Religious.
>I do not see JK as anything different.
>
>----------------------
>
>Why are we there? Nobody can answer that question since Iraq isn't
>harboring terrorists, (well, they weren't until we got there) they were not
>a direct threat to the security of this country, and lastly, they possessed
>no weapons of mass destruction.
>
>----------------------
>
>The official reason we are there is because of the inflated WMD issue.
>The real reason is because we did not finish the job the first time.
>
>----------------------
>
>There's nothing wrong with the United Nations.
>
>----------------------
>
>HUH? Read anything about the 'Welfare for Bureaucrats...' err I mean
>'Oil for Food' program.
>
>----------------------
>
>yet the Bush administration blithely went
>ahead and did what it wanted, regardless of anything the United Nations
>said or did.
>
>----------------------
>
>This was because the people in the UN were in cahoots with Saddam Hussien,
>and were going to remain in cahoots as long as the gravy train kept
>pulling in.
>
>----------------------
>
>(i.e., "we can do whatever we want whenever we want" -- lovely, isn't it?)
>
>----------------------
>
>Ostenably it was because of Iraq's rouge nation status and the inaction
>on the part of the UN to do anything about it.
>
>----------------------
>
>Go ahead and vote for Bush.
>
>----------------------
>
>I am not voting for Bush. I am going to vote Democrat.
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
>Nyly܅܆+ޱZlzbey+"mjvڭb?Iai
Regards,
Shawn Gordon
President
theKompany.com
www.thekompany.com
949-713-3276
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
