"Despite this incredible progress, the House Republicans did manage
to cut over $100 million, including funding for children's programming
like "Sesame Street." "

"The Republican-dominated board of the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting (CPB) hired a former Republican National Committee chair
as the next president, injecting partisanship into the very
organization designed to shield public broadcasting from political
meddling."

http://www.democracynow.org/article..../06/22/1347234
[
"Bill Moyers: "The Radical Right Wing is Very Close to Achieving a
Longtime Goal of Undermining the Independence of Public Broadcasting"
.......
"National Public Radio reported that they had obtained emails from a
CPB official that showed that CPB Chair Kenneth Tomlinson had
conferred with the White House in hiring decisions and in shaping
policy at the corporation. In past interviews, Tomlinson has said that
the White House does not interfere with CPB.
Last year, he secretly paid more than $14,000 to an outside
consultant, to monitor the political content of the guests on the PBS
program NOW with Bill Moyers. The consultant, Fred Mann, worked for
the American Conservative Union for many years.

And earlier this month, it was revealed that a former co-chair of the
Republican National Committee is Tomlinson's favored candidate to take
over as President of the CPB. Patricia de Stacy Harrison is currently
a high-ranking official at the State Department. She was co-chair of
the RNC from 1997 until January 2001, helping to raise money for
Republican candidates, including George W. Bush."
]

Oh get your head out of your ass there is no difference between
republicans and democrats.

As for liberals, the way people go on about the quest for personal
freedom and use meaningless buzzwords you would think Hitler, Stalin
and Saddam were all liberals.

Our government wa ssupposed to be about leadership, somewhere along the
line they decided control was more in their interests.

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:17:15 -0400, Cliff wrote:

"Despite this incredible progress, the House Republicans did manage
to cut over $100 million, including funding for children's programming
like "Sesame Street." "

"The Republican-dominated board of the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting (CPB) hired a former Republican National Committee chair
as the next president, injecting partisanship into the very
organization designed to shield public broadcasting from political
meddling."

http://www.democracynow.org/article..../06/22/1347234
[
"Bill Moyers: "The Radical Right Wing is Very Close to Achieving a
Longtime Goal of Undermining the Independence of Public Broadcasting"
......
"National Public Radio reported that they had obtained emails from a
CPB official that showed that CPB Chair Kenneth Tomlinson had
conferred with the White House in hiring decisions and in shaping
policy at the corporation. In past interviews, Tomlinson has said that
the White House does not interfere with CPB.
Last year, he secretly paid more than $14,000 to an outside
consultant, to monitor the political content of the guests on the PBS
program NOW with Bill Moyers. The consultant, Fred Mann, worked for
the American Conservative Union for many years.

And earlier this month, it was revealed that a former co-chair of the
Republican National Committee is Tomlinson's favored candidate to take
over as President of the CPB. Patricia de Stacy Harrison is currently
a high-ranking official at the State Department. She was co-chair of
the RNC from 1997 until January 2001, helping to raise money for
Republican candidates, including George W. Bush."
]



http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilit...49&R=778A3497E


Regards
Daveb

In article .com,
says...

Oh get your head out of your ass there is no difference between
republicans and democrats.

Hmm. Hillary Clinton = GWB.

Never thought of it that way. Could we get
a second opinion on this issue. Oh GUnnnnner!

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 20:45:50 GMT, DaveB wrote:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilit...49&R=778A3497E

"Media Research Center (MRC) is a conservative media ...."
"Conservative media mogul Rupert Murdoch owns The Weekly Standard"
"Stephen F. Hayes, a writer for the conservative magazine The Weekly
Standard"

I glanced at small bit of his old stuff ...
Not impressive.
--
Cliff

"Hmm. Hillary Clinton = GWB.

Never thought of it that way. Could we get
a second opinion on this issue. Oh GUnnnnner!


Jim"

From a veracity standpoint , zero difference.
Hillary might have more balls.

wrote:

Oh get your head out of your ass there is no difference between
republicans and democrats.

.......the liberal says when talking to conservatives.

