Goodbye

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:56:46 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The fact remains Mark never (that I can recall) started a political
thread the way that JB or Train Wrecked or Dough-for-brains.

Or you. In this newsgroup a few days ago. Congratulations.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Bill Sornson said:

AndyMorris wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I was always fascinated how someone who talked such sense about
bikes, could seem so wacko about politics. Which was kind of fun and
thought provoking.

Is everyone who disagrees with you or has a different viewpoint from
yours "wacko"?

Just wondering.

Oh ffs take a chill. My daughter thinks I'm wacko for riding a bike, I think
my better half's wacko for learning to fly in a 20 year old plane. Its
respecting others difference mixed in with a bit of banter.

Your not wacko, just lacking in humour and tolerance.

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email hidden]>

may have said:

... the reality that this is no
longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.

So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
farewell. I've got the same kind of feeling that you get when you're
finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.

Been there, done that, understand completely. If you find yourself
itching for a little keyboard time some blustery evening, though, be
assured that you'll be welcomed back by at least some of the crowd in
any event.

The only way I visit the newsgroups is with a stout set of killfile
entries to reduce the abrasion factor...and maintaining them is,
itself, more than a minor annoyance. I can't fault anyone for
finding that the personal cost/benefit ratio has gone upside down;
it's done that for me at times, and I've had to bail out of certain
groups for a while myself...and there are also groups I once
frequented which haven't been active in my .newsrc for a very long
time.

Do what you can enjoy.

Noli nothem permittere te terrere.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:56:46 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

It seems he's
deplored for simply speaking up once topics got started -- and that's the
entire point: one side attempting through bullying, intimidation, lies and
misrepresentations to stifle the other side's right to speak. (Again, think
Columbia University and /any/ conservative group or speaker.)

Is this going to be your new meme -- that some lefties shut Hickey up?

It seems to me he shut himself up, with scary politics and then
becoming unhinged enough to start claiming he was considering legal
action against me. Here is a comment from an old school conservative
that he may have benefited from considering:

"We must remember that we have more power than our enemies to worsen
our fate"

That's by Ted Galen Carpenter of the Cato Institute. You have claimed
to have liberatarian leanings (though I don't think you actually know
what "libertarian" means, given the specific political opinions you
hold) -- you should check out some of his writing and think about it
in relation to the GWB crowd you support.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Bill said:

Quoted message said:

Bill Sornson said:

I hope Mark will reconsider because SHUTTING OUT OPPOSING VOICES is an
obvious tactic of a certain political movement nowadays

Quoted message said:

Not just nowadays. It's been an obvious tactic of the right since at
least 9/11. But fortunately, as a strong majority of Americans have
come to recognize the corruption of the Bush administration and the
horror of sending thousands of American troops to their death or
maiming in an illegal, pointless war sold to the American public
through lies that were amplified through the megaphone of "liberal"
media sources such as the New York Times, well, maybe, to some degree,
the mainstream media is letting some of the truth seep out. The truth
hurts, but that doesn't mean that the media have to publish
Administration lies to give it balance. Not anymore. We've had 6+
years of almost nothing but cheerleading out of the media; now it's
time for the truth.

I'm getting Deja-Vu since I went through the whole Viet Nam period
listening for how many kids got killed on a day by day. That one was
ramped up by Johnson (dem) and maintained by Nixon (repug), although I
give some credit to Nixon for pulling out. Johnson was a fool who fell
for the peace talk stuff while China and Russia poured men and supplies
to the north.
Any politician can screw up anything given enough time.

For the record, the majority of US combat deaths in Vietnam came on
Nixon's watch.

A Muzi said:

Quoted message said:

Bill Sornson said:

I hope Mark will reconsider because SHUTTING OUT OPPOSING VOICES is an
obvious tactic of a certain political movement nowadays

Quoted message said:

Not just nowadays. It's been an obvious tactic of the right since at
least 9/11. But fortunately, as a strong majority of Americans have
come to recognize the corruption of the Bush administration and the
horror of sending thousands of American troops to their death or
maiming in an illegal, pointless war sold to the American public
through lies that were amplified through the megaphone of "liberal"
media sources such as the New York Times, well, maybe, to some degree,
the mainstream media is letting some of the truth seep out. The truth
hurts, but that doesn't mean that the media have to publish
Administration lies to give it balance. Not anymore. We've had 6+
years of almost nothing but cheerleading out of the media; now it's
time for the truth.

