[Rhodes22-list] Brad, now my turn:

R22RumRunner at aol.com R22RumRunner at aol.com
Thu Sep 11 09:17:51 EDT 2008


Stan,
In case your eyeglasses are a little foggy this morning, she has cute perky  
breasts.
 
Rummy
 
 
In a message dated 9/11/2008 9:01:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
stan at rhodes22.com writes:


Brad,

now my turn:  tell me how she  differs from George.

something? - anything?

ss

-----  Original Message ----- 
From: "stan" <stan at rhodes22.com>
To: "The  Rhodes 22 Email List" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Tuesday,  September 09, 2008 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the  "evolutionists" are going to 
save us from the Republicans


>  something? -  anything?
>
> He won his BW.
>
>  ss
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Herb  Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List"  <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008  3:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the "evolutionists"  are going 
> to save us from the Republicans
>
>
>>  Brad my friend, you're missing the obvious. As Slim so masterfully ,  the
>> "I won't vote for a religious kook" (or actually, insert any  label you
>> choose there) REALLY means they're looking for an excuse  not to vote for
>> the person, and the "label" doesn't apply if the  "labled" is from the 
>> left.
>>
>> Brad Haslett  wrote:
>>> Stan,
>>>
>>> In the jargon of  fighter pilots, "this is a target rich environment".
>>> So I pick  you as the target among the many threads to begin the  fight.
>>>  Who is the most devoutly religious person  currently elected to
>>> office? I don't know either but I'm  guessing Senator Lieberman.  When
>>> he was the VP candidate  with Gore in 2000 did we hear the constant
>>> refrain of: "If  Gore takes the Whitehouse, and he gets stomped by a
>>> big  'carbon footprint', Uncle Joe will outlaw BBQ pork sandwiches  for
>>> life!"  No, no one gave a shit.  The current  conversation is much to
>>> do about nothing.  Let's get back  to "what exactly did Obama ever do
>>> at any point in his life  but complain about his or someone else's
>>> treatment?"   Short of running for something, what has he  accomplished?
>>>  Something,  anything!
>>>
>>>  Brad
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at  8:26 AM, stan <stan at rhodes22.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Slim,
>>>>
>>>> As a member of your religious  faith, and an ardent fan, if you really 
>>>>  plan
>>>> to skip voting (in effect voting for those whose  direct religious
>>>> instructions got us into such a waste of  our wealth and blood) I would 
>>>> be
>>>>  truly saddened.   I don't think poorly of John's and Palin's  inability 
>>>> to
>>>> live up to their own  family values, relying on their gods to forgive 
>>>> them  -
>>>> I worry about their health; a topic that seems to be  forbidden to 
>>>> address.
>>>> John's cheek is  not like that from his prisoner days and his vp could 
>>>> be  our
>>>> leader without notice.  Then where would this  country's founding desire 
>>>> for
>>>>  religious freedom end up?  The first example is already on the table  
>>>> and
>>>> Catholic Joe has it right:   When life starts is a religious opinion and
>>>> should not be  one decided by government.   You may feel life does not  
>>>> start
>>>> until a breath is taken, the  Jews count a number of months before the 
>>>>  start,
>>>> the Christens count from the moment the cells begin  dividing. 
>>>> Personally I
>>>> don't think it  starts until after college.  If we allow a Palin to call 
 
>>>> such
>>>> shots we are on a path Jefferson  and all those other smart guys 
>>>> insisted  on
>>>> avoiding.   McCain told the TV interviewer  that if he had his way the 
>>>> first
>>>>  judge he would get rid of is Ginsberg and than went down the list of  
>>>> her
>>>> kind.   Once this is  allowed to start (we already have allowed god onto 
>>>>  our
>>>> coins), god (hypocritically speaking) help us - or we  will all, 
>>>> eventually,
>>>> become strong  advocates of the second amendment.
>>>>
>>>>  John, at least is a flip flopper so, if elected, would probably revert  
>>>> to
>>>> many of his reasonable  positions.  It is Palin I am fearful will give 
>>>>  us
>>>> even worse than another 8 years.  (And this from a  confessed 
>>>>  womanizer.)
>>>>
>>>>  stan/ec
>>>>  .
>>>> ----- Original Message  -----
>>>> From: "Steven Alm"  <stevenalm at gmail.com>
>>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List"  <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday,  September 09, 2008 2:02 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list]  Praise Jesus,the "evolutionists" are going 
>>>>  to
>>>> save us from the  Republicans
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>  Todd,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm an atheist and I  think Palin's a religious kook.  And you're 
>>>>>  right, I
>>>>> won't vote for a religious kook.  I  haven't studied Darwin very much 
>>>>>  (and
>>>>> I
>>>>> applaud your research  and quotes) but I don't think that's the only 
>>>>>  rebuke
>>>>> to creationism.  Since most of the species  of plant and animal life on
>>>>>  this
>>>>> earth are in fact extinct, I'd call that  "unintelligent design."
>>>>>
>>>>> You  said there are only two possibilities as to how life started.  Are 
 
