George W. Bush



"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:17:46 -0800, bri719
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
>
> BS. I am sure that the election was rigged by Republican secretaries of
state
> etc.
>

Why not prove it, become famous, you would then have a real audience not
just a few mountain bikers who don't care if you exist or not.

The last 2 states to release their vote count have Democrat Secretaries of
State, probably were still looking for additional votes. Hey, makes as much
sense as what Mike is saying.
 
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 18:41:10 -0500, "Goodoz"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .(1) Despite incorrect and deliberate media declarations of a Gore
> victory in .Florida that resulted in THOUSANDS of panhandle voters
> not casting their .ballot, the Supreme Court ratified GW's nomination
> -- Legal.
>
> BS. The Supreme Court STOPPED the vote count. ILLEGAL.

Bunch of lawless rebels, those Supreme Court Justices.

> .(2) Treaty violation would be recognized by NATO and the UN. It
> would also .be blown all over the place by the Media. Now, with the
> Media's hatred of .GW, we would have heard about that (even if they
> attained the info from a .forged document...ask Dan Rather!!).
>
> Can you say "ABM"?

U full of BM.

> .(3) Afghanistan and Iraq were/are overpopulated with dangerous
> ASSHOLES that .will give their own life to kill innocent civilians.
> These ASSHOLES have .demonstrated that they will hijack aircraft from
> within our borders and kill .thousands in one sweep if we don't kill
> them first. September 11 was .neither healthy for people, or the
> environment. One must consider .priorities....er eh, nevermind...you
> obviously don't get it.
>
> Uh, you conveniently "forgot" that the hijackers came from Saudi
> Arabia.

Trained and state-supported by the Taliban.

> .(4) The president does not have the authority to envoke power that
> is not .specifically given to him by our Constitution. If he does,
> we have a little .thing called Impeachment (Did you know that
> Clinton's impeachment papers are .on display in the Smithsonian?
> Awesome!!!) Further, your side's precious .UN gave global
> authorization to wage war on Iraq if they violated sanctions .back in
> 1991...Sadam repeatedly commited violations.
>
> He should be impeached.

Why? We found him cowering in a rat hole. (Bet he'd take "impeachment"
over what he's got coming in a heartbeat.)

> .(5) Hmmmmm, let's see. About 3000 innocent, non military lives were
> taken .by ASSHOLES on September 11. By your figures, 120,000
> innocents have been .killed by GW??? Back that up (or, put it in as
> a suggestion on Rather's .website!!)
>
> Lancet found that 100,000 people have bene killed in Iraq. Our toll
> was less than 3000.

Well, he won 6 Tours de France in a row, so he must know something.

> .(6) According to the popular vote yesterday, MOST Americans don't
> have any .respect for the UN.
>
> BS.

Good comeback.

> .(7) You are finally correct!!! ASSHOLE Terrorists are everywhere in
> this .world and they hate all All Americans (including the president).
>
> Thanks to Bush.

He caused all terrorism? Starting when?

> And GW has
> .found a sweet spot in the MidEast where they are coming to us...by
> the .thousands. Bringem' on baby!!!
> .
> .I'm very proud to be an American...And you sir, are a disgrace.
>
> I hope you get a chance to go to Iraq and defend me. Hypocrite.

You're indefensible.

Bill "for those insipid dots if nothing else" S.
 
Mark Hickey wrote:
> Shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
>
>>>You might think he is making reference to a different treaty, but you don't
>>>know Mike very well if you think he cares about anything other than his
>>>whacked out view of the environment. I do not suggest that taking a position
>>>on the environment is whacked out, I only suggest that the view that Mike
>>>has is whacked out.
>>
>>Kyoto wasn't ratified by the Senate. ABM was, and yes Vandamage is a
>>wack job.
>
>
> In fact, in an almost unheard of moment of unity, the senate voted 100
> to ZERO to NOT ratify the Kyoto treaty because of the obvious
> problems. It was NOT a good idea, IOW.
>
> And yes, it's not a secret that MV is a whack job (though I believe
> you spelled it wrong). The fact he apparently supported Kerry should
> make virtually everyone feel better, regardless of your political
> leanings. ;-)

Don't think I agree with that one Mark.
So is MV a few letter short of being a whack job?


Shawn
 
"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote

>>
>>Kyoto wasn't ratified by the Senate. ABM was, and yes Vandamage is a
>>wack job.
>
> In fact, in an almost unheard of moment of unity, the senate voted 100
> to ZERO to NOT ratify the Kyoto treaty because of the obvious
> problems. It was NOT a good idea, IOW.

