OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Touchy Touchy! See, now that is what I am talking about. It is so easy
to make a right winger blow a gasket. :-) They seem to think that they
own the first amendment and everyone else is a commie/pinko/fag.

Normally my post would just pass into usenet oblivion but now that you
have replied with such a nasty blast this thread stands a good chance of
making into the top 10 for the year. :-)

George Willer wrote:

Glenn,

Are you as fat and ugly as MM or do you have some other reason for your love
affair? Are your thought processes as screwed up as those other loony libs
who defend his lies? Do you really hate our country enough to see it
trashed by the likes of them? Your hatred of the right has turned your
brain to mush!

The lesson to be learned here is to give serious thought to what is best for
our country at large and give up this silly hatred for those who really can
and will improve things.

Keep in mind that the adults are in charge and protecting us from the likes
of Franken, gore, Kerry, Terry McCauliffe, Dan Rather, Janet Reno, Carville,
and all the other senseless propagandists from the goofy left. Even you are
benefiting from their true leadership.

I really don't mind you left wing nuts, but it is my country too that you
are trying, in your mis-guided efforts, to undermine.

Take a pill, finish your boat and sail to Cuba if you like lefty
Communism/Socialism so much.

George Willer

"Glenn Ashmore" wrote in message
news:1zYEc.8$jp1.0@lakeread04...


Ed Huntress wrote:


It's interesting, though, that he has a team of researchers who he says

have

checked every fact, and a team of lawyers threatening, and just itching

to

sue for libel any right-wing pundit who calls him a liar in print.

My guess is that he really, really hopes they will. Think about what it
would do for the box office. d8-)

Ed Huntress

I think they learned their lessons with Al Frankin. If FOX hadn't sued
him and the far right not gotten so bent out of shape nobody would have
noticed it. Regardless of whether F911 is a documentary, propaganda or
just plain old entertainment, the funny thing about it is the right
wingers just can't stomach a taste of their own medicine.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com





--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

George Willer wrote:
Glenn,

Are you as fat and ugly as MM or do you have some other reason for your love
affair? Are your thought processes as screwed up as those other loony libs
who defend his lies? Do you really hate our country enough to see it
trashed by the likes of them? Your hatred of the right has turned your
brain to mush!

The lesson to be learned here is to give serious thought to what is best for
our country at large and give up this silly hatred for those who really can
and will improve things.

Keep in mind that the adults are in charge and protecting us from the likes
of Franken, gore, Kerry, Terry McCauliffe, Dan Rather, Janet Reno, Carville,
and all the other senseless propagandists from the goofy left. Even you are
benefiting from their true leadership.

I really don't mind you left wing nuts, but it is my country too that you
are trying, in your mis-guided efforts, to undermine.

Take a pill, finish your boat and sail to Cuba if you like lefty
Communism/Socialism so much.

George Willer

"Glenn Ashmore" wrote in message
news:1zYEc.8$jp1.0@lakeread04...


Ed Huntress wrote:


It's interesting, though, that he has a team of researchers who he says

have

checked every fact, and a team of lawyers threatening, and just itching

to

sue for libel any right-wing pundit who calls him a liar in print.

My guess is that he really, really hopes they will. Think about what it
would do for the box office. d8-)

Ed Huntress

I think they learned their lessons with Al Frankin. If FOX hadn't sued
him and the far right not gotten so bent out of shape nobody would have
noticed it. Regardless of whether F911 is a documentary, propaganda or
just plain old entertainment, the funny thing about it is the right
wingers just can't stomach a taste of their own medicine.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com




Seems to me the lion's share of the hatred is coming from the right
wingnuts like George, and his heroes like Coulter, Savage, Hannity, et al.

Bob

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 20:42:22 +0100, Guido wrote:

||Ed Huntress wrote:
||
||
|| My guess is that he really, really hopes they will. Think about what it
|| would do for the box office. d8-)
||
||
||F911 box office receipts were $8,000,000 on the first day,
||topping the chart for last weeks movie going in the US:
||http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...lm/3844573.stm

They picked a good week to release it, with competition like "White Chicks", a B
movie which F911 barely outgrossed.

Texas Parts Guy

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Bob Robinson wrote:

If you bother to read it, it cites 22,000,000 as the total population of
Iraq. It goes on to say that the total number of people killed over the
23 year span of Saddam's reign was approximately 1,000,000 and point out
that this figure includes 800,000 Iraqis, Kuwaitis, Iranians, and other
foreign nationals killed as a result of various wars (the major portion
from the US-sponsored war with Iran) over the past quarter century.

Wow, I feel better now. I bet all 1 million of them deserved it, too.


--
Samiam is Scott A. Moore

Personal web site: http:/www.moorecad.com/scott
My electronics engineering consulting site: http://www.moorecad.com
ISO 7185 Standard Pascal web site: http://www.moorecad.com/standardpascal
Classic Basic Games web site: http://www.moorecad.com/classicbasic
The IP Pascal web site, a high performance, highly portable ISO 7185 Pascal
compiler system: http://www.moorecad.com/ippas

Being right is more powerfull than large corporations or governments.
The right argument may not be pervasive, but the facts eventually are.

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

RainLover wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 09:15:07 GMT, Scott Moore
wrote:


I think its time to say something about this crap. The "end justifies
the means" was a goddam dictator's slogan, not a reasonable policy.
What is the farthest the right has sunk in recent years ? Calling
Clinton an adulterer ? Boy, was that out of line.


How about Regan, et al, selling weapons to Iran illegally and then
taking the money and sending it down to Contras in South America to
fund a war that congress explicitly said was illegal to fund?


Last time I checked, Regan was not in office.

How about The president and all of his top cabinette people lying
about Iraq being involved with 9/11?

According to the liberals.


What about The president and his people lying about the weapons of
mass destruction that they had 'secret' PROOF of?


According to the liberals.

Remember that little package of "anthrax" that Powell waved around the
United Nations?


So ? I seem to recal the USA being attacked with anthrax. Humm, musta
dreamed that.

Bush believes that The End Justifies The Means all the way.

You have a short memory for what the 'right' has done over the last
few years.

James, Seattle

Both sides justify their position. The liberals seem to believe that
lying and exaggeration is "justified".

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Neocons never let the truth get in their way either, Stephen.

I disagree. Neoconservatives state facts to win agruments, whereas
Liberals will quote erroneous and/or fictitous sources. This thread
is about the MM film. Do you honestly believe he is truthful? Can
you give me an example of a conservative film that has all the lies MM
film does? He is a typical left-winger who will say anything to
promote his hatred of Bush. And sadly he has millions of "brain-dead"
followers ready to drink the Kool-Aid.

Steve M

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Scott Moore wrote:

Bob Robinson wrote:

If you bother to read it, it cites 22,000,000 as the total population
of Iraq. It goes on to say that the total number of people killed
over the 23 year span of Saddam's reign was approximately 1,000,000
and point out that this figure includes 800,000 Iraqis, Kuwaitis,
Iranians, and other foreign nationals killed as a result of various
wars (the major portion from the US-sponsored war with Iran) over the
past quarter century.


Wow, I feel better now. I bet all 1 million of them deserved it, too.


If we had not interfered, Saddam could have spent the rest of his life,
and Uday could have continued the work, to try to get the numbers up to
some significance.

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Koz wrote:

It's always interesting how, by nature, perception skewes viewpoint
without acknowledgement that it is happening. A common example within
these newsgroups is a HUGE number of conservatives making the claim that
they are "centrist". By the same notion, I just claimed that they were
conservative due to my viewpoint as an ultra-liberal-pinko-commie.

Some of you might get a chuckle out of this.
http://www.politicalcompass.org

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On 30 Jun 2004 04:06:49 -0700, (Cliff Huprich)
wrote:

Chuckle. good post Cliff, I like good comedy.