It's unfair for *any* media to be recieving public money. Liberal or
conservative.

how would you feel if say. Rush limbaugh or Boortz were given govt grants?

I think you would be against that, and so would I.

--
**********
shu

"Cliff" wrote in message
...
| "Despite this incredible progress, the House Republicans did manage
| to cut over $100 million, including funding for children's programming
| like "Sesame Street." "

First off, where in the hell does it say that the government should be
in the broadcasting business?
Secondly, a small amount of PBS' funds come from the government,
therefore I think they can make it on their own. If they can't, they
deserve to die. Free market still works, even in the charity field.

In article .com, says...

Oh get your head out of your ass there is no difference between
republicans and democrats.

As for liberals, the way people go on about the quest for personal
freedom and use meaningless buzzwords you would think Hitler, Stalin
and Saddam were all liberals.

Our government wa ssupposed to be about leadership, somewhere along the
line they decided control was more in their interests.

Woo, someone who says the same things as I do! O_O

That's scary.

FW

On 24 Jun 2005 12:37:20 -0700, wrote:

Oh get your head out of your ass there is no difference between
republicans and democrats.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As for liberals, the way people go on about the quest for personal
freedom and use meaningless buzzwords you would think Hitler, Stalin
and Saddam were all liberals.

Liberals are totalitarians. So were the three you mentioned.

Our government wa ssupposed to be about leadership, somewhere along the
line they decided control was more in their interests.

Check the restrictive laws enacted in the last 30 yrs..and see who the
sponsers were.

We can start with the 2nd Amendment restrictions and go from there....

Gunner


"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

On 24 Jun 2005 14:11:51 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article .com,
says...

Oh get your head out of your ass there is no difference between
republicans and democrats.

Hmm. Hillary Clinton = GWB.

Never thought of it that way. Could we get
a second opinion on this issue. Oh GUnnnnner!

Jim


Well..they both like pussy...

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

Geez, cliff, can't you see the difference between cutting funding and a
"ban".. straighten up, act normal.

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:17:15 -0400, Cliff wrote:

"Despite this incredible progress, the House Republicans did manage
to cut over $100 million, including funding for children's programming
like "Sesame Street." "

"The Republican-dominated board of the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting (CPB) hired a former Republican National Committee chair
as the next president, injecting partisanship into the very
organization designed to shield public broadcasting from political
meddling."

http://www.democracynow.org/article..../06/22/1347234
[
"Bill Moyers: "The Radical Right Wing is Very Close to Achieving a
Longtime Goal of Undermining the Independence of Public Broadcasting"
......
"National Public Radio reported that they had obtained emails from a
CPB official that showed that CPB Chair Kenneth Tomlinson had
conferred with the White House in hiring decisions and in shaping
policy at the corporation. In past interviews, Tomlinson has said that
the White House does not interfere with CPB.
Last year, he secretly paid more than $14,000 to an outside
consultant, to monitor the political content of the guests on the PBS
program NOW with Bill Moyers. The consultant, Fred Mann, worked for
the American Conservative Union for many years.

And earlier this month, it was revealed that a former co-chair of the
Republican National Committee is Tomlinson's favored candidate to take
over as President of the CPB. Patricia de Stacy Harrison is currently
a high-ranking official at the State Department. She was co-chair of
the RNC from 1997 until January 2001, helping to raise money for
Republican candidates, including George W. Bush."
]

False alarm......Big Bird won, they got the money anyway

Regards

Daveb

Public radio is for the Common good isn't it?


I stole this from a different group..
[
We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of providing
citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living. The
activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the
interests
of the community, but must take place within its confines and be for the
good of all. Therefore, we demand: an end to the power of the financial
interests . We demand profit sharing in big business. We demand a broad
extension of care for the aged. We demand . . . the greatest possible
consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state,
and
municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and
industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the
achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an
all-around enlargement of our system of public education. . . . We demand
the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents. . .
. The government must undertake the improvement of public health - by
protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor - by the greatest
possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of
youth. We combat the . . . materialistic spirit within and without us, and
are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from
within on the foundation of " The Common Good Before the Individual Good ."