>>>>> you
>>>>> sure?  How do you  know this?  What I know is that all religions serve  
>>>>> in
>>>>> answering three  questions:  Where did we come from, how do we live  and
>>>>> what
>>>>> happens when we  die?  Myself, I've answered those questions to my  own
>>>>> satisfaction and I don't need the church to tell  me anything.
>>>>>
>>>>>  Slim
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at  5:32 PM, Todd Tavares <sprocket80 at mail.com> 
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Slim, Wow!  are you are going to vote for Obama because he is a  
>>>>>> Marxist
>>>>>> or not vote  for McCain just because Palin is a religious extremist?  
>>>>>> :^D
>>>>>> Glad you  mentioned carbon dating.  Carbon has been proven by  many
>>>>>> scientists to be a wholly inaccurate method  of dating.  I am far from
>>>>>> being a  scientist...or a religious kook thinking the earth is only  a
>>>>>> couple of thousand of years old, but there is  just as much scientific
>>>>>> information out there to;  while not proving creation is the truth, 
>>>>>>  surely
>>>>>> proves evolution is improbable if not  impossible.  You are/were an
>>>>>> educator and  were taught evolution from a text book, like we all  
>>>>>> were.
>>>>>> Just because  you read something in a text book does not make it  
>>>>>> truth.
>>>>>>  http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Maybe we could all  
>>>>>> stomach
>>>>>> creationism  if we called it a theory too. After all that is  what
>>>>>> evolution is...just an unproven theory. There  are equally as many
>>>>>> scientists out there who  believe they have proven evolution is myth. 
>>>>>>  It
>>>>>> was not Darwin's brainstorm anyway.  He  thought he could further 
>>>>>>  explain
>>>>>> a centuries old belief; that life arose  from non life and everything
>>>>>> sprang from a common  ancestor. Modern scientists say it was that 
>>>>>>  first
>>>>>> amino acid or protein chain in the pool of  "primordial ooze."  I like 
>>>>>>  how
>>>>>> one Nobel prize winner (Biology 1967?) put  it:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "There are only  two possibilities as to how life arose; one is
>>>>>>  spontaneous generation arising to evolution, the other is a  
>>>>>> supernatural
>>>>>> creative  act of God, there is no third possibility.  Spontaneous
>>>>>> generation that life arose from  non-living matter was scientifically
>>>>>> disproved 120  years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That leaves us  
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> only one  possible conclusion, that life arose as a creative act of  
>>>>>> God. I
>>>>>> will not  accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe 
 
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> God, therefore I  choose to believe in that which I know is 
>>>>>>  scientifically
>>>>>> impossible, spontaneous generation  arising to evolution."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  (Dr. George Wald, evolutionist, Professor Emeritus of Biology at  the
>>>>>> University at Harvard, Nobel Prize winner in  Biology.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the most  interesting fact is that even Darwin himself  realized
>>>>>> evolution was not  workable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "To suppose  that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances  for
>>>>>> adjusting the focus to different distances,  for admitting different
>>>>>> amounts of light, and for  the correction of spherical and chromatic
>>>>>>  aberration, could have formed by natural selection, seems, I  freely
>>>>>> confess, absurd in the highest degree  possible." (Charles Darwin, 
>>>>>>  "The
>>>>>> origin of species by means of natural  selection")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "If it  could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which  
>>>>>> could
>>>>>> not possibly  have been formed by numerous, successive, slight
>>>>>>  modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."  (Charles  
>>>>>> Darwin,
>>>>>> "The Origin  of Species")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Often a  cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself  
>>>>>> whether
>>>>>> I may have  not devoted myself to a fantasy."  (Charles Darwin, Life  
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> Letters, 1887,  Vol. 2, p. 229)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I  could post a few hundred quotes from noted doctors and scientists  
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> try to "prove"  evolution wrong or creation right. I could "do my
>>>>>>  homework" as we say here on the list and cite actual findings, but  
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> is not  necessary. Because to dismiss the possibility of God or some  
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> Intelligent  Designer makes it easier to accept our notions that it is 
 