Damn, I gotta hand it to Moore. He has found a good money making gig.
Better than the usual Flim-Flam man scams, and he puts the snake-oil
salesmen to shame. Since he found out he could get a LOT more press,
publicity, and so forth by throwing temper tantrums and saying
outrageous things like he did on a tour in England ... he's been about
to vastly raise his price as a guest speaker. And even gets attention
paid to his so-so, second rate films.


From the old Email inbox:

[
A Little Perspective

By Michael Moore

snipped ....

To get some perspective, here are some real-life comparisons about what $87
billion means:

hmmm .... near as I figure ... it's a bit less than ONE percent of the
US annual economy. Around 0.8 %.

$87 Billion is more than the combined total of all State budget deficits in
the United States.
This is a good thing. A well run state shouldn't be having a deficit
in the first place.

The Bush administration proposed absolutely zero funds
to help states deal with these deficits, despite the fact that their tax
cuts drove down state revenues. [Source: Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities].
Hmmm. I don't think he should help states cut their deficits. I
think the Feds outta cut theirs.

$87 Billion is enough to pay the 3.3 million people who have lost jobs under
George W. Bush $26,363.00 each! The unemployment benefits extension passed
by Congress at the beginning of this year provides zero benefits to workers
who exhausted their regular, state unemployment benefits and cannot find
work [Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities].

Which they'd probably spend foolishly, anyway. If yah check into it,
MOST folks who get a sudden cash windfall which they didn't actually
have to work for, tend to squander it very quickly.

I'm not bashing folks who lost their jobs, not at all. Just a fact,
humans seen to foolishly spend money they got easily and/or
unexpectedly and unearned. The many lottery winners end up broke or
nearly so a few years later. The reason most folks who inherit a
little something from their parents, grandparents, etc have that money
spent in a year or 2 and precious little to show for it. So on and so
forth.

My answer to the unemployment problem? In the past year I've
personally helped 4 people find jobs. Those 4 people I know on a
personal basis. Doesn't count any hiring done by me for the company
for whom I work. The 4 are all friends, none qualified to work at my
employer's business.

My suggestion would be that perhaps Moore could spend more time doing
what I did. Counseling the unemployed person. Giving em hints and
tips. Pointing out faults or lacks they should work on. (We all have
em) Helping em make up resumes. Helping em locate prospective
employers. And so forth.

If Moore and his ilk would spend less time bashing others, less time
telling each other how wonderful and caring they are, and less time
lining own pockets with money by saying the things they know people
want to hear. And more time physically getting up off ass, and
personally putting out the effort to help the neighbor down the street
having a hard time. We'd all be better off.

$87 Billion is more than double the total amount the government spends on
Homeland Security. The U.S. spends about $36 billion on homeland security.
Yet, Sen. Warren Rudman (R- N.H.) wrote, America will fall approximately
$98 .4 billion short of meeting critical emergency responder needs for
homeland security without a funding increase. [Source: Council on Foreign
Relations].

Chuckle, as in Homeland Security, the agency. Which is really just a
guidance and coordination agency (management and planning) for a whole
SLEW of other agencies on the federal level. Each having own budget.
Now, add agencies on the state level, etc. All works out to a lot
more than $87 billion.

$87 Billion is 87 times the amount the Federal Government spends on After
School Programs. George W. Bush proposed a budget that reduces the $1
billion for after-school programs to $600 million cutting off about 475,000
children from the program. [Source: The Republican-dominated House
Appropriations Committee].

Good. The states, and the local counties and cities should be
spending money on schools. Not the Feds.

I don't know about where you live. But, for instance, the Minneapolis
school district reports a budget which averages over $15,000 per
student.

I don't think there is any real lack of money going into educational
institutions. Chuckle, as a matter of fact, at least half my
contracts at work are with schools and school districts. I spend a
lot of time in schools. Not just taking the guided tour. I get to
see behind the scenes. It absolutely amazes me how much money most of
em waste. I've come to realize why so many school adminstrators and
various school system department managers work for the school systems
rather than for a private company. They'd get fired for incompetency.
Hmmm, come to think of it, I personally know 2 guys who were fired
outta private industry for incompetence. Who found themselves nice,
secure employment at two major school districts. In upper management
at the district level.

The problem is not lack of money ... it's how they're spending it.

$87 Billion is more than 10 times what the Government spends on all
environmental Protection. The Bush administration requested just $7.6
billion for the entire Environmental Protection Agency. This included a 32
percent cut to water quality grants, a 6 percent reduction in enforcement
staff, and a 50 percent cut to land acquisition and conservation. [Source:
Natural Resources Defense Council].

Chuckle. again, we're simply talking the Enviornmental Protection
Agency. Which is really just and investigative, research, and rules
enforcement agency. Thus, Moore is not counting one hell of a lot of
money spent by private and corporate businesses to improve cleanups,
for prevention, and to reduce pollution in the first place. ie I
personally know of an electrical utility company who spent more than a
billion bucks improving the boilers they have so that they'd produce
less pollution. And that electrical utility company is only a small,
small part of the whole of such utility companies in the US.

In Minnesota, the federal EPA represents a minor player and minor
money role in the water quality improvement programs. Most is funded
by the state, counties, etc.

We ain't running out of trees or wildlife, either. I know. I'm a
hunter and a fisherman. A contributor to the state wildlife and
conservation fund. Both by money and by personal labor. A regular
subscriber to the DNR's magazine. And from what I read, we're doing
quite nicely, thank you. Without the Feds or Michael Moore.

There you go. In black and white. A few million of you will receive this
letter. Please share the above with at least a half-dozen people today and
tomorrow. I, like you, do not want to see another approval rating over 50
percent.

Yours,

Michael Moore

Filmmaker
]
Chuckle, Moore need not worry. He never got as high as a 50% approval
rating from me, at any time.

Of course, Cliff, I suppose he and you meant politics, and Bush
specifically.

Well, I don't care for politics much. Am neither a Democrat nor a
Republican. In fact, I don't love Bush. There are several matters
about which he and I would disagree. However, that said, I'm gonna
vote for him next time around. (Yes, I voted for him the first time
around) As I think he's doing a better job that the alternatives
would.

Kerry? Yah just don't really want to know what I think of that
fellow.

But it's no wonder Moore supports him. I remember something about
"birds of a feather ...".

But I do gotta hand it to Moore. One of the best scam artists I've
seen or heard about in years. A master of spin, double talk, and the
half truth. It's no wonder Hollywood, much of Washington DC, and the
French like him so much. Also no wonder he's the darling and Pin-up
Boy of the World Socialist Party.

I even kinda like him, for the humor factor. He's funny, makes me
laugh. For more opinions on Moore yah might try:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/.../site/newsweek

More Distortions From Michael Moore
Some of the main points in ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ really aren’t very fair
at all
By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek
Updated: 6:26 p.m. ET June 30, 2004


http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...4/278rxzvb.asp

Un-Moored from Reality
From the July 5 / July 12, 2004 issue: Fahrenheit 9/11 connects dots
that aren't there.
by Matt Labash
07/05/2004, Volume 009, Issue 41


http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive...king062704.htm

The Fahrenheit 411: Michael Moore's Phony "Facts"
June 26, 2004
by J.C. King


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/26/op...David%20Brooks

The New Rork Times
OP-ED COLUMNIST
All Hail Moore
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: June 26, 2004


http://fahrenheit_fact.blogspot.com/

http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/

http://www.mooreexposed.com/

Bob

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Bob G wrote:

On 30 Jun 2004 04:06:49 -0700, (Cliff Huprich)
wrote:

Chuckle. good post Cliff, I like good comedy.

