[P1] self-quotes

[Eric B. Richardson]

At 5:06 PM -0600 1/4/03, John Paul Moore wrote:
>At 1:54 PM -0600 1/4/03, Eric B. Richardson wrote:
>>
>>What I objected to has to do with the term 'chicken hawk' which is
>>long term standing slang for a pedophile that is decades old at
>>least. The people who appropriated this term for this debate are
>>aware of that meaning, and by doing so, implicating our national
>>leaders with such connotations, is shameful and reprehensible
>>behavior. I did not object to the criticism. If I did, it would be
>>along the lines like this:
>
>These are public figures we are referring to here--among the chickenhawks
>are George Bush, Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, John Ashcroft, Paul Wolfowitz,
>Richard Perle, Spencer Abraham, Don Evans, Karl Rove, Andrew Card, Tom
>DeLay, Trent Lott, Bob Barr, Mitch McConnell, Dick Armey, Phil Gramm,
>Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Newt Gingrich, Mark Racicot, Rudy Guliani,
>Charlton Heston, Wayne LaPierre, Bill Bennett, Jerry Falwell, George Will,
>Bill O'Reilly, Tony Snow, Britt Hume and Sean Hannity--and as such are
>subject to being called any name the public cares to put on them.


Oh, yeah. Nothing is too vile or out of line. I understand where you 
are coming from.

>I am not saying they are pedophiles, that is your construction.

It is not my construction. The meaning that I gave is factual, and in 
fact, your meaning is not even listed at dictionary.com, so the real 
construction is on your part and others of your ilk. Your real bias 
was evident when you decided to post the utterly ignorant crap about 
Clinton being the most effective president, not just more than Bush, 
but more than any president in American history. What a load. You act 
like a teenager with a crush.

>I am saying
>that insasmuch as they are promoting war, it serves us all to consider the
>roots of such advocacy.

They are not promoting war, they are with reason and diplomacy and 
steadfast will, answering a clear declaration of war against us, and 
giving the opposition lots of time to reconsider its options before 
we answer them with destruction. Iraq is up to the roots of it's 
scalp hairs in bloody terrorism, and the sooner Saddam is taken out 
of the picture and Iraq liberated the safer the world will be.

>  There are two kinds of people--those who served and
>those who did not. Among those who served, there are those who were put in
>a position to kill or be killed. And among these, there are the ones who
>survived and the ones who did not. Before we create any more of this last
>group, we should carefully consider ALL the options.

Including the option to bow down and kiss the Iraqi trained and 
funded terrorists' jackboots?

>  Many of us believe the
>current impasse, as well as other problems afflicting our current body
>politic, are largely due to the Bush Administration's utter malfeasance in
>foreign affairs.

This statement ranks right up there with the one about Clinton's 
effectiveness. You apparently dwell in a black and white world where 
hyperbole is the standard, and reason is out the window.

There are many of you considering that a couple of percentage points 
of 300 million is still six million, but it is evident that you are a 
very small part of the overall body politic.

>People close to the current unelected administration who have survived
>combat have, to a man so far as I know, opposed the hair trigger, cowboy
>approach Bush advocates, going to war with or without provocation or
>international support.

This is definitely your construction. I can't parse a particle of 
truth in it at all. Hair trigger? I think that Bush has been very 
slow and methodical, very planned and reasoned. He definitely has 
asked for and gotten international support. Cowboy approach? That has 
a nice propagandistic ring to it, with all its dripping disdain for 
enthusiasm and the real life cowboys, but in the end it has no 
meaning, just a yellow journalism type of phrase meant to elicit some 
emotional knee jerk response from your fellow travellers.

>
>They are not pedophiles, they are worse.

Yes, we see. These men are worse than the killer of Van Damme and all 
deserve to die.

>
>John Paul Moore
>johnpaulmoore at austin.rr.com
http://alllinked.com

Somewhere I misplaced the place where you said that Bush was 
unelected. He was clearly elected by the only vote that counts the 
electoral college. Or don't you just care about the constitution and 
the rules? No, I didn't think that you did.

He was elected by a greater percentage of the popular vote than Bill 
Clinton got in either election. And I don't believe that Gore had a 
majority of the vote either, if he had he would have won. He couldn't 
even carry his own state, despite the overwhelming bias of the 
network news reporting and the major newspapers in the country. They 
systematically did everything they could to discourage the 
conservative vote in swing states by their reporting of results. Even 
now they misreport the economic situation trying to bias people 
against Bush, just like they misreported the economic situation 
before the 2000 election trying to bias people in favor of Clinton.