Nazi party, 1920
]
'
reminds me of that supreme court descision on thursday, stripping away
private property rights for the "common good"

***
shu

"Gunner" wrote in message
...


As for liberals, the way people go on about the quest for personal
freedom and use meaningless buzzwords you would think Hitler, Stalin
and Saddam were all liberals.

Liberals are totalitarians. So were the three you mentioned.

And black is white, war is peace, and love is hatred...

Big Brother is Gunner's idol.

--
Ed Huntress

In article ,
Gunner wrote:

On 24 Jun 2005 12:37:20 -0700, wrote:

Oh get your head out of your ass there is no difference between
republicans and democrats.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As for liberals, the way people go on about the quest for personal
freedom and use meaningless buzzwords you would think Hitler, Stalin
and Saddam were all liberals.

Liberals are totalitarians. So were the three you mentioned.

I'm not a totalitarian....

--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail dot net
http://web2.airmail.net/thegoat4/

It is called Communism!

Ken
"shu" wrote in message
...
Public radio is for the Common good isn't it?


I stole this from a different group..
[
We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of providing
citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living.
The
activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the
interests
of the community, but must take place within its confines and be for the
good of all. Therefore, we demand: an end to the power of the financial
interests . We demand profit sharing in big business. We demand a broad
extension of care for the aged. We demand . . . the greatest possible
consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state,
and
municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and
industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the
achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an
all-around enlargement of our system of public education. . . . We demand
the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents. .
.
. The government must undertake the improvement of public health - by
protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor - by the greatest
possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of
youth. We combat the . . . materialistic spirit within and without us, and
are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed
from
within on the foundation of " The Common Good Before the Individual Good
."

Nazi party, 1920
]
'
reminds me of that supreme court descision on thursday, stripping away
private property rights for the "common good"

***
shu

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 02:31:30 -0500, "B.B."
u wrote:

In article ,
Gunner wrote:

On 24 Jun 2005 12:37:20 -0700, wrote:

Oh get your head out of your ass there is no difference between
republicans and democrats.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As for liberals, the way people go on about the quest for personal
freedom and use meaningless buzzwords you would think Hitler, Stalin
and Saddam were all liberals.

Liberals are totalitarians. So were the three you mentioned.

I'm not a totalitarian....

If you claim to be a modern liberal..then by definition you are. It
may be to a small degree, or a large one..but.

What is your take on the term "for the children"?

A term used by the Left, to excuse totalitarian behavior btw...

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

"Gunner" wrote in message
...

Check the restrictive laws enacted in the last 30 yrs..and see who the
sponsers were.

We can start with the 2nd Amendment restrictions and go from there

I'd like to see a comprehensive list of such "restrictive laws" and the
authors of same; from both parties.


"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

Signature line is still bass ackwards.

In article ,
Gunner wrote:

[...]

Liberals are totalitarians. So were the three you mentioned.

I'm not a totalitarian....

If you claim to be a modern liberal..then by definition you are. It
may be to a small degree, or a large one..but.

What is your take on the term "for the children"?

A term used by the Left, to excuse totalitarian behavior btw...

I don't know outside of context. Provide some and maybe I can tell
you my take on it.

--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail dot net
http://web2.airmail.net/thegoat4/

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 12:23:51 -0700, "John Kunkel"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .

Check the restrictive laws enacted in the last 30 yrs..and see who the
sponsers were.

We can start with the 2nd Amendment restrictions and go from there

I'd like to see a comprehensive list of such "restrictive laws" and the
authors of same; from both parties.

Google is your friend.


"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

Signature line is still bass ackwards.


Been dyslexic for a long time?

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 03:30:20 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

Check the restrictive laws enacted in the last 30 yrs..and see who the
sponsers were.

Gee ....
--
Cliff

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 00:53:43 -0500, "shu" wrote:

We demand
the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents.

You don't have to worry so, Shu G.
--
Cliff

On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 16:11:59 -0500, "shu" wrote:

Military

Why? Don't the current mercenaries do well?
Still have your boots?