Damn, I gotta hand it to Moore. He has found a good money making gig.
Better than the usual Flim-Flam man scams, and he puts the snake-oil
salesmen to shame. Since he found out he could get a LOT more press,
publicity, and so forth by throwing temper tantrums and saying
outrageous things like he did on a tour in England ... he's been about
to vastly raise his price as a guest speaker. And even gets attention
paid to his so-so, second rate films.


He must have been listening to rush and picked up his scam. I wonder if
he is on painkillers too.

chop





John

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Terry Collins wrote:

Some of you might get a chuckle out of this.
http://www.politicalcompass.org

Interesting. I came out right where I thought I was. Right on the big
middle line between Left and Right and 2 blocks toward Libertarian. The
problem is the right wingers consider everyone more than 2 blocks of the
Right side to be a Commie.

Now. Where is the BS susceptibility index test for Gunner and his friends?

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

I was quite sure that I had read 8 million killed in the Iran- Iraq
war. But now I can only find that estimates run as high as 1.5
million.

Dan


Bob Robinson wrote in message news:40e42b64$0 Dan Caster wrote:

So how much would that be for each of the over 8,000,000 people that
Saddam Huisan caused to die? About $10,000 per life. Not much per
life in my opinion.

Dan


If you bother to read it, it cites 22,000,000 as the total population of
Iraq. It goes on to say that the total number of people killed over the
23 year span of Saddam's reign was approximately 1,000,000 and point out
that this figure includes 800,000 Iraqis, Kuwaitis, Iranians, and other
foreign nationals killed as a result of various wars (the major portion
from the US-sponsored war with Iran) over the past quarter century.

It then goes on to cite an estimate of 200,000 killed by the regime in
the various prisons/gulags/torture centers, etc.

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 17:03:11 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Koz" wrote in message
...

The point? IT"S ENTERTAINMENT. Get over the notion that it's anything
else. This includes Limbaugh, Almost all news, etc. They are in the
BUSINESS of SALES. Don't like it? Make your own movie and entertain
those with similar viewpoints to you. Maybe you'll make some money too
and **** off us liberals :)

It's interesting, though, that he has a team of researchers who he says have
checked every fact, and a team of lawyers threatening, and just itching to
sue for libel any right-wing pundit who calls him a liar in print.

My guess is that he really, really hopes they will. Think about what it
would do for the box office. d8-)

Ed Huntress


Chuckle...its starting....
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/1/00111.shtml
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 11:59 p.m. EDT
Richard Clarke: Big Part of Moore's Movie 'a Mistake'

Former White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke, who served as a
principal source for conspiracy filmmaker Michael Moore's movie
"Fahrenheit 9/11," said this week that the central premise of the film
is "a mistake."

In an interview with the Associated Press, Clarke took issue with
Moore's criticism that President Bush allowed prominent Saudis,
including members of Osama bin Laden's family, to fly out of the U.S.
in the days after the 9/11 attacks.

Saying Moore's version of the episode has provoked "a tempest in a tea
pot," Clarke called his decision to make the bin Laden family flyout a
big part of the film's indictment against Bush "a mistake."
"After 9/11, I think the Saudis were perfectly justified ... in
fearing the possibility of vigilantism against Saudis in this country.
When they asked to evacuate their citizens ... I thought it was a
perfectly normal request," he explained.

In May, Clarke confessed that he and he alone made the decision to
approve the flyouts.

"It didn’t get any higher than me,” he told The Hill newspaper. "On
9/11, 9/12 and 9/13, many things didn’t get any higher than me. I
decided it in consultation with the FBI.”

Clarke told the 9/11 Commission the same thing in March, after first
detailing the episode for Vanity Fair magazine last August - leaving
plenty of time for Moore to adjust his film to the facts as recounted
by his primary source.

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 22:09:33 -0400, john
wrote:



Bob G wrote:

On 30 Jun 2004 04:06:49 -0700, (Cliff Huprich)
wrote:

Chuckle. good post Cliff, I like good comedy.

Damn, I gotta hand it to Moore. He has found a good money making gig.
Better than the usual Flim-Flam man scams, and he puts the snake-oil
salesmen to shame. Since he found out he could get a LOT more press,
publicity, and so forth by throwing temper tantrums and saying
outrageous things like he did on a tour in England ... he's been about
to vastly raise his price as a guest speaker. And even gets attention
paid to his so-so, second rate films.


He must have been listening to rush and picked up his scam. I wonder if
he is on painkillers too.

chop


LOL way to go Johnny... bury your head in the sand. I noticed you
didnt comment on those links to those liberals commentators who spoke
their mind on Moores "documentary"

I wonder..hey Johnny...are they traitors to the Liberal Cause cause
they said Moore was a lying fat sack of ****?

Gunner






John

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Gary Coffman writes:

Most of Iraq's dual use pesticide/war gas chemicals and chemical plant
came from Germany, though parts of it were bought from Britain and the
US (IMI and Dupont respectively).

The really funny bit is how the US administration maneuvered Iraq off
the official terrorist friendly nations list in order to be able to
let those deals go through and enable their good friend Saddam to use
gas on the Iranians and Kurds. The person in charge of this exercise?
(Drum roll...) Donald Rumsfeld! :-)

-tih
--
Tom Ivar Helbekkmo, Senior System Administrator, EUnet Norway
www.eunet.no T: +47-22092958 M: +47-93013940 F: +47-22092901

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 04:54:01 GMT, Gunner
wrote:


Chuckle...its starting....
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/1/00111.shtml
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 11:59 p.m. EDT
Richard Clarke: Big Part of Moore's Movie 'a Mistake'

Former White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke, who served as a
principal source for conspiracy filmmaker Michael Moore's movie
"Fahrenheit 9/11," said this week that the central premise of the film
is "a mistake."

In an interview with the Associated Press, Clarke took issue with
Moore's criticism that President Bush allowed prominent Saudis,
including members of Osama bin Laden's family, to fly out of the U.S.
in the days after the 9/11 attacks.

Saying Moore's version of the episode has provoked "a tempest in a tea
pot," Clarke called his decision to make the bin Laden family flyout a
big part of the film's indictment against Bush "a mistake."
"After 9/11, I think the Saudis were perfectly justified ... in
fearing the possibility of vigilantism against Saudis in this country.
When they asked to evacuate their citizens ... I thought it was a
perfectly normal request," he explained.

In May, Clarke confessed that he and he alone made the decision to
approve the flyouts.

"It didn’t get any higher than me,” he told The Hill newspaper. "On
9/11, 9/12 and 9/13, many things didn’t get any higher than me. I
decided it in consultation with the FBI.”

Clarke told the 9/11 Commission the same thing in March, after first
detailing the episode for Vanity Fair magazine last August - leaving
plenty of time for Moore to adjust his film to the facts as recounted
by his primary source.


Quack Quack.... where is that stupid duck?

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On 1 Jul 2004 21:03:06 -0700, (Dan Caster) wrote:
I was quite sure that I had read 8 million killed in the Iran- Iraq
war. But now I can only find that estimates run as high as 1.5
million.

It's a bitch when truth starts to filter through the propaganda.

Gary

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 01:50:30 GMT, Sue wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 20:20:27 -0500, Bob G wrote:


$87 Billion is enough to pay the 3.3 million people who have lost jobs under
George W. Bush $26,363.00 each! The unemployment benefits extension passed
by Congress at the beginning of this year provides zero benefits to workers
who exhausted their regular, state unemployment benefits and cannot find
work [Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities].

Which they'd probably spend foolishly, anyway. If yah check into it,
MOST folks who get a sudden cash windfall which they didn't actually
have to work for, tend to squander it very quickly.