Actually, it was 95-0, 5 non voting.
Even Kerry thought it was a bad idea...:)

Pete
 
* Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>:
> The saddest thing about this election is that so many Americans support a
> "president" who (1) was not legitimately elected, (2) violates binding treaties,
> (3) puts the profits of corporations above the protection of our health and our
> environment, (4) waged war without the Congressional declaration of war required
> by our Constitution, (5) killed approximately 40 times as many innocent people
> as Osama Bin Laden, (6) has no respect for the United Nations, and (7) is almost
> universally hated around the world. And we are expected to be PROUD to be an
> American? Not at the moment.
>
> Michael J. Vandeman
>
> ===
> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande


Fire up those email clients folks the address is [email protected]

Jason
 
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 06:49:50 -0400, Jason <[email protected]>
wrote:

>> The saddest thing about this election is that so many Americans support a
>> "president" who (1) was not legitimately elected, (2) violates binding treaties,
>> (3) puts the profits of corporations above the protection of our health and our
>> environment, (4) waged war without the Congressional declaration of war required
>> by our Constitution, (5) killed approximately 40 times as many innocent people
>> as Osama Bin Laden, (6) has no respect for the United Nations, and (7) is almost
>> universally hated around the world. And we are expected to be PROUD to be an
>> American? Not at the moment.

>Fire up those email clients folks the address is [email protected]

Absolutely. A post where only item 1 is contentious - absolutely
unacceptable from Vandespamm.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
B i l l S o r n s o n wrote:

>>
>>BS. The Supreme Court STOPPED the vote count. ILLEGAL.
>
>
> Bunch of lawless rebels, those Supreme Court Justices.
>

These dimwits are still fighting that battle?

I'm surprised the SCOTUS Justices stopped riding their chopped Indians
long enough to do alternative illegal acts. That is alternative to the
raping and pillaging they were doing before stealing the election from
poor tubby Algore.
 
First president in 16 years to have a majority vote (>50%).
However not a mandate with just a 3% lead.
 
"rick++" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> First president in 16 years to have a majority vote (>50%).
> However not a mandate with just a 3% lead.

When you consider the President's margin of victory, the gain by Republicans
in the Senate and House of Representatives, it is clear mandate by American
voters.
 
November 4, 2004

Jason wrote:

> * Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>:
> > The saddest thing about this election is that so many Americans support a
> > "president" who (1) was not legitimately elected, (2) violates binding treaties,
> > (3) puts the profits of corporations above the protection of our health and our
> > environment, (4) waged war without the Congressional declaration of war required
> > by our Constitution, (5) killed approximately 40 times as many innocent people
> > as Osama Bin Laden, (6) has no respect for the United Nations, and (7) is almost
> > universally hated around the world. And we are expected to be PROUD to be an
> > American? Not at the moment.
> >
> > Michael J. Vandeman
> >
> > ===
> > I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> > humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> > years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
> >
> > http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
>
> Fire up those email clients folks the address is [email protected]

That's right folks, use your freedom of speech to protest against the freedom of
speech.

It's the American way!

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
 
Chris Phillipo wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, sorni@bite-
> me.san.rr.com says...
>>> .(3) Afghanistan and Iraq were/are overpopulated with dangerous
>>> ASSHOLES that .will give their own life to kill innocent civilians.
>>> These ASSHOLES have .demonstrated that they will hijack aircraft
>>> from within our borders and kill .thousands in one sweep if we
>>> don't kill them first. September 11 was .neither healthy for
>>> people, or the environment. One must consider .priorities....er
>>> eh, nevermind...you obviously don't get it.
>>>
>>> Uh, you conveniently "forgot" that the hijackers came from Saudi
>>> Arabia.
>>
>> Trained and state-supported by the Taliban.
>>
>
> Which at the time Bush was negotiating a deal to run an oil pipeline
> through their territories. Keep your friends close keep you enemies
> rolling in money and arms.

Boy, wonder if they'd like a do-over on THOSE decisions then???

Bill "someone dig 'em up and ask" S.
 
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> BS. I am sure that the election was rigged by Republican secretaries of
> state
> etc.
> ===
As disappointed as I am to see Dubya in office for 4 more years, I have to
say that the above statement continues to prove that you are full of shiite.
Oh yeah, and they're having a sale on aluminum foil hats at Conspiracy
Theories -R- Us

CG
 
Had to log onto see what the talk was about the election...
I could have guessed but, of course, MV is upset. I consider that a plus.
But now we have a (1) President who was legitimately elected, by a majority
vote (51%) (2) Does not allow U.S. security to be bound by outdated
"treaties", (3) allows private enterprise to dictate the course of their
business and recognizes the health industry is in turmoil but throwing the
government resources into a social program is too costly, inefficient, and
will not solve the problem (realistically, it is the scam of insurance and
frivolous attorneys (like John Edwards) driving the problem), (4) Responded
to the declaration of war on our people and country, (5) Has gutted the
terrorist organizations responsible and continues to fight those who would
twist a peaceful religion into an extremist propaganda evil agenda, (6) has
no respect for an organization which fails to enforce its own rulings, calls
on our participation when it desires then asks us to pay for it also, and is
corrupt with bribery, self serving members, and was so deeply mired in
inaction they couldn't decide which way to turn, (7) and is disrespected by
those who were profiting from their own arms and oil deals with Saddam and
did not want U.S. involvement in Iraq because it would upset their own apple
cart.
Yes, we have a President. We do not have a White House resident who would
poll the world before acting in the best interests of the United States.
If that also means we'll be able to ride our bicycles in the woods without
elitist interference from self described experts, all the better.