I have no problem with militias or mercenaries, in fact the 2nd amendment
all but requires it.

??
--
Cliff

In article ,
Cliff wrote:

On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 16:11:59 -0500, "shu" wrote:

Military

Why? Don't the current mercenaries do well?
Still have your boots?

I have no problem with militias or mercenaries, in fact the 2nd amendment
all but requires it.

??

the second amendment mentions militias
it doesnt mention mercenaries

its sorta like saying
i have no problems with militias or lolipops
in fact the secind amendment all but requires it
therefore lollipops are required

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 18:54:26 -0700, mariposas morgan mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges wrote:

In article ,
Cliff wrote:

On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 16:11:59 -0500, "shu" wrote:

Military

Why? Don't the current mercenaries do well?
Still have your boots?

I have no problem with militias or mercenaries, in fact the 2nd amendment
all but requires it.

??

the second amendment mentions militias
it doesnt mention mercenaries

its sorta like saying
i have no problems with militias or lolipops
in fact the secind amendment all but requires it
therefore lollipops are required

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

Well, we can add this one to the earlier thread where it is a crime to
violate the First Amendment free speech clause, in email, between two
individuals.

Amazing **** people make up that is included in the constitution.
--

Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker Award, May 2005

On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 02:14:11 GMT, Aratzio
wrote:

Amazing **** people make up

You should see some of the rest of her stuff G.

Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker Award, May 2005

Who won that one? For what?
--
Cliff

On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 22:24:04 -0400, Cliff wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 02:14:11 GMT, Aratzio
wrote:

Amazing **** people make up

You should see some of the rest of her stuff G.

Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker Award, May 2005

Who won that one? For what?

Please to consult the FAQ about kook/troll awards at insurgent.org.


--
mhm 27x12
smeeter #28
Usenet Valhalla Circle #19 & #21
Bartlo's hate lits #1:
CEO Alcatroll Labs Inc.

The Way of the Kook:
http://www.insurgent.org/~jhd/kookway.htm

in Message-ID:
Alexa Cameron explains world religions:
"The jews roots are islamic."

in Message-ID:
Alexa "dumbass" Cameron shows her knowledge of history:
"WRONGO. There was NO Bible before King James had it written."

In article ,
Cliff wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 02:14:11 GMT, Aratzio
wrote:

Amazing **** people make up

You should see some of the rest of her stuff G.

ill show you mine
if you show me yours

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 22:24:04 -0400, Cliff wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 02:14:11 GMT, Aratzio
wrote:

Amazing **** people make up

You should see some of the rest of her stuff G.

I see enough from supposedly educated people not much would surprise
me. With such nice resources like
http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/index.html it is a crime
they are so ignorant.


Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker Award, May 2005

Who won that one? For what?

Peter Ross and myself, for a counter-troll that forced the original
****head to out his own sock puppets in about 2-3 hours, melt down and
swear revenge upon AUK (again). Pulled essentially the same gaff on
the fukkhead last month and he is doing a nice email meltdown.

AUK has 2 HL&S awards:
Good: Pierre Sallinger HL&S
Bad: Bob Allisat Memorial HL&S

One is for trolling and catching teh fishies.
Two is for being teh fishy a little to often.
--

Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker Award, May 2005

On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 04:28:20 +0200, "Dr. Flonkenstein"
wrote:


Please to consult the FAQ about kook/troll awards at insurgent.org.

That's pretty good G.
--
Cliff

wrote:

Our government wa ssupposed to be about leadership, somewhere along the
line they decided control was more in their interests.


Yup. That's the way it works.

Consider any of the following conversations, which each of us has
heard countless times:

A mother speaking to her young son:
"Johnny, please stop doing that"
"Johnny, I said I want you to stop that"
"Johnny! Stop that right now!"
"If you don't stop that right now, I'm going to send you to your room
without dinner!"

A boss talking to an employee:
"I think we should do it this way, not that"
"Yes, I know you disagree; but this is the way I want it done."
"I don't care what you think, just do it this way"
"Either do it my way, or go find another job."