I agree with you for the most part. Had a welfare client many years
ago who inherited some small amount of money. He bought himself a big
fancy, powerful car. Paid cash, no insurance, totaled it about 3
weeks into his ownership. Not the worst thing he ever did. Killed
his wife some while later. She was a druggy, in the hospital having
their 3rd or 4th child. He smuggled some heroin in and she wound up
dying right in the hospital of an OD.
I have a client right now who stands to inherit around $150,000 from
her recently deceased grandmother. Sigh. I *know* she's going to
blow it.
Now, I, on the other hand (ahem), upon inheriting from my mother put
$105,000 down on my house (leaving a balance of about $36,000), bought
almost all new furniture (had just had a house fire that destroyed
most everything I owned) and paid off my car. I suppose the extremely
expensive trip I took to Alaska (took 3 of my children, my 2
grandchildren and one associate for a week to go to my oldest
daughter's graduation from U of A) was rather frivolous, but I
wouldn't have traded it for anything.

I said -most-, Sue. Even emphasized it by capitalizing it so it'd
stand out in the sentence. I did not say ALL.

As to the family trip to see daughter's graduation. I don't think
I'd, personally, spend a small fortune on such an event ... per se.
OTOH, it makes a good excuse for a nice family get together and trip,
emphasis on the family aspect, rather than simply the graduation.

Now, I've spent a lot of money on such, a family get together and
trip, time spent together, and so forth. Worth every penny spent,
IMHO.

Wasn't that we had luxury accomodations, nor that we traveled 1st
class, etc which made the trip expensive. ie On one such, we went in a
full sized van. Stayed at modest, but decent hotels. Ate at modest
restaurants for the most part, when we ate at restaurants. Routinely
we kept a cooler full of food and ate in the van, or at a roadside
rest stop, or in a hotel room. When we did not eat with relatives iin
their homes. But on the road, I insisted we take the time to eat at
least one sit down, hot meal per day.

The expensive part came from the fact that it was a 3 week trip. We
made the tour thru areas of Oklahoma, Texas, and Louisiana where I was
born and raised. Stopping to see relatives along the way. Also
stopping to see sights I thought worthwhile. The idea of that trip
was to give our kids a feel for who dad was, where he came from, etc.
Group was myself, my wife, our 2 natural kids, and our adopted
daughter. The kids were born in various places, and had lived in
various places, when younger. Were teens at this time. Had no real
memories of any place but Minnesota. My wife had decided she wanted
em to see my past and history.

So we went off and did the tour of the Cherokee Nation, visited old
house where I was born and raised, fallen to ruins by this time.
Spent time with my Cherokee relatives. Chuckle, I think my kids were
a little disappointed. When they found out my relatives don't live in
teepees and wear pretty much the same clothes as most people. And
pretty much talk about the same things, most of the time. Did enjoy
the visit to the small ranch owned by one of my uncles. Then we
continued south. They didn't like Dallas. Too big, too crowded, to
noisy. I had to agree. And it no longer looked anything like the
Dallas I remembered. On to San Antonio. Which they liked. On to
Houston .... then Galveston ... then into bayou country in coastal
Louisiana. Where my daughter asked me what language my uncle and his
horde of kids and grandkids were speaking. To which I answered,
"English, honey. Well ... it's kinda-sorta English anyway." LOL.
She'd asked me to translate what they were saying for her, as she
couldn't understand em. Unc had married this cute little cajun gal.
And she and her relatives are back in the swamps and bayous types,
country folk, who avoid cities. So their accent is quite pronounced.
Even uncle's, as he's adapted to her and her family's ways.

Anyway, a nice family trip and time together can be worth every dime
it costs. To me, anyway.

Chuckle, but I had to pay outta my own money. No inheritance came my
way. But I don't blame yah for spending some inheritance for such.
No matter how yah did it and funded it, family time is worthwhile.
IMHO.

Of course, I'd suppose there are many reading this group who'd
disagree.

If Moore and his ilk would spend less time bashing others, less time
telling each other how wonderful and caring they are, and less time
lining own pockets with money by saying the things they know people
want to hear. And more time physically getting up off ass, and
personally putting out the effort to help the neighbor down the street
having a hard time. We'd all be better off.

Just think of all the good he could do with the profits from his
movie. Hmmm. Wonder how much he will donate to charity. Anyone seen
anything on that?
Sue

I wouldn't know. And while I may not like Moore, I don't think he has
some automatic obligation to give away his money. His choice to make.

However, he and many others of his ilk often irritate me with their
speeches calling for the GOVERNMENT to do more.

There isn't any such thing as GOVERNMENT MONEY. Government does not
run a business, nor make a profit. Their money comes from me. And
you, and from the individual residents in the US. Their money is
TAKEN from us, by force if necessary.

Now, unlike some who might be reading this post. I'm not against
taxes, per se. Hey, I use the roads. Like having the deputy sheriffs
where I live on duty. Our fire department is volunteer, but local
taxes buy their equipment. Schools are a good thing. And so forth.
And as I've mentioned before, I haven't any problem with social
programs to aid the truly handicapped, and so forth. I only rant
against the fraud, waste, and abuse inherent in some of the social
welfare programs. And will argue that some spending, and some
programs are an utter waste of time. But I'm not against the basic
idea of helping the truly needy.

However, many of the things Moore advocates DO NOT work, have been
tried in the past and have been proven not to work. And he does not
speak for me. If he wants his pet projects funded ... far as I'm
concerned he can reach into his own pocket and fund them. I'm tired
of him trying to pick my pocket without my consent.

I have no way of knowing for sure. But I'd bet a fair chunk on the
fact that out of discretionary spending money, not tax money which is
taken from yah like it or not, that I give more money voluntarily as a
percentage of my income to various social and charity causes than
Moore does.

And when it comes to actual, personal time and effort spent helping
others, I'd bet I expend more than Moore and his ilk do. I do not
count Moore's appearances as guest speaker and lecturer, etc where he
is paid to put on his appearance.

As I alluded to before, I'd rather see less time talking and shooting
off big mouth, patting self on back and telling everyone how wonderful
you are, looking for photo-ops and publicity, opportunities to promote
new book or film, etc out of Moore and his ilk. And see more true
sincerity out of em. ie ACTION ... get off ass and DO something.

I could've just scribbled check out to one fellow, for instance. Or
tossed him some pocket change. An acquaintance, young one. 26 years
old. Likely, he'd have spent it quickly and been back in same
position as before. Met him on a job site. Where he made an
appearance seeking work. I couldn't help him directly as the company
for whom I work does not have positions for the unskilled and under
educated. But I do know some folks. I noticed he'd gotten some work
from a masonry outfit on the job site as a manual laborer. Also
noticed he slept over night in his old beat up car. They only had a
few days work for him. So he was making his rounds asking if anyone
else had anything. I got to chatting with him.

Common story. Goofed off in school and dropped out. Partied and did
too many drugs and too much booze. Fun for a while. But after a
while, one after one family and relatives stopped helping him and
giving him handouts. Only friends he had left were about as useless
as himself. Now he was older. And somewhere along the way he'd
shacked up with this gal. And now they had a baby. And he'd gotten
older. Was feeling some responsibility. Stopped the boozing and
drugs. Was wanting to make new start. Really, really wanted to
support the gal and baby. They had a place, poor one, out in the
sticks. Unused, old house, rented to em by a farmer. To save some
money as he didn't make much, he hunted up jobs and if it was far
away, did what he was doing. Slept in car to save gas on commuting.
Ate sandwiches after going to store to buy loaf of bread and some
lunch meat. Went back home on weekend.

He was getting by, barely. Proud of that. But wanted to do better
for his gal and kid.

