http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...es/#more-20006

On 2008-09-23, Cydrome Leader wrote:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...es/#more-20006

Great webpage!

``The Verdict: Misleading. While Obama has supported some measures to
limit gun rights, he has backed nothing on the scale suggested in the
[NRA] ad.''

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

Christopher Tidy wrote in
:

As an outsider, I don't think I get why Obama is so popular. He's run a
very well organised campaign, and has created a good image for himself,
but is that it? I don't see a lot of substance there, but it could just
be that I don't live in the US.

Not at all: all that Obama has is "image" - no "Substance" at all.


I am perhaps a little wary of campaigns which heavily rely on image. The
last one here in England was the Labour campaign of 1997, after which
Tony Blair became Prime Minister. These days, that Labour adminstration
is not viewed with a lot of respect, because it spent a lot of time
talking convincely, but little time achieving anything. I just have a
fear that Obama could turn into an American version of that.


Your fear is well grounded and shared by many, including ME!


--
I used to be an anarchist but had to give it up: _far_ too many rules.

Ignoramus21403 wrote:
On 2008-09-23, Cydrome Leader wrote:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...es/#more-20006


Great webpage!

As an outsider, I don't think I get why Obama is so popular. He's run a
very well organised campaign, and has created a good image for himself,
but is that it? I don't see a lot of substance there, but it could just
be that I don't live in the US.

I am perhaps a little wary of campaigns which heavily rely on image. The
last one here in England was the Labour campaign of 1997, after which
Tony Blair became Prime Minister. These days, that Labour adminstration
is not viewed with a lot of respect, because it spent a lot of time
talking convincely, but little time achieving anything. I just have a
fear that Obama could turn into an American version of that.

Chris

"Ignoramus21403" wrote in message
...
On 2008-09-23, Cydrome Leader wrote:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...es/#more-20006

Great webpage!

``The Verdict: Misleading. While Obama has supported some measures to
limit gun rights, he has backed nothing on the scale suggested in the
[NRA] ad.''

You should see this month's issue of _American Rifleman_. Yup, Obama really
is the antichrist. g

--
Ed Huntress

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Ignoramus21403 wrote:
On 2008-09-23, Cydrome Leader wrote:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...es/#more-20006


Great webpage!

As an outsider, I don't think I get why Obama is so popular. He's run a
very well organised campaign, and has created a good image for himself,
but is that it? I don't see a lot of substance there, but it could just be
that I don't live in the US.

I am perhaps a little wary of campaigns which heavily rely on image. The
last one here in England was the Labour campaign of 1997, after which Tony
Blair became Prime Minister. These days, that Labour adminstration is not
viewed with a lot of respect, because it spent a lot of time talking
convincely, but little time achieving anything. I just have a fear that
Obama could turn into an American version of that.

Chris

It's possible, and even those of us who are impressed by him recognize that
possibility. But, to me, he sounds like he has the right stuff to be
president at this time. There's a lot more going on there than his image.
There's also one of the best-managed campaigns in recent history, and a
sense you get from his associates, former students, and other law professors
that he has an excellent approach to decision-making. He certainly turned
back one of the biggest juggernauts in the campaign -- and Democrats, unlike
Republicans, don't resent Hillary Clinton.

But there isn't a lot of experience to support it. You have to be willing to
take some risk to support him.

--
Ed Huntress

On 2008-09-24, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Ignoramus21403 wrote:
On 2008-09-23, Cydrome Leader wrote:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...es/#more-20006


Great webpage!

As an outsider, I don't think I get why Obama is so popular. He's run a
very well organised campaign, and has created a good image for himself,
but is that it? I don't see a lot of substance there, but it could just be
that I don't live in the US.

I am perhaps a little wary of campaigns which heavily rely on image. The
last one here in England was the Labour campaign of 1997, after which Tony
Blair became Prime Minister. These days, that Labour adminstration is not
viewed with a lot of respect, because it spent a lot of time talking
convincely, but little time achieving anything. I just have a fear that
Obama could turn into an American version of that.

Chris

It's possible, and even those of us who are impressed by him recognize that
possibility. But, to me, he sounds like he has the right stuff to be
president at this time. There's a lot more going on there than his image.
There's also one of the best-managed campaigns in recent history, and a
sense you get from his associates, former students, and other law professors
that he has an excellent approach to decision-making. He certainly turned
back one of the biggest juggernauts in the campaign -- and Democrats, unlike
Republicans, don't resent Hillary Clinton.

But there isn't a lot of experience to support it. You have to be willing to
take some risk to support him.


Obama seems to be a bright and thoughtful guy who can organize things
very well and pay attention to details. Exact opposite of McCain.