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The saddest thing about this election is that so many Americans support a
> "president" who (1) was not legitimately elected, (2) violates binding
> treaties,
> (3) puts the profits of corporations above the protection of our health
> and our
> environment, (4) waged war without the Congressional declaration of war
> required
> by our Constitution, (5) killed approximately 40 times as many innocent
> people
> as Osama Bin Laden, (6) has no respect for the United Nations, and (7) is
> almost
> universally hated around the world. And we are expected to be PROUD to be
> an
> American? Not at the moment.
>
> Michael J. Vandeman
>
> ===
> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
--

Somewhere in Texas, a village is missing its idiot.
"bri719" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>
> >The saddest thing about this election is that so many Americans support a
> >"president" who (1) was not legitimately elected,
> >
> this time:
> a) 31 states to 19 + DC
> b) majority of electoral vote
> c) no popular vote disagreement with the electoral college
> d) _majority_ of the popular vote!
>
> just because you didn't recognize it the last time isn't our
> problem...but now you have no debate.
>
> bri
> --

Nope. Debate over. We're a Nation of Idiots.
 
* Thomas Lee Elifritz <[email protected]>:
> November 4, 2004
>
>
> That's right folks, use your freedom of speech to protest against the freedom of
> speech.
>
> It's the American way!
>
> Thomas Lee Elifritz
> http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
>

Its called spamming Thomas not freedom of speech. And yes there is a
very large diffenence.

Jason
 
On 03 Nov 2004, the cheeks of Mike Vandeman parted, and a trumpetous
noise emerged:

> On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 16:14:01 -0600, "the Moderator"
> <sparky@no_spam_engineer.com> wrote:
>
> .
> ."Andy Chequer" <andy@(youdon'twantthisbitinit)thisisasparagus.com>
> wrote in .message news:[email protected]...
> .> >(7) is almost universally hated around the world.
> .>
> .> We don't like the monkey man over here. Particularly vexing is his
> .> abreviation of "terrorism" to "turr".
> .>
> .> Andy Chequer
> .>
> .
> .The President may mispronounce a word, but he does not mispronounce
> his .intent.
>
> Yes, he does. His intent was and is to get his hands on Iraqi oil.

If we're getting all this oil from Iraq, why is oil so damned expensive?

--
__ __ _ ___ ___
/ _|/ _/ |_ _|_ _|
\_ ( (( o | | | |
|__/\__\_/|_| |_|

[email protected]
 
On 03 Nov 2004, the cheeks of Mike Vandeman parted, and a trumpetous
noise emerged:

> .(1) Despite incorrect and deliberate media declarations of a Gore
> victory in .Florida that resulted in THOUSANDS of panhandle voters
> not casting their .ballot, the Supreme Court ratified GW's nomination
> -- Legal.
>
> BS. The Supreme Court STOPPED the vote count. ILLEGAL.

Because it was determined that the vote count would take several years to
complete. Furthermore, at the time the counting was stopped, Bush was
ahead. Also, nothing the Supreme Court does is illegal, because THEY DECIDE
what is and isn't illegal.

--
__ __ _ ___ ___
/ _|/ _/ |_ _|_ _|
\_ ( (( o | | | |
|__/\__\_/|_| |_|

[email protected]
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Roger Christie" <[email protected]> wrote:

> --
>
> Somewhere in Texas, a village is missing its idiot.
> "bri719" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Mike Vandeman wrote:
> >
> > >The saddest thing about this election is that so many Americans support a
> > >"president" who (1) was not legitimately elected,
> > >
> > this time:
> > a) 31 states to 19 + DC
> > b) majority of electoral vote
> > c) no popular vote disagreement with the electoral college
> > d) _majority_ of the popular vote!
> >
> > just because you didn't recognize it the last time isn't our
> > problem...but now you have no debate.
> >
> > bri
> > --
>
> Nope. Debate over. We're a Nation of Idiots.
>
>

No, we only are HALF a nation of Idiots.......

Me who wonder which half is which.........
 
Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Lancet found that 100,000 people have bene killed in Iraq. Our toll was less
> than 3000.
>

>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

The study has an any accuracy of 95 percent within the range of
8500-196,000. Some awesome use of statics to get 100,000 deaths. The
best well documented studies show about 20,000 deaths do to insurgent
violence in iraq. Still much lower than the 60,000/year for 30 years
of Saddamm.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back