'cheerleading'???
Headline: "Bush awoke this morning"
Subhead: "Precious oxygen wasted; Armageddon imminent"

On what planet are your morning papers printed?

I guess you've heard of Judith Miller, fed a daily crock of [censored] by
the Bush administration which she regurgitated for all of us in black
and white in the days leading up to the invasion of Iraq. That's
probably the best example of stuff that goes on daily in the major
newspapers and other media outlets. Now, tell us that the "liberal"
New York Times wasn't lying to us about WMD; go on, tell us.

A Muzi said:

-snip-

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

OTOH, if the Head [censored]'s ticker gave out from the stress, we'd have
Pelosi 'til January 2009. That would be a huge improvement over the
current situation.

Bill said:

Now there's an opinion I can't even begin to argue with. I think she
might take 2008 and have Hillary as the V.P.

I was sorta hopin the Dems ticket would be Kucinich/Sharpton. . .

Finally someone injects some serious content into the discussion.

LOL :-D :-P <eg> :o) 8-) 8-O LOL

Jay Beattie said:

"John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Jay Beattie said:

"John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:23:48 GMT, still me <[email hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>> I _could_ get aggravated, but I don't anymore. Why? Because it
>> doesn't change anything, and it just gets you aggravated and
>> wastes your time.
>
> Maybe. And the current decline in polls for the right-wing may say
> things are going to work out. But not getting aggravated is also
> the way dictatorships creep in. It's suck if we didn't get
> aggravated enough and our democracy is in the toilet in 15 years.

FYI, the nastiest dictators of all times were grass-roots heros put
in to power by aggravated people. Stalin was very left wing. [censored] was
right. By whom would you prefer to be executed?

It's pretty much the same to me if I'm going to die, but your
question is not so relevant to the US now.

In the US at least, the greater present-day threat to the democracy
is from the right, especially the current administration. By far. Look at
attacks on habeas corpus and the rights to fair trials. Look at
assertions by the US Attorney General (!!!!).

There is a confusion of terms here. "Democracy" refers to government
by the people, exercised either directly or through elected
representatives. It has nothing to do with the political bent or
goals of a democratically elected government. Obviously, the people
can democratically elect a tyrant or the "wrong" person. This
problem has put the United States at odds with is own pro-democracy
stance -- like when Mossadeq was democratically elected but
threatened to nationalize oil production in Iran. Enter the CIA
(created by a real Lefty, Truman, although under the control of
Eisenhower at the time -- to the extent he controlled Dulles).
What you appear to be saying is that you do not like the policies of
this democratically elected administration. That's fine. Neither do
I, but that has nothing to do with democracy. It is the result of
democracy. Long live democracy. Thank God for the 22nd Amendment.

Quoted message said:

So that's what I'm concerned with. We dont' have a powerful
left-wing movement in the US with the power to jail people
indefinitely or wiretap people w/o a court order.

Believe it or not, people have already brought law suits which have
been adjudicated and which have established that the President may
not do these things. These lawsuits were not won by screaming. They
were won by advocates who presented well constructed arguments and
who were, I am sure, totally civil to the court and the parties. I
can assure you that I have never won an argument in court by
screaming at the top of my lungs. That would only cause the judge to
push the panic button under his or her desk, and some burley guy in a
Kevlar vest wrestling me to the ground. I am not very persusasive
when burried under a 250lb sheriff's deputy.
Join the ACLU. Really. But be prepared to pay your dues even when
it sues to protect the free speech rights of Nazis in Skokie. It's
not a pick and choose thing. -- Jay Beattie.

They also defend and represent NAMBLA, for God's sake. (Sorry to use the G
word, even though it's in every single state's preamble to its
constitution.)

Still, Jay, you're way too freaking reasonable. Cut it out.

Bill said:

A Muzi said:

Bill said:

Bush 1. Waco, Texas????