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

As an outsider, I don't think I get why Obama is so popular. He's run a
very well organised campaign, and has created a good image for himself,
but is that it? I don't see a lot of substance there, but it could just be
that I don't live in the US.

I am perhaps a little wary of campaigns which heavily rely on image. The
last one here in England was the Labour campaign of 1997, after which Tony
Blair became Prime Minister. These days, that Labour adminstration is not
viewed with a lot of respect, because it spent a lot of time talking
convincely, but little time achieving anything. I just have a fear that
Obama could turn into an American version of that.

Chris

Perception is all that counts in the "Good 'ol USA". He has changed his
story so many times, says what's convenient/expedient at the time/place he's
at.

McCain is another rich guy who has no concept of a wage earner life.



The US has the best government money can buy.

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:52:56 -0500, Ignoramus21403
wrote:


Obama seems to be a bright and thoughtful guy who can organize things
very well and pay attention to details. Exact opposite of McCain.


I wonder if he can name of the capitals of all 57 states?

Ive got a neighbor down the street, who is obsessive compulsive. His
house is VERY well organized.

Other than that...he is an utter retard.

Like Obamassiah


Gunner

On 2008-09-24, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:52:56 -0500, Ignoramus21403
wrote:


Obama seems to be a bright and thoughtful guy who can organize things
very well and pay attention to details. Exact opposite of McCain.


I wonder if he can name of the capitals of all 57 states?

Ive got a neighbor down the street, who is obsessive compulsive. His
house is VERY well organized.

Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc. Republicans are no longer such, and need to be
punished. McCain, specifically, is corrupt, stupid, and ill tempered.

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:13:54 -0500, the infamous Ignoramus18870
scrolled the following:

On 2008-09-24, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:52:56 -0500, Ignoramus21403
wrote:


Obama seems to be a bright and thoughtful guy who can organize things
very well and pay attention to details. Exact opposite of McCain.


I wonder if he can name of the capitals of all 57 states?

Ive got a neighbor down the street, who is obsessive compulsive. His
house is VERY well organized.

Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc.

Nice dream.


Republicans are no longer such, and need to be punished.

Punished? Now you're talking like a demonrat, Ig.

Republicans and Democrats are no longer such. They are corrupt
*******s and should never get another vote from any decent U.S. voter.

--
To know what you prefer instead of humbly saying Amen
to what the world tells you you ought to prefer,
is to have kept your soul alive.
-- Robert Louis Stevenson

On 2008-09-24, Larry Jaques novalidaddress@di wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:13:54 -0500, the infamous Ignoramus18870
scrolled the following:

On 2008-09-24, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:52:56 -0500, Ignoramus21403
wrote:


Obama seems to be a bright and thoughtful guy who can organize things
very well and pay attention to details. Exact opposite of McCain.


I wonder if he can name of the capitals of all 57 states?

Ive got a neighbor down the street, who is obsessive compulsive. His
house is VERY well organized.

Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc.

Nice dream.


Republicans are no longer such, and need to be punished.

Punished? Now you're talking like a demonrat, Ig.

Republicans and Democrats are no longer such. They are corrupt
*******s and should never get another vote from any decent
U.S. voter.


I think that specifically Obama, is much better than McCain, on all
issues except guns.

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

Ignoramus18870 wrote:
On 2008-09-24, Larry Jaques novalidaddress@di wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:13:54 -0500, the infamous Ignoramus18870
scrolled the following:

On 2008-09-24, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:52:56 -0500, Ignoramus21403
wrote:


Obama seems to be a bright and thoughtful guy who can organize things
very well and pay attention to details. Exact opposite of McCain.


I wonder if he can name of the capitals of all 57 states?

Ive got a neighbor down the street, who is obsessive compulsive. His
house is VERY well organized.

Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc.

Nice dream.


Republicans are no longer such, and need to be punished.

Punished? Now you're talking like a demonrat, Ig.

Republicans and Democrats are no longer such. They are corrupt
*******s and should never get another vote from any decent
U.S. voter.


I think that specifically Obama, is much better than McCain, on all
issues except guns.

It's not about guns- it's about who wants to meddle and dictate as the
governemnt how you should live your life and what decisions you're just
not smart enough to make on your own and they (government) need to make
for you.

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Ignoramus21403 wrote:

On 2008-09-23, Cydrome Leader wrote:


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...es/#more-20006


Great webpage!

As an outsider, I don't think I get why Obama is so popular. He's run a
very well organised campaign, and has created a good image for himself,
but is that it? I don't see a lot of substance there, but it could just be
that I don't live in the US.