A civil rights leader (time lapse) talking in public
"I wish people would all understand how offensive certain words can be,
and would be sensitive enough not to use them"
"I'm really offended by some of the words people use"
"I'm going to sue the next person who calls me one of those words."
"I'm going to start a movement, to pass a law, to make it illegal to use
words that offend me. And then anyone who uses those words will be
prosecuted and sent to prison."

And, of course, there are too many examples to choose from in the
world of politics and elected officials.

Leadership is hard. It takes intelligence, work, and a willingness
to know something about the people you're trying to lead. It also puts
constraints on where you're going to lead people to. If the destination
makes sense only to you, then there won't be anybody following along.

Control, on the other hand, is the easiest thing in the world, as
long as you're well enough armed.

As long as we continue to elect people on the basis of whether they
promise to give each of us, personally and individually, whatever it is
we want, and as long as we attempt to use our political processes to
achieve our own little bits of power and control, we'll ALWAYS get
control freaks and power mongers, and never EVER get leaders. It's the
path of least resistance, the least common denominator, and the entropic
tendency toward chaos and disorder, all rolled into one big mess.

An interesting thing to reflect on, considering what holiday the US
just finished celebrating.

KG

Well Put !

Tom


"Kirk Gordon" wrote in message
news:1120582283.ca153ca0fed4ba10cc3a0cfcb9956aad@t eranews...
wrote:

Our government wa ssupposed to be about leadership, somewhere along the
line they decided control was more in their interests.


Yup. That's the way it works.

Consider any of the following conversations, which each of us has
heard countless times:

A mother speaking to her young son:
"Johnny, please stop doing that"
"Johnny, I said I want you to stop that"
"Johnny! Stop that right now!"
"If you don't stop that right now, I'm going to send you to your room
without dinner!"

A boss talking to an employee:
"I think we should do it this way, not that"
"Yes, I know you disagree; but this is the way I want it done."
"I don't care what you think, just do it this way"
"Either do it my way, or go find another job."

A civil rights leader (time lapse) talking in public
"I wish people would all understand how offensive certain words can be,
and would be sensitive enough not to use them"
"I'm really offended by some of the words people use"
"I'm going to sue the next person who calls me one of those words."
"I'm going to start a movement, to pass a law, to make it illegal to use
words that offend me. And then anyone who uses those words will be
prosecuted and sent to prison."

And, of course, there are too many examples to choose from in the
world of politics and elected officials.

Leadership is hard. It takes intelligence, work, and a willingness
to know something about the people you're trying to lead. It also puts
constraints on where you're going to lead people to. If the destination
makes sense only to you, then there won't be anybody following along.

Control, on the other hand, is the easiest thing in the world, as
long as you're well enough armed.

As long as we continue to elect people on the basis of whether they
promise to give each of us, personally and individually, whatever it is
we want, and as long as we attempt to use our political processes to
achieve our own little bits of power and control, we'll ALWAYS get
control freaks and power mongers, and never EVER get leaders. It's the
path of least resistance, the least common denominator, and the entropic
tendency toward chaos and disorder, all rolled into one big mess.

An interesting thing to reflect on, considering what holiday the US
just finished celebrating.

KG

On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 09:07:56 GMT, the opaque sittingduck
clearly wrote:

Kirk Gordon wrote:
--snip--
As long as we continue to elect people on the basis of whether they
promise to give each of us, personally and individually, whatever it is
we want, and as long as we attempt to use our political processes to
achieve our own little bits of power and control, we'll ALWAYS get
control freaks and power mongers, and never EVER get leaders. It's the
path of least resistance, the least common denominator, and the entropic
tendency toward chaos and disorder, all rolled into one big mess.

Wow, it's almost worth wading through thousands of GARBAGE posts by people
like gunner and his ilk to find gems like this.
Well said!

Duck, I'm glad you quoted the entire thing again. I had missed it
after scanning the first screen and overlooking the best part of his
message.


-
Better Living Through Denial
------------
http://diversify.com Dynamic Websites, PHP Apps, MySQL databases