Anyway, I talked around, pulled string here and there with friends.
Got him some temporary work. Warned him that it was manual labor, not
fun. And if he didn't work ass off and sweat profusely, he was a
goner. A friend was willing to use him. But it was hot, dirty work,
ripping out a lot of old stuff in some machinery rooms that were
getting new equipment. And friend would pay decent wage. $14 an
hour. BUT ... if guy get hit it, balls to the walls for his 8 hours a
day, friend would dump him like a hot rock. Friend has his own little
business. HVAC guy. Had no time for the lazy or slackers. Took bid
contracts, which had only so many hours to get things done, and a
schedule. So when it was working time, employees had to hit it and
hit it hard and fast. Friend sometimes used temporary help for
ripouts. So he could keep trained help (and more expensive help)
productive in areas which required their skills.

Kid took offer. And my friend was merciless, and took no excuses. But
kid kept up with the demands, worked his ass off. Friend and I, over
time talked about the kid. Both of us hit him up with the idea of kid
getting GED. I gave kid some study books. And even spent some
tutoring time. So did my friend. Surprise, surprise. Kid actually
read the books and did the exercises. This was a good thing. Showed
sincerity. Finally, kid took test and passed it. Friend had not said
he would, just told kid that he wasn't ever gonna get in the HVAC biz
these days without at least a HS diploma or GED to start with. Really
needed a tech school. But when kid got GED, friend hired him as a
regular employee. Not as a HVAC tech. Not qualified. General
laborer and gopher (go-for). We both know the right folks, did some
talking, got an instructor at a vo-tech to grease the skids and get
the kid into a part-time, night class for HVAC. Friend contributed
some company money. Tech teacher did paperwork to get kid some little
bit extra tuition help thru some program.

This past winter kid graduated with a certificate. Not as good as the
2 yr degree. But it was something. Enough so friend could sponsor
kid into getting into local HVAC union as an apprentice.

So kid is on his way. Good, hard worker. Putting his all into it.
Smart, too. When he puts mind to it. Gotta put in his time, a few
years, attend the union night classes, etc. But if yah didn't know,
he can make as much as a 4 year college degree grad if and when he
makes journeyman status. Or more. Top journeyman negotiate own wages
above union scale. Many make well more than the average college grad,
if they're really good.

Thing is, if kid had been trying to flim-flam us, whining and pleading
he was helpless and a victim of circumstances, chances are we'd not
have bothered. Experience dictates we'd likely have been wasting our
time. If a guy really means what he says, he'll be willing to sweat
his ass off and get sore muscles to get it done. Just my opinion, and
experience. Giving somebody something for nothing, or for little
effort, is useless more times than not. As far as really helping em
out in the long run.

Bob

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Glenn Ashmore wrote:

Terry Collins wrote:

Some of you might get a chuckle out of this.
http://www.politicalcompass.org

Interesting. I came out right where I thought I was. Right on the big
middle line between Left and Right and 2 blocks toward Libertarian. The
problem is the right wingers consider everyone more than 2 blocks of the
Right side to be a Commie.

Now. Where is the BS susceptibility index test for Gunner and his friends?

Glenn Ashmore

I came out left- right 0.38
lib.- auth. 0.26

I guess that makes me a real Middle of the roader.
Or does it mean I can't make my mind up? :-)
...lew...

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

In article A_%Ec.9609$7t3.8098@attbi_s51, Scott Moore
writes:

Remember that little package of "anthrax" that Powell waved around
the
United Nations?


So ? I seem to recal the USA being attacked with anthrax.

Which DNA tests indicated came from the US weapons stores
of "WMDs".
NOT Iraq.

The liberals seem to believe that lying and exaggeration is
"justified".

Wingers .. go figure.
BTW, The *whole US* was not attacked. Certainly not by Iraq with
a smidgen of Anthrax.

BTW-II -- NOBODY, not even the shrub, has so far dared to point
out any errors of fact AFAIK.
Just a bunch of right-wing space cadets calling names, lying &
being foul-mouthed idiots or morons (both of which they are making
look bad).

Expect complaints from the Idiots & Morons Union local 327.
--
Cliff

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

In article , Stephen Moore
writes:

And sadly he has millions of "brain-dead"
followers ready to drink the Kool-Aid.

Do I detect a severe case of Acidosis?

All this name calling by right-wingers with nary a fact to support
their
(so far) nonexistent claims (many quite blatent lies have however been
said)
..... or the shrub's prior ones ...

http://bookandpaper.org/exhibitions2...singGorge.html
--
Cliff

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Scott Moore wrote:
RainLover wrote:

How about The president and all of his top cabinette people lying
about Iraq being involved with 9/11?

According to the liberals.

AND THE SHRUB hisownself now claims that Iraq had nothing to do with it.

What about The president and his people lying about the weapons of
mass destruction that they had 'secret' PROOF of?

According to the liberals.

I beleive a bipartisan Congressional investigation has come to the same
conclusion.

Remember that little package of "anthrax" that Powell waved around the
United Nations?

So ? I seem to recal the USA being attacked with anthrax. Humm, musta
dreamed that.

The FBI seems to have spent a lot of time investigating Americans rather
than Iraqis for that.

Both sides justify their position. The liberals seem to believe that
lying and exaggeration is "justified".

What the heck do you think Rush and his ilk have been doing for the past
10 years?

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Cliff Huprich wrote in article
. ..

SNIP

Just a bunch of right-wing space cadets calling names, lying &
being foul-mouthed idiots or morons (both of which they are making
look bad).

Expect complaints from the Idiots & Morons Union local 327.


Funny....when Conservatives have complained about the degradation of
language and communications into in-your-face,
who-cares-about-your-sensitivities profanity, liberals say, "Don't get so
uptight....It's only words."

Yet, when Conservatives use that very same language, they are
"...foul-mouthed idiots."

I believe that is the definitive example of the term "double standard".

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 06:20:09 -0500, Bob G wrote:


I wouldn't know. And while I may not like Moore, I don't think he has
some automatic obligation to give away his money. His choice to make.

It would seem that Moore might get a *smaller* share of the profits
than charities will.

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/busin...lash-financial

A quote from the article -

"When other tallies are later added in -- including foreign ticket
revenue, DVD and video sales, and licensing the film to TV networks --
it is expected to be an impressive bounty. One wild card is how much
Mr. Moore himself will make via his own profit participation in the
movie, which people close to the matter describe as generous. That
amountwill be deducted from the take before the Weinsteins and the
charities divvy up the rest. Mr. Moore's Los Angeles agent, Ari
Emanuel, declined to discuss Mr. Moore's compensation but indicated it
would be less than what the charities receive."

Wayne

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 17:03:11 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Koz" wrote in message
...

The point? IT"S ENTERTAINMENT. Get over the notion that it's anything
else. This includes Limbaugh, Almost all news, etc. They are in the
BUSINESS of SALES. Don't like it? Make your own movie and entertain
those with similar viewpoints to you. Maybe you'll make some money too
and **** off us liberals :)

It's interesting, though, that he has a team of researchers who he says have
checked every fact, and a team of lawyers threatening, and just itching to
sue for libel any right-wing pundit who calls him a liar in print.

My guess is that he really, really hopes they will. Think about what it
would do for the box office. d8-)

Ed Huntress



Chuckle...its starting....
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/1/00111.shtml
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 11:59 p.m. EDT
Richard Clarke: Big Part of Moore's Movie 'a Mistake'

Former White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke, who served as a
principal source for conspiracy filmmaker Michael Moore's movie
"Fahrenheit 9/11," said this week that the central premise of the film
is "a mistake."

In an interview with the Associated Press, Clarke took issue with
Moore's criticism that President Bush allowed prominent Saudis,
including members of Osama bin Laden's family, to fly out of the U.S.
in the days after the 9/11 attacks.