I am perhaps a little wary of campaigns which heavily rely on image. The
last one here in England was the Labour campaign of 1997, after which Tony
Blair became Prime Minister. These days, that Labour adminstration is not
viewed with a lot of respect, because it spent a lot of time talking
convincely, but little time achieving anything. I just have a fear that
Obama could turn into an American version of that.

Chris


It's possible, and even those of us who are impressed by him recognize that
possibility. But, to me, he sounds like he has the right stuff to be
president at this time. There's a lot more going on there than his image.
There's also one of the best-managed campaigns in recent history, and a
sense you get from his associates, former students, and other law professors
that he has an excellent approach to decision-making. He certainly turned
back one of the biggest juggernauts in the campaign -- and Democrats, unlike
Republicans, don't resent Hillary Clinton.

But there isn't a lot of experience to support it. You have to be willing to
take some risk to support him.

Well it'll be interesting to see how it turns out. Truth of the matter
is, there's a reasonable chance that either could be a bad leader.

Chris

Ignoramus18870 wrote:
On 2008-09-24, Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:52:56 -0500, Ignoramus21403
wrote:


Obama seems to be a bright and thoughtful guy who can organize things
very well and pay attention to details. Exact opposite of McCain.


I wonder if he can name of the capitals of all 57 states?

Ive got a neighbor down the street, who is obsessive compulsive. His
house is VERY well organized.

Other than that...he is an utter retard.


I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc. Republicans are no longer such, and need to be
punished. McCain, specifically, is corrupt, stupid, and ill tempered.

Not sure about the first two. I admire McCain's determination, but I
have noticed the ill tempered bit a couple of times recently. Obama
doesn't seem to do that. He does cold, but not ill tempered. I was a bit
disappointed that Giuliani's campaign didn't succeed. He managed to be
irritable and likable at the same time.

Chris

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:13:54 -0500, Ignoramus18870
wrote:


Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc. Republicans are no longer such, and need to be
punished. McCain, specifically, is corrupt, stupid, and ill tempered.


Yet you are voting for the single most Liberal of all Congress
critters.

Fascinating.

And of course you have cites for McCain being "corrupt, stupid and ill
tempered"?

Ill be waiting for them

Gunner

On 2008-09-25, Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:13:54 -0500, Ignoramus18870
wrote:


Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc. Republicans are no longer such, and need to be
punished. McCain, specifically, is corrupt, stupid, and ill tempered.


Yet you are voting for the single most Liberal of all Congress
critters.

Fascinating.

Better than for McCain.

And of course you have cites for McCain being "corrupt, stupid and ill
tempered"?

Ill be waiting for them

Corrupt, start with this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us.../21mccain.html

Stupid, start with this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/us.../10mccain.html

Ill tempered

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...r-what-temper/

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

On 2008-09-25, Ignoramus23784 wrote:
Ill tempered

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...r-what-temper/


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

Ignoramus21403
Cydrome Leader

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...eck-does-obama...

``The Verdict: Misleading. While Obama has supported some measures to
limit gun rights, he has backed nothing on the scale suggested in the
[NRA] ad.''

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...f_Barack_Obama

"As a state legislator in Illinois, Obama supported banning the sale
or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic firearms, increasing state
restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms"

"He supported a "ban" on the sale and possession of handguns on
a political questionnaire."

"In 1999, he urged for prohibiting the operation of any gun store
within five miles of a school or park, which according to gun-rights
advocates would eliminate gun stores from most of the inhabited
portion of the United States."

"He sponsored a bill in 2000 limiting handgun purchases to one
per month."

"As state senator, he voted against a 2004 measure that allowed
self-defense as an affirmative defense to those charged with
violating
local laws making it otherwise unlawful for such persons to possess
firearms."

"He also voted against allowing persons who had obtained domestic
violence protective orders to carry handguns for their protection."

"While in the US Senate, Obama has supported several gun control
measures, including restricting the purchase of firearms at gun shows
and the reauthorization of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban."

"Obama voted against legislation protecting firearm manufacturers
from certain liability suits, which gun-rights advocates say are
designed
to bankrupt the firearms industry."

"Obama has also stated his opposition to allowing citizens to carry
concealed firearms and supports a national law outlawing the
practice."

Ed Stasiak wrote:
Ignoramus21403
Cydrome Leader

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...eck-does-obama...

``The Verdict: Misleading. While Obama has supported some measures to
limit gun rights, he has backed nothing on the scale suggested in the
[NRA] ad.''

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...f_Barack_Obama

"As a state legislator in Illinois, Obama supported banning the sale
or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic firearms, increasing state
restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms"

"He supported a "ban" on the sale and possession of handguns on
a political questionnaire."