>>>>>> ok
>>>>>> to be a homosexual  (and not allow me a choice when the schools teach 
>>>>>>  this
>>>>>> gargage to my kids while denying the right to  learn about the theory 
>>>>>>  of
>>>>>> creation along with evolution) or that it  should be a crime to kill a
>>>>>> tree, but ok to kill  an unborn baby. Not to say everyone believing in
>>>>>>  evolution is an athiest (or a Democrat), but you have made me see  
>>>>>> this as
>>>>>> a hinge  factor in how I will vote....real issues  aside.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Todd  T
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Besides, it is not  very PC to say we evolved (were "selected") from 
>>>>>>  apes.
>>>>>> We don't want any of the apes that were not  selected to be made to 
>>>>>>  feel
>>>>>>  inferior.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: "Steven  Alm"
>>>>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email  List"
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus,  the Republicans are going 
>>>>>>  to
>>>>>> save us from the  Republicans
>>>>>> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:11:17  -0500
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  "Ahh, so the "tolerant" lefty has a litmus test for religious  
>>>>>>  beliefs."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I  require that the candidates be sane, critical thinkers. Palin  
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> obviously not. I  wouldn't say that if she were a Catholic or a 
>>>>>>  Lutheran
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> here's a  woman who wants to stare down the whole scientific community 
 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> deny things like  carbon 14 dating and declare that the heavens and 
>>>>>>  earth
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> only a few  thousand years old. You didn't just call ME an extremist,  
>>>>>> did
>>>>>>  you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Brad, you left  out the part of Kroon saying that his parishioners  
>>>>>> should
>>>>>> pray for the  completion of the pipeline because at the end of the  
>>>>>> world,
>>>>>> folks will  flock to Alaska as their final  refuge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't  believe that was you quoting all that God  stuff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Slim
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 8,  2008 at 12:18 PM, Steven Alm  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  "She's already demonstrated that she is fully capable of separating  
>>>>>>> her
>>>>>>> personal  beliefs from her  duties."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Wouldn't it be better if she didn't have  to?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 6:18 AM, Herb Parsons  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Ahh, so the "tolerant" lefty has a litmus test for religious  
>>>>>>>>  beliefs.
>>>>>>>> She's already demonstrated that  she is fully capable of separating 
>>>>>>>>  her
>>>>>>>> personal beliefs from her duties. She  vetoed a bill that would have
>>>>>>>> denied  benefits to gay  couples.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  But, you extremists keep it up, I'm sure you'll find (or make  up)
>>>>>>>> SOMETHING on  her.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Steven Alm  wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  She's a creationist. Her Assembly of God stuff is a deal breaker  
>>>>>>>>>  for
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Religious extremism cannot be  tolerated.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  The most important legacy the president leaves is the appointment  
>>>>>>>>>  of
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  supreme court.
>>>>>>>>> The next pres might  appoint as many as three. If Sarabaracuda  has
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  her
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  way,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  say goodbye to Roe V. Wade and hello to back-ally coat  hanger
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  abortions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Slim
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Herb  Parsons
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  I think it's funny that the candidate that was considered as  a
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  running
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  mate for the Democratic choice a few years back, is now  being
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  touted  as
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  "more of the same". Keep trying though, you guys may find  
>>>>>>>>>>  something
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  that
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  works.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  What exactly makes Palin a "religious kook", that fact that's  she
>>>>>>>>>> religious? I think your colors  are beginning to  show.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  petelargo  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Ben, thanks for your post. As you may have noticed, there is  no
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  dialogue
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  with
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  the right-wing extremists. You are wrong, end of discussion  and
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  your
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  an
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  idiot to  boot.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  When John McCain won the nomination, Bush disappears overseas.  
>>>>>>>>>>>  At
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  RNC,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  no Bush, no Cheney (and no mention of them). They know it's  a
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  failed
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  administration. Where were the solutions. Once again, they  are
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  trying
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  frame the campaign as an ideology argument rather than an  issues
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Today on Face the Nation, "Sis Cum Ba and WHA-LAA", McCain is  
>>>>>>>>>>>  now
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  change
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  candidate and stated that he will end the incredible corruption  
>>>>>>>>>>>  in
>>>>>>>>>>> Washington and the failed  policies. John McCain has re-defined  a
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  whole
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  new
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  level of flip-flopping on over two dozen key issues within  the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  last
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  eight
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  years including his own authored bill that he was for and  now
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  against.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  I couldn't give a poop about the experience argument of Palin  vs
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Obama.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  It's
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  a waste of time. The entire Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice-Rove,  etc
>>>>>>>>>>> administration could be  argued to be the most  experienced
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  administration
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  in
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  the history of the White House. A huge amount of prior  
>>>>>>>>>>>  "executive
>>>>>>>>>>> experience". For  the first time in recent politics the  
>>>>>>>>>>>  Republicans
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  had
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  power in the white house, judicial, house and senate. How was  it
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  for
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  you?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  It's one thing to drive a tractor trailer up our butts, but  when
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  they
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  start
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  blowing on the horn while there're doing it, it's really gone  
>>>>>>>>>>>  too
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  far.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  A big thank you for the memories: the debt, the dead, the  
>>>>>>>>>>>  twisting
>>>>>>>>>>> intelligence to  "sell" us a war on a country that did not  attack
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  us,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  good ol boy ineffectual cronyism, and finally the shredding of  
>>>>>>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>>>>>> constitution. With Palin  we now we get to have another  religious
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  kook
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  satisfy the so-called conservative extremist religious right  to
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  'bridge'
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  them into this administration and get  money.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Spending 5-10 billion dollars a month on Iraq and kissing  