Saying Moore's version of the episode has provoked "a tempest in a tea
pot," Clarke called his decision to make the bin Laden family flyout a
big part of the film's indictment against Bush "a mistake."
"After 9/11, I think the Saudis were perfectly justified ... in
fearing the possibility of vigilantism against Saudis in this country.
When they asked to evacuate their citizens ... I thought it was a
perfectly normal request," he explained.

In May, Clarke confessed that he and he alone made the decision to
approve the flyouts.

"It didn’t get any higher than me,” he told The Hill newspaper. "On
9/11, 9/12 and 9/13, many things didn’t get any higher than me. I
decided it in consultation with the FBI.”

Clarke told the 9/11 Commission the same thing in March, after first
detailing the episode for Vanity Fair magazine last August - leaving
plenty of time for Moore to adjust his film to the facts as recounted
by his primary source.



Now I'm really confused, Richard Clarke has already been labeled a
worthless, lying, sack of commie **** by all the right-thinking
republicans and their disk jockey leaders, so either Moore must really
be onto something, or the right wingers are full of **** (we know that's
impossible, since only evil liberals lie), or could it be that the talk
radio gurus are misleading their flock.....

BTW, Fox News, which only speaks the absolute unbiased truth, gave a
rave review to Moore's latest effort, here's your cite Gunner:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122680,00.html

Does this mean that we can't even trust FOX anymore, and maybe Michael
Savage is the only true prophet left?

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 10:16:30 -0500, Bob Robinson
wrote:

Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 17:03:11 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Koz" wrote in message
...

The point? IT"S ENTERTAINMENT. Get over the notion that it's anything
else. This includes Limbaugh, Almost all news, etc. They are in the
BUSINESS of SALES. Don't like it? Make your own movie and entertain
those with similar viewpoints to you. Maybe you'll make some money too
and **** off us liberals :)

It's interesting, though, that he has a team of researchers who he says have
checked every fact, and a team of lawyers threatening, and just itching to
sue for libel any right-wing pundit who calls him a liar in print.

My guess is that he really, really hopes they will. Think about what it
would do for the box office. d8-)

Ed Huntress



Chuckle...its starting....
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/1/00111.shtml
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 11:59 p.m. EDT
Richard Clarke: Big Part of Moore's Movie 'a Mistake'

Former White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke, who served as a
principal source for conspiracy filmmaker Michael Moore's movie
"Fahrenheit 9/11," said this week that the central premise of the film
is "a mistake."

In an interview with the Associated Press, Clarke took issue with
Moore's criticism that President Bush allowed prominent Saudis,
including members of Osama bin Laden's family, to fly out of the U.S.
in the days after the 9/11 attacks.

Saying Moore's version of the episode has provoked "a tempest in a tea
pot," Clarke called his decision to make the bin Laden family flyout a
big part of the film's indictment against Bush "a mistake."
"After 9/11, I think the Saudis were perfectly justified ... in
fearing the possibility of vigilantism against Saudis in this country.
When they asked to evacuate their citizens ... I thought it was a
perfectly normal request," he explained.

In May, Clarke confessed that he and he alone made the decision to
approve the flyouts.

"It didn’t get any higher than me,” he told The Hill newspaper. "On
9/11, 9/12 and 9/13, many things didn’t get any higher than me. I
decided it in consultation with the FBI.”

Clarke told the 9/11 Commission the same thing in March, after first
detailing the episode for Vanity Fair magazine last August - leaving
plenty of time for Moore to adjust his film to the facts as recounted
by his primary source.



Now I'm really confused, Richard Clarke has already been labeled a
worthless, lying, sack of commie **** by all the right-thinking
republicans and their disk jockey leaders, so either Moore must really
be onto something, or the right wingers are full of **** (we know that's
impossible, since only evil liberals lie), or could it be that the talk
radio gurus are misleading their flock.....

BTW, Fox News, which only speaks the absolute unbiased truth, gave a
rave review to Moore's latest effort, here's your cite Gunner:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122680,00.html

It only goes to show that Fox indeed has people on both sides of the
political spectrum and is not afraid to post both sides. I believe
they claim to be fair and balanced do they not? Now when the Big 3
have similar commentators speak negatively about Moore.. EG

Does this mean that we can't even trust FOX anymore, and maybe Michael
Savage is the only true prophet left?

See above.
As to Richard Clark..even he didn't want to be nailed to the wall when
the fallout from the lies in Moores movie starts floating around. He
was called on his own brand of :truth:, so Id think he has gotten a
bit of the gospel by now.

Gunner




"The entire population of Great Britain has been declared insane by
their government. It is believed that should any one of them come in
possession of a firearm, he will immediately start to foam at the
mouth and begin kiling children at the nearest school. The proof of
their insanity is that they actually believe this."
-- someone in misc.survivalism

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Gunner wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 10:16:30 -0500, Bob Robinson
wrote:


Gunner wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 17:03:11 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



"Koz" wrote in message
...


The point? IT"S ENTERTAINMENT. Get over the notion that it's anything
else. This includes Limbaugh, Almost all news, etc. They are in the
BUSINESS of SALES. Don't like it? Make your own movie and entertain
those with similar viewpoints to you. Maybe you'll make some money too
and **** off us liberals :)

It's interesting, though, that he has a team of researchers who he says have
checked every fact, and a team of lawyers threatening, and just itching to
sue for libel any right-wing pundit who calls him a liar in print.

My guess is that he really, really hopes they will. Think about what it
would do for the box office. d8-)

Ed Huntress



Chuckle...its starting....
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/1/00111.shtml
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 11:59 p.m. EDT
Richard Clarke: Big Part of Moore's Movie 'a Mistake'

Former White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke, who served as a
principal source for conspiracy filmmaker Michael Moore's movie
"Fahrenheit 9/11," said this week that the central premise of the film
is "a mistake."

In an interview with the Associated Press, Clarke took issue with
Moore's criticism that President Bush allowed prominent Saudis,
including members of Osama bin Laden's family, to fly out of the U.S.
in the days after the 9/11 attacks.

Saying Moore's version of the episode has provoked "a tempest in a tea
pot," Clarke called his decision to make the bin Laden family flyout a
big part of the film's indictment against Bush "a mistake."
"After 9/11, I think the Saudis were perfectly justified ... in
fearing the possibility of vigilantism against Saudis in this country.
When they asked to evacuate their citizens ... I thought it was a
perfectly normal request," he explained.

In May, Clarke confessed that he and he alone made the decision to
approve the flyouts.

"It didn’t get any higher than me,” he told The Hill newspaper. "On
9/11, 9/12 and 9/13, many things didn’t get any higher than me. I
decided it in consultation with the FBI.”

Clarke told the 9/11 Commission the same thing in March, after first
detailing the episode for Vanity Fair magazine last August - leaving
plenty of time for Moore to adjust his film to the facts as recounted
by his primary source.



Now I'm really confused, Richard Clarke has already been labeled a
worthless, lying, sack of commie **** by all the right-thinking
republicans and their disk jockey leaders, so either Moore must really
be onto something, or the right wingers are full of **** (we know that's
impossible, since only evil liberals lie), or could it be that the talk
radio gurus are misleading their flock.....

BTW, Fox News, which only speaks the absolute unbiased truth, gave a
rave review to Moore's latest effort, here's your cite Gunner:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122680,00.html


It only goes to show that Fox indeed has people on both sides of the
political spectrum and is not afraid to post both sides. I believe
they claim to be fair and balanced do they not? Now when the Big 3
have similar commentators speak negatively about Moore.. EG


Seems they all have (see cites below), but I guess you feel comfortable
criticizing networks you never watch and movies you haven't seen. Back
to the original question, if the lying liberal-biased media are
criticizing the film and the un-biased Fox Network is praising it, where
do you suppose the truth lies? Bonus Question: Could the intellectual
giants of talk radio have a hidden agenda, or could they be purposely
misleading their listeners??? BG


http://abcnews.go.com/sections/ThisW...e040620-1.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in626685.shtml

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/

Looking forward to your take on this,

Bob

Does this mean that we can't even trust FOX anymore, and maybe Michael
Savage is the only true prophet left?