"In 1999, he urged for prohibiting the operation of any gun store
within five miles of a school or park, which according to gun-rights
advocates would eliminate gun stores from most of the inhabited
portion of the United States."

"He sponsored a bill in 2000 limiting handgun purchases to one
per month."

"As state senator, he voted against a 2004 measure that allowed
self-defense as an affirmative defense to those charged with
violating
local laws making it otherwise unlawful for such persons to possess
firearms."

"He also voted against allowing persons who had obtained domestic
violence protective orders to carry handguns for their protection."

"While in the US Senate, Obama has supported several gun control
measures, including restricting the purchase of firearms at gun shows
and the reauthorization of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban."

"Obama voted against legislation protecting firearm manufacturers
from certain liability suits, which gun-rights advocates say are
designed
to bankrupt the firearms industry."

"Obama has also stated his opposition to allowing citizens to carry
concealed firearms and supports a national law outlawing the
practice."

I like this story too

http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdo...hdog25.article

whoops, $100,000 given to a buddy was wasted/lost.

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:10:22 -0500, the infamous Ignoramus23784
scrolled the following:

On 2008-09-25, Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:13:54 -0500, Ignoramus18870
wrote:


Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc. Republicans are no longer such, and need to be
punished. McCain, specifically, is corrupt, stupid, and ill tempered.


Yet you are voting for the single most Liberal of all Congress
critters.

Fascinating.

Better than for McCain.

And of course you have cites for McCain being "corrupt, stupid and ill
tempered"?

Ill be waiting for them

Corrupt, start with this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us.../21mccain.html

Stupid, start with this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/us.../10mccain.html

I'll address these after I've read them. Back to Dirty Harry...


Ill tempered

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...r-what-temper/

From the Wash Post article on that, I quote "Part of the paradox of
McCain is that many of the old targets of his volcanic temper are now
his campaign contributors." Other than Wexeler and, possibly,
Barrett, I don't see a consistent problem with anger in the man.
Perhaps you could tell me what you read in there that I missed.

--
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc. Republicans are no longer such, and need to be
punished. McCain, specifically, is corrupt, stupid, and ill tempered.


Yet you are voting for the single most Liberal of all Congress
critters.

Fascinating.

And of course you have cites for McCain being "corrupt, stupid and ill
tempered"?

Ill be waiting for them

Right. So you can ignore them when they are provided. Like nobody knows
those things about McCain are true. Corrupt, take a look at McCain's
involvement in the Keating 5 business. Stupid, how about when he showed he
didn't know a Shiite from A Sunni and had to have Joe Lieberman correct him
repeatedly. How can anyone ask for proof of McCain's ill temper when he is
known for being hot headed and hot tempered? Not knowing those things about
McCain are true is like not knowing Jenny McCarthy can't act.

Hawke

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:10:22 -0500, Ignoramus23784
wrote:

On 2008-09-25, Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:13:54 -0500, Ignoramus18870
wrote:


Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc. Republicans are no longer such, and need to be
punished. McCain, specifically, is corrupt, stupid, and ill tempered.


Yet you are voting for the single most Liberal of all Congress
critters.

Fascinating.

Better than for McCain.

And of course you have cites for McCain being "corrupt, stupid and ill
tempered"?

Ill be waiting for them

Corrupt, start with this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us.../21mccain.html

Stupid, start with this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/us.../10mccain.html

Ill tempered

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...r-what-temper/


How about cites from other places than the propaganda arm of the DNC,
the New York Slime?

Id rather not have to log into such dreck.

Gunner

On 2008-09-26, Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:10:22 -0500, Ignoramus23784
wrote:

On 2008-09-25, Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:13:54 -0500, Ignoramus18870
wrote:


Other than that...he is an utter retard.

I personally wish that we could have a "true conservative" president
and congress, who would cut expenses, would not get us into
unnecessary foreign entanglements, and specifically wars of
aggression, defend out freedoms (which go beyond just one "second
amendment"), etc. Republicans are no longer such, and need to be
punished. McCain, specifically, is corrupt, stupid, and ill tempered.


Yet you are voting for the single most Liberal of all Congress
critters.

Fascinating.

Better than for McCain.

And of course you have cites for McCain being "corrupt, stupid and ill
tempered"?

Ill be waiting for them

Corrupt, start with this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us.../21mccain.html

Stupid, start with this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/us.../10mccain.html

Ill tempered

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...r-what-temper/


How about cites from other places than the propaganda arm of the DNC,
the New York Slime?

Id rather not have to log into such dreck.

So where do you want me to look, in National Review? Or in McCainPalin2008.com?

You wanted cites, I gave you cites.

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/