>>>>>>>>>>>  chinese
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  ass
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  (borrowing the money) of the most Marxist suppressive  government
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  on
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  planet at this time is a conservative  value?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Finally, the biggest hypocrisy of all . That these  extremists
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  actually
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  think
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  that they and the republicans are the vanguards of  conservatism?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  The
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  two
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  top key pillars of conservatism are less government and  
>>>>>>>>>>>  government
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  intrusion
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  and fiscal responsibility. The only administration that  walked
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  that
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  talk
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  in
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  50 years was a Democrat that left Bush a 500 billion  dollar
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  surplus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  He
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  blew
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  threw that in one year and it was prior to 9-11. And there is  no
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  greater
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  government intrusion that being told what you can or cannot  do
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  with  or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  put
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  into your body. Palin wants privacy for her family decisions,  
>>>>>>>>>>>  but
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  she
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  wants
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  to legislate publicly what you should do with yours. No  thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Ben Cittadino-2  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  My Dear Culture  Warriors;
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  So....are we having fun  yet?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  First, I'd like to thank Richard and Slim for stepping up to  
>>>>>>>>>>>>  join
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  "Assault on the Citadel".
>>>>>>>>>>>>  The bullets don't sting as much when the adversary's fire  is
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  spread
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  out
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  among more than one  target.
>>>>>>>>>>>> In the words first  uttered by Gen. "Vinegar Joe"  Stillwell,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  "illegitimi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  non  carborundum".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  As for Tootle, Brad, and Herb, you guys crack me up. I  posted
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  about
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Obama
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  only because I saw Tootle's post  that
>>>>>>>>>>>> suggested anybody  supporting Obama was either a marxist, or  a
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  farm
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  animal.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  What did he expect when he said  that?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Herb, where was your  outrage that Tootle would refer to some  of
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  his
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  fellow
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  "Rhodies" in such derogatry terms? Supporting Obama or  McCain
>>>>>>>>>>>> may turn out to be  right or wrong, but if we debate policy  and
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  don't
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  engage in mere name-calling this "sailor's bar" could be  an
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  interesting
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  place.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Richard's "geezer" remarks are defensible on several  grounds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  First,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  he
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  was provoked. Second, he was defending  ME.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Third, it was funny.  Calling someone a "marxist" as Tootle did  
>>>>>>>>>>>>  is
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  several
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  magnitudes worse than gentle kidding of  the
>>>>>>>>>>>> "old fart" kind.  Surely you see the  difference.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  The positions I tried to lay out as reasons some people  support
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Obama
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  were
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  intended as an outline of ideology (as Slim  noted),
>>>>>>>>>>>> not an argument  supporting any position. For example, Herb,  you
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  are
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  pro-life and will probably vote for McCain/Palin in part for  
>>>>>>>>>>>>  that
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  reason.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  I am pro-choice, pro-embryonic stem cell research and so I  will
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  support
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Obama/Biden in part for that reason. It is not hyperbole to  
>>>>>>>>>>>>  point
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  out
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  the policy differences that explain my choice. What I know  for
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  sure
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  that marxism and "sheepiness" have nothing to do with it. I  
>>>>>>>>>>>>  have
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  thought
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  about all of my positions on the issues I mentioned and  am
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  completely
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  prepared to explain and justify them. In Brad's oft'  repeated
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  mantra
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  I
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  know I have "done my  homework".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Enough for today. The games will be on  soon.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Cheers!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Ben C. , s/v Susan Kay, Highlands,  NJ
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>  To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing  
>>>>>>>>>>>>  list
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  go
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>  To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list  
>>>>>>>>>>  go
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>  To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list  
>>>>>>>>>  go
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>  To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go 
 
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>  http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>  To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list  go
>>>>>> to  http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  --
>>>>>> Be Yourself @  mail.com!
>>>>>> Choose From 200+ Email  Addresses
>>>>>> Get a Free Account at  www.mail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>  To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go  
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>  http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>> To  subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go  to
>>>>>  http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>> To  subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to  
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>  __________________________________________________
>>> To  subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to  
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>  __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>  __________________________________________________
>> To  subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to  
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>  __________________________________________________
>  

__________________________________________________
To  subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to  
http://www.rhodes22.org/list
__________________________________________________





**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, 
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.      
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)


More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list