See above.
As to Richard Clark..even he didn't want to be nailed to the wall when
the fallout from the lies in Moores movie starts floating around. He
was called on his own brand of :truth:, so Id think he has gotten a
bit of the gospel by now.

Gunner




"The entire population of Great Britain has been declared insane by
their government. It is believed that should any one of them come in
possession of a firearm, he will immediately start to foam at the
mouth and begin kiling children at the nearest school. The proof of
their insanity is that they actually believe this."
-- someone in misc.survivalism

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Gunner wrote:

Now I'm really confused, Richard Clarke has already been labeled a
worthless, lying, sack of commie **** by all the right-thinking
republicans and their disk jockey leaders, so either Moore must really
be onto something, or the right wingers are full of **** (we know that's
impossible, since only evil liberals lie), or could it be that the talk
radio gurus are misleading their flock.....

BTW, Fox News, which only speaks the absolute unbiased truth, gave a
rave review to Moore's latest effort, here's your cite Gunner:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122680,00.html

It only goes to show that Fox indeed has people on both sides of the
political spectrum and is not afraid to post both sides. I believe
they claim to be fair and balanced do they not? Now when the Big 3
have similar commentators speak negatively about Moore.. EG

Possibly it was because FOX is such a prolific generator of outrageous
political BS that they just had to recognize a master of the art. :-)

More likely though that after getting burned real bad on the Franken
suit they are taking a different tack. Endorse it and maybe voters who
know the crap FOX spews will decide not to go see it.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 22:22:15 -0400, Glenn Ashmore
calmly ranted:



Terry Collins wrote:

Some of you might get a chuckle out of this.
http://www.politicalcompass.org

Interesting. I came out right where I thought I was. Right on the big
middle line between Left and Right and 2 blocks toward Libertarian. The
problem is the right wingers consider everyone more than 2 blocks of the
Right side to be a Commie.

Now. Where is the BS susceptibility index test for Gunner and his friends?

With the OVERT exception of his bud, the Shrub, Gunner doesn't
seem to be very susceptible to BS, Glenn. ;)


--
If you turn the United States on its side,
everything loose will fall to California.
--Frank Lloyd Wright

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

LOL way to go Johnny... bury your head in the sand. I noticed you
didnt comment on those links to those liberals commentators who spoke
their mind on Moores "documentary"


Gunner, it must of gone right over your head. I was only illustrating
that most of the commentators, rush, mm, hanity (sp) and the others are
in it for the dollar. You are so jaded you can't even open your left
eye.




John

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

"Ed Huntress" wrote in
. net:

Oh, boy, this is going to drive the right-wingers right up the wall.
g

Why should it Ed?

Just because it drove the left wingers up the wall when Mel Gibson released
the "Passion". I remember alot of people on here bitchin and moanin about
that one and they never saw it.

MM has every right to show his film. I have every right to watch or not watch
it.

I just cant see me spending 12 bucks to put in his fat assed pocket. Has
nothing to do with his movie. Everything to do with the man itself.

And for the rest of y'all that are bitchin and moanin about this movie, go
download it for free from one of the binary groups. Watch it, then bitch and
moan. Dont act like a hypocritical liberal. There's enuff of them around
right here.

Bing
--
Follow me the wise man said, but he walked behind.

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

"Bing" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote in
. net:

Oh, boy, this is going to drive the right-wingers right up the wall.
g

Why should it Ed?

Duh, I don' know, Bing, why do you suppose? Their usually reliable [Where in
the] Fox the News [?] just ran a review that said Michael Moore's film is
brilliant and patriotic. Do you suppose they're all out there nodding their
heads in agreement? Or blowing out blood vessels in every exposed part of
their bodies?

--
Ed Huntress
(remove "3" from email address for email reply)

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

I Did it!!!!!

I usually sit here and notice how flawlessly Ed writes and envy his
skills. Finally I can gloat over a typo/ill-chosen word and feel that I
am somehow superior to the world for about 2 minutes :)

Seriously, this whole thread is really cracking me up. It's clearly
showing that EACH side gives great merit to the things they want to hear
while tromping on that which they don't..regardless of "supporting
facts" or lack of. Each end of the spectrum is happy to be the choir
which is "preached to[at]". Each side believes the flimsy that supports
their argument to be credible and the strong that opposes to be flimsy.
There are few actually in the middle trying to find balance.

Koz (who is still getting a good laugh at the nature of opinion and it's
application in debate)



Ed Huntress wrote:

"Bing" wrote in message
...


"Ed Huntress" wrote in
v.net:



Oh, boy, this is going to drive the right-wingers right up the wall.
g


Why should it Ed?



Duh, I don' know, Bing, why do you suppose? Their usually reliable [Where in
the] Fox the News [?] just ran a review that said Michael Moore's film is
brilliant and patriotic. Do you suppose they're all out there nodding their
heads in agreement? Or blowing out blood vessels in every exposed part of
their bodies?

Instant wealth was ... OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

It being a dull day, I decide to respond to what Sue
fosted Fri, 02 Jul 2004 01:50:30 GMT on misc.survivalism , viz:

Which they'd probably spend foolishly, anyway. If yah check into it,
MOST folks who get a sudden cash windfall which they didn't actually
have to work for, tend to squander it very quickly.

I agree with you for the most part. Had a welfare client many years
ago who inherited some small amount of money. He bought himself a big
fancy, powerful car. Paid cash, no insurance, totaled it about 3
weeks into his ownership. Not the worst thing he ever did. Killed
his wife some while later. She was a druggy, in the hospital having
their 3rd or 4th child. He smuggled some heroin in and she wound up
dying right in the hospital of an OD.
I have a client right now who stands to inherit around $150,000 from
her recently deceased grandmother. Sigh. I *know* she's going to
blow it.
Now, I, on the other hand (ahem), upon inheriting from my mother put
$105,000 down on my house (leaving a balance of about $36,000), bought
almost all new furniture (had just had a house fire that destroyed
most everything I owned) and paid off my car. I suppose the extremely
expensive trip I took to Alaska (took 3 of my children, my 2
grandchildren and one associate for a week to go to my oldest
daughter's graduation from U of A) was rather frivolous, but I
wouldn't have traded it for anything.

Others might consider it "frivolous" but you were performing a useful
economic service, providing employment to members of the community. Some
years ago, my grand father, age 83, went to Lisbon Portugal to see "his
bridge" - the first bridge to span the mouth of the Tejo river. Many were
upset at this, but my mother, his daughter was adamant: it is his money, he
can do with it as he wills. "But what if something happens." He's 83, so
what. To which I commented later, the worse that could happen is he has a
heart attack and dies - on the way to the bridge,a nd doesn't get to see
'his' bridge. (His firm had done the engineering for the foundations of
the bridge, which is why it was "his" bridge.)

That's one reason I have little problems with the "idle rich", as long
as they are spending their money. After all, if they didn't have more
money than sense, who would be able to bill them $200 a month to come to
their house and watch their favorite soap operas with the cat every day?
(It is a tough job, but why didn't I think of it first?)

Lord Fitzgerald attempted
to fix the electric light
himself. It killed him
and serves him right.
It is the duty of the wealthy man
to provide employment to the artisan.
Hillare Belloc (from my memory.)

--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Koz wrote in
:

I Did it!!!!!