Clinton /Reno on that one

I'm a bit fuzzy on that time line but I thought it was after the
election but before the swearing in. Reno's name definitely resonates.
I would look it up but I am running a system virus scan and don't want
to overload the system and lose 4 hours of scanning.
Sure it wasn't Bush/Reno??
Bill (up all night, but why?) Baka

Keep talking, Bill. Your political insight today is truly amazing.

AndyMorris said:

Bill Sornson said:

AndyMorris wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I was always fascinated how someone who talked such sense about
bikes, could seem so wacko about politics. Which was kind of fun
and thought provoking.

Is everyone who disagrees with you or has a different viewpoint from
yours "wacko"?

Just wondering.

Oh ffs take a chill. My daughter thinks I'm wacko for riding a bike,
I think my better half's wacko for learning to fly in a 20 year old
plane. Its respecting others difference mixed in with a bit of banter.

Your not wacko, just lacking in humour and tolerance.

Hey, you made the comment. Maybe you think /every/ conservative is "wacko
about politics".

All I did was ask, Mr. Humour and Tolerance.

Cya.

Dennis P. Harris said:

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:46:27 -0400 in rec.bicycles.misc, John

Forrest Tomlinson said:

You're a coward.

PLONK. should have killfiled you long ago, idjit.

I detest Hickey's politics, too (which certainly changed my mind
about buying a bike frame from himO, but you are simply a
gratuitous attacker who never does anything positive for anyone.

your contribution to this newsgroup is nothing but negative, so
everyone in the group should join me in killfiling you.

I love the smell of vindication in the...early evening.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:20:24 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Jay Beattie wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Join the ACLU.

I did.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Really.

Really. In 2003.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But be prepared to pay your dues even when
it sues to protect the free speech rights of Nazis in Skokie. It's
not a pick and choose thing. -- Jay Beattie.

To Beattie: Of course I support the Nazis having the right to say
those things. And I am very prepared to denounce them loudly and
firmly.

And I did pay my dues for several years. Though I'm not sure I did in
the last year -- not because of anything specific the ACLU did
recently, but I just can't remember if I'm paid up now.

Quoted message said:

They also defend and represent NAMBLA, for God's sake. (Sorry to use the G
word, even though it's in every single state's preamble to its
constitution.)

To Sorni: It seems you are so simple-minded that you can't concieve
that someone like me would support the right of people -- NAMBLA,
Hickey or whoever -- to say what they want to say and also totally
want to rag all over them for what they're saying.

I think you're so incapable of non-subjective thought that those sorts
of distinctions are inconcebable to you. It's why you think that if a
reporter votes Democratic they must be a Democratic partisan in their
writing, despite their trying hard not to be.

You're such a dope. I'd forgotten how dopey you are, but it's coming
a back to me. And not just in math. Just dopey all around.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Bill said:

A Muzi said:

I was sorta hopin the Dems ticket would be Kucinich/Sharpton. . .

I might agree but who's Kucinich? Sharptons' mug is everywhere he can
find a camera. I'm already tired of looking at him.
Bill Baka

Kucinich often doesn't show up in photo-ops on accounta he's just a
little elf. He has publicly called for the USA to pay reparations for
some of the damage over there, which is not a bad idea given that
Germany and Japan did quite well after being wrestled to the ground in
WWII.

Of course they had to lay down their weapons first, and there is no sign
of *that* happening any time soon in Iraq. Seems like a type of madness
to inject oneself among the various participants.

--
Ted Bennett

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

It's not primarily the candidates. It's Republican discipline (fair
and square) <>

Their marketing and sales skills are commendable. It's why they win
without actually providing real benefit to those who vote for them en
masse. It's brilliant.

Quoted message said:

and corruption <>

Kerry might have one. Ohio comes to mind. There are plenty of other
voting scandals too. But, all that said, if the Dumbacrats had run a
strong candidate, none of it would have mattered at all.

Quoted message said:

Actually, there is an argument to be made that it's a public
recognition of Replublican corruption in congress that the led to the
big gains for Democrats <>

I agree that the taint hurt them in the last election. The taint also
comes from the President this time, it is not from below. That is
going to hurt them if history is a teacher. Again, they are very
vulnerable - but don't underestimate the Dem's stupidity in choosing a
candidate who is un-electable.

