Various Topics on Internet News

.... ..

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 03:33:01 GMT, Al Superczynski
<modeleral@deadspam.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 21:32:05 GMT, Dave K. <djkrieps@junkbust.att.net>
>wrote:
>
>>>[Hillary for President]
>>
>> Well, for me it depends entirely upon who she might be running
>>against.<g>
>
> Yeah, I suppose the Republicans could nominate someone worse but
>I just don't see it happening.
>
>> I suppose we could do worse. In fact, I believe we have done worse.
>>Warren G. Harding comes to mind.<g>
>
> Oh, we've done *lots* worse, that's for sure. Harding is an
>excellent example. I would point to Carter as well....
>
>> She is a capable politician, or so it seems.
>
> That she is, and her husband is *the* consumate politician.
>
>>> If she wins, I'm moving across the pond with Barbra and
>>>what's-his-name: Mrs. Barbara?
>>
>> You would move for that? Not me. Heck, I stayed even when Bush,
>>jr. was elected...<G>
>
> And I stayed while Mr. Clinton was in office....... ;-p

There you go!

--

Cheers!

.... ..

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:21:52 -0400, Just Judy
<gopanth@invalid-addy.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 21:32:05 GMT, Dave K. <djkrieps@junkbust.att.net>
>wrote:
>
>>> If she wins, I'm moving across the pond with Barbra and
>>>what's-his-name: Mrs. Barbara?
>>
>> You would move for that?
>
> Yep, just like Barbra said she'd do.
>
>> Not me. Heck, I stayed even when Bush,
>>jr. was elected...<G>
>
> Go to your room!

LOL.

--

Cheers!

..ridi.. ..ewa..

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:23:39 -0400, Just Judy
<gopanth@invalid-addy.com> wrote:
>
> Ahhh, Carter. He's a mixed bag for sure. I think he was
>probably the most ineffective president ever, but the one with the most
>honest intentions.
>
> My opinion of him has dropped off the scale in recent years.
>However, he remains what I consider the only honest politician in
>history. Honest, but ineffective.


Do you consider trading arms for hostages as being effective?
--
=================
Mike Burell
http://burell.com
=================

That leaves you, you'll have to do it - T Rundgren

.... ....

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 01:08:14 GMT, Meridian Leeward <mburell@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:23:39 -0400, Just Judy
><gopanth@invalid-addy.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ahhh, Carter. He's a mixed bag for sure. I think he was
>>probably the most ineffective president ever, but the one with the most
>>honest intentions.
>>
>> My opinion of him has dropped off the scale in recent years.
>>However, he remains what I consider the only honest politician in
>>history. Honest, but ineffective.
>
>
>Do you consider trading arms for hostages as being effective?

Absolutely not. Call it what you will, but it helped reinforce
terrorists' belief that we would not strike back.

..ridi.. ..ewa..

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:28:37 -0400, Just Judy
<gopanth@invalid-addy.com> wrote:


>>Do you consider trading arms for hostages as being effective?
>
> Absolutely not. Call it what you will, but it helped reinforce
>terrorists' belief that we would not strike back.

Well it is probably what made Reagan more effective in gaining the
release of the hostages. Being popular didn't have as much influence
in what Carter did.
--
=================
Mike Burell
http://burell.com
=================

That leaves you, you'll have to do it - T Rundgren

..

On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 05:16:27 GMT, Meridian Leeward <mburell@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:28:37 -0400, Just Judy
><gopanth@invalid-addy.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Do you consider trading arms for hostages as being effective?
>>
>> Absolutely not. Call it what you will, but it helped reinforce
>>terrorists' belief that we would not strike back.
>
>Well it is probably what made Reagan more effective in gaining the
>release of the hostages. Being popular didn't have as much influence
>in what Carter did.

Yup, and it probably had a lot to do how the American public perceived
JFK as well.

--
cg