I usually sit here and notice how flawlessly Ed writes and envy his
skills. Finally I can gloat over a typo/ill-chosen word and feel that
I am somehow superior to the world for about 2 minutes :)


Yer 2 minutes are up!
BTW, most people opt for 15.

Sorry.

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

Gunner wrote in
:

I wonder..hey Johnny...are they traitors to the Liberal Cause cause
they said Moore was a lying fat sack of ****?

You forgot lying fat sack of faggot.

Y'all are gonna have to git with the program.

Bing

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

"Ed Huntress" wrote in
t:

"Bing" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote in
. net:

Oh, boy, this is going to drive the right-wingers right up the
wall. g

Why should it Ed?

Duh, I don' know, Bing, why do you suppose? Their usually reliable
[Where in the] Fox the News [?] just ran a review that said Michael
Moore's film is brilliant and patriotic. Do you suppose they're all
out there nodding their heads in agreement? Or blowing out blood
vessels in every exposed part of their bodies?

I doubt they are blowing blood vessels.
Seems that most peeps cant fathom a network being fair an balanced.
Oh the pain of sheeple addicted to ABC or CNN.

But, FOX is usualy reliable?
Did some aliens put you inna pod or something?

Maybe they WANT you to see the movie. For whatever evil they want to
spread. Ever thought about that?

So what do you think Ed? Fair and balanced or an agenda?
Or perhaps that reporter just has a job to do.

Oh let Koz have another laugh. He's got 13 minutes left for fame and
glory. :)

Bing
--
Follow me the wise man said, but he walked behind.

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 11:55:41 -0500, Bob Robinson
wrote:

Gunner wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 10:16:30 -0500, Bob Robinson
wrote:


Gunner wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 17:03:11 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



"Koz" wrote in message
...


The point? IT"S ENTERTAINMENT. Get over the notion that it's anything
else. This includes Limbaugh, Almost all news, etc. They are in the
BUSINESS of SALES. Don't like it? Make your own movie and entertain
those with similar viewpoints to you. Maybe you'll make some money too
and **** off us liberals :)

It's interesting, though, that he has a team of researchers who he says have
checked every fact, and a team of lawyers threatening, and just itching to
sue for libel any right-wing pundit who calls him a liar in print.

My guess is that he really, really hopes they will. Think about what it
would do for the box office. d8-)

Ed Huntress



Chuckle...its starting....
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/1/00111.shtml
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 11:59 p.m. EDT
Richard Clarke: Big Part of Moore's Movie 'a Mistake'

Former White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke, who served as a
principal source for conspiracy filmmaker Michael Moore's movie
"Fahrenheit 9/11," said this week that the central premise of the film
is "a mistake."

In an interview with the Associated Press, Clarke took issue with
Moore's criticism that President Bush allowed prominent Saudis,
including members of Osama bin Laden's family, to fly out of the U.S.
in the days after the 9/11 attacks.

Saying Moore's version of the episode has provoked "a tempest in a tea
pot," Clarke called his decision to make the bin Laden family flyout a
big part of the film's indictment against Bush "a mistake."
"After 9/11, I think the Saudis were perfectly justified ... in
fearing the possibility of vigilantism against Saudis in this country.
When they asked to evacuate their citizens ... I thought it was a
perfectly normal request," he explained.

In May, Clarke confessed that he and he alone made the decision to
approve the flyouts.

"It didn’t get any higher than me,” he told The Hill newspaper. "On
9/11, 9/12 and 9/13, many things didn’t get any higher than me. I
decided it in consultation with the FBI.”

Clarke told the 9/11 Commission the same thing in March, after first
detailing the episode for Vanity Fair magazine last August - leaving
plenty of time for Moore to adjust his film to the facts as recounted
by his primary source.



Now I'm really confused, Richard Clarke has already been labeled a
worthless, lying, sack of commie **** by all the right-thinking
republicans and their disk jockey leaders, so either Moore must really
be onto something, or the right wingers are full of **** (we know that's
impossible, since only evil liberals lie), or could it be that the talk
radio gurus are misleading their flock.....

BTW, Fox News, which only speaks the absolute unbiased truth, gave a
rave review to Moore's latest effort, here's your cite Gunner:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122680,00.html


It only goes to show that Fox indeed has people on both sides of the
political spectrum and is not afraid to post both sides. I believe
they claim to be fair and balanced do they not? Now when the Big 3
have similar commentators speak negatively about Moore.. EG


Seems they all have (see cites below), but I guess you feel comfortable
criticizing networks you never watch and movies you haven't seen. Back
to the original question, if the lying liberal-biased media are
criticizing the film and the un-biased Fox Network is praising it, where
do you suppose the truth lies? Bonus Question: Could the intellectual
giants of talk radio have a hidden agenda, or could they be purposely
misleading their listeners??? BG

I dont recall Fox praising it..but only a single reviewer who works
for them. As I stated, they hire folks from both sides of the asle.
Or do you claim that Fox dictates everything their writers produce?
Are you suddenly suprised when Fox claims that they show both
viewpoints and are fair and balanced, and they do?

If so..then the Big Three are indeed owned and run by liberals..as
they never produce anything with a conservative slant. And of
course..thats been pretty well backed up by Bernard Goldberg, and a
number of other media wonks.

Hidden agenda? How so? They are quite clear where their viewpoints
are coming from. And they call themselves Conservatives. Which talking
head from the Big Three have publicly called themselves Liberals?

Those taking heads from the Big 3 attempt to make the claim that they
are mainstream centrists. Which in itself is a lie.


http://abcnews.go.com/sections/ThisW...e040620-1.html

I thought you folks were making the claim that this is a
"documentary"?

"MOO Well, it's an op-ed piece. It's my opinion about the last four
years of the Bush administration. And that's what I call it. I'm not
trying to pretend that this is some sort of, you know, fair and
balanced work of journalism...."

Oh oh..now even Moore himself says that its a propaganda piece and is
not fair or balanced. Or even accurate.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in626685.shtml

In speaking of slimey journalism and hate mongering..the author says
this about Moore and the Left...

" But now, Bush-haters and liberal Democrats are happy to tolerate all
that from Michael Moore, his unfounded conspiracy theories, his
demonizing of those he argues with, his generally dirty play.

The New Republic’s Richard Just, in an essay reprinted here on
CBSNews.com noted, "There seems to be a growing sentiment among
liberals that Moore is a bad guy, but dammit, he's our bad guy. "

Looks like one CBS reporter besides Goldberh has some nads..and some
honor.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/

The title says it all:
"More Distortions From Michael Moore"

Looks like the Left has a sense of shame afterall..or at least a few
writers do.

Now when Baba W and Rather etc all speak the truth about Moore..we can
all breath a sigh of relief and perhaps think that the Big 3 has
finally gotten a little sense of honor. Think it will happen?

Bring a very big lunch as it will be a very very long time. About the
time Satan starts serving popsicles in hell.


Looking forward to your take on this,

Bob


Gunner

That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's
cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays
there.
- George Orwell

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 15:28:10 -0400, john
wrote:




LOL way to go Johnny... bury your head in the sand. I noticed you
didnt comment on those links to those liberals commentators who spoke
their mind on Moores "documentary"


Gunner, it must of gone right over your head. I was only illustrating
that most of the commentators, rush, mm, hanity (sp) and the others are
in it for the dollar. You are so jaded you can't even open your left
eye.




John

Do you machine for free?
If you are a ****ty machinist..do you think folks will pay you for
your "talents"? If Hanity etc were lousy at their jobs..do you think
their audiences would keep them on the air?

Gunner
That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's
cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays
there.
- George Orwell

OT - $87 Billion Moore
 

"Cliff Huprich" wrote in message
m...

Michael Moore

Filmmaker


Bull****-artist.