Quoted message said:

Also, Obama Barack and John Edwards are projecting themselves as very
ideolical -- that is moved by ideals -- and it seems to be working.

The "ideals" thing might work, but only in one way. If you can create
a candidacy that is truly a "movement" where people feel enlightened
by a vibrant, charismatic, motivated candidate, with new ideas, it
works. If it comes off as a party specific ideology, it does not work.

Quoted message said:

Early days yet, and whether they can withstand the republican machine
is another question.

It's the Dems to lose this time. They've proven repeatedly that they
can do that when needed!

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:27:58 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email hidden]>
wrote:.

Quoted message said:

I need to get out and /ride/, man.

Actually, you need to get laid.

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:27:58 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email hidden]>
wrote:.

Quoted message said:

I need to get out and /ride/, man.

Doug Taylor said:

Actually, you need to get laid.

hey, family newsgroup!

(anyone in mind? does she have a sister? )
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bill Sornson said:

Tim McNamara said:

What you're not understanding is that bias is in the eye of the
beholder. If your personal bent is to the right, the media looks
like it's skewed to the left. If your personal bent is to the
left, it looks like the media is skewed to the right.

And little things like 82% of the WH press corps voting Democrat is
just...imaginary.

Right.

Yes, that appears to be imaginary, the figment of Republicans trying to
explain why reality has turned against them. You get that from Rush
Limbaugh? I just spent a bunch of time trying to find verification- any
verification- of that.

You know, the New York Times parroted the Bush White House day after day
after day when they were presenting their "case" for going to war in
Iraq. There was no critical challenge to the assertions and every thing
that came out of the offices of POTUS and VPOTUS were presented as fact,
when what they were was blatant lies and distortions. Yellow cake,
aluminum tubes, smoking guns, mushroom clouds, yadda yadda yadda. They
lied, tens of thousands of people died and are still dying.

For most of the past six years, Bush and Co. have been given a free ride
by the media. Their incompetence, corruption, nepotism and high-level
patronage jobs went (and mostly remain) unremarked. That's changed
slightly. The beginning of the turning point was Cheney shooting his
hunting partner, of all things.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tosspot said:

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

Tim McNamara said:

In Mark's case, if I recall his posts correctly, he went on record
supporting the use of waterboarding. (It's possible that I am not
recalling his posts correctly, however).

He did support waterboarding of prisoners to get information to
prevent more probelms and doesn't dispute that.

He disputes that waterboarding prisoners is in fact torture due to
particular interpretation of the Geneva conventions and also the
fact that some members of the US military have undergone
waterboarding as training to resist interrogation.

The Geneva Convention does not apply in these cases. They are not
prisoners of war. The MCA presumaby would apply.

They are prisoners of war. We have after all, declared a "war on
terror." The Bush Administration fabricated a convenient new category
of prisoner to circumvent the Geneva Convention.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bill said:

A Muzi said:

-snip-

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> OTOH, if the Head [censored]'s ticker gave out from the stress, we'd
> have Pelosi 'til January 2009. That would be a huge improvement
> over the current situation.

Bill said:

Now there's an opinion I can't even begin to argue with. I think
she might take 2008 and have Hillary as the V.P.

I was sorta hopin the Dems ticket would be Kucinich/Sharpton. . .

I might agree but who's Kucinich?

Kucinich is the Representative who entered a House bill with three
Articles of Impeachment today against Richard B. Cheney.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tim McTeague said:

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

I know how you feel Mark and I have taken a 'vacation' from these
silly NGs as well. Hopefully yours will be a vacation, not permanent
and you'll be back bcause you DO have something worthwhile to offer.
But if you don't come back certainly understand.

Don't you leave too, Peter. You, Jobst and a few others are the main
reasons I put up with this newsgroup. I find some of the web forums,
particularly Serotta's, are more moderate in tone. Richard Sachs, Dave Kirk
and Tom Kellogg frequent that forum so there is a wealth of knowledge to be
found by the likes of me, and most of the posts are not Serotta related.

I only occasionally look at that forum but there has been some good
stuff there. Some insupportable myth and lore, too, but that'll happen
anywhere.