And the winner is...

Jeff Jones said:

...McQuaid. Only Moreno ended up standing against him after Singh and
Verbruggen withdrew their bids.

Bit more at:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep23news2

Oh, yeah. That'll change things.

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Jeff Jones said:

...McQuaid. Only Moreno ended up standing against him after Singh and
Verbruggen withdrew their bids.

Bit more at:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep23news2

Oh, yeah. That'll change things.

What do you mean? Is there something that needs to be changed?

Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

On 09/23/2005 02:09 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Tom Kunich"

Quoted message said:

Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 09/23/2005 02:09 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Tom Kunich"

Quoted message said:

Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

Which party abolished slavery?
Which party selected Earl Warren to the Supreme Court who pushed through
Brown v Board of education?
Which party put troops in the south to enforce B v BoE?
Which party opened diplomatic ties with China?
Which party ended Vietnam?

Tom Kunich said:

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 09/23/2005 02:09 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Tom Kunich"

Quoted message said:

Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

Which party abolished slavery?
Which party selected Earl Warren to the Supreme Court who pushed through
Brown v Board of education?
Which party put troops in the south to enforce B v BoE?
Which party opened diplomatic ties with China?
Which party ended Vietnam?

The answer is the Republican party... but that's misleading, because
before about 1900, they were the more liberal party and the Democratic
party was the party of the Southern plantation owners.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Tom Kunich said:

Which party selected Earl Warren to the Supreme Court who pushed through
Brown v Board of education?

Earl Warren had been a party faithful until he took the
seat at the Supreme Court, then he went walk-about. The
Eisenhower administration was not pleased.

--
Michael Press

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tom Kunich said:

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 09/23/2005 02:09 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Tom Kunich"

Quoted message said:

Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

I would have said "the right", rather than "conservatives". Bush, Rove,
Delay, etc. are hardly conservatives.

Quoted message said:

Which party abolished slavery?

Lincoln was a Republican, however, you can in no way positively compare the
Republicans of the 1860s to the Republican leadership of today.

Quoted message said:

Which party selected Earl Warren to the Supreme Court who pushed through
Brown v Board of education?
Which party put troops in the south to enforce B v BoE?

Eisenhower was a Republican, however, you can in no way positively compare
his conservatism with that of the Republican leadership of today.

Quoted message said:

Which party opened diplomatic ties with China?
Which party ended Vietnam?

Hmm, normally you're ***blaming*** "Liberals" for that, claiming they have
the blood of millions on their hands. Now you want to give Republicans credit?

--
tanx,
Howard

Butter is love.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Steven L. Sheffield said:

On 09/23/2005 02:09 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Tom Kunich"

Quoted message said:

Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

CONSERVATIVE, n.
A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from
the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.

Quoted message said:

From the Devil's Dictionary by Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914(?)

Tom Kunich said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

Which party abolished slavery?
Which party selected Earl Warren to the Supreme Court who pushed through
Brown v Board of education?
Which party put troops in the south to enforce B v BoE?
Which party opened diplomatic ties with China?
Which party ended Vietnam?

Fellow Dumbasses -

Anyone who has the attitude of: one party=all good, the other party=all
bad

is basically a non-thinker and isn't worth your time.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

Quoted message said:

> Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

Which party abolished slavery?
Which party selected Earl Warren to the Supreme Court who pushed through
Brown v Board of education?
Which party put troops in the south to enforce B v BoE?
Which party opened diplomatic ties with China?
Which party ended Vietnam?

Fellow Dumbasses -

More irony here.

Quoted message said:

Anyone who has the attitude of: one party=all good, the other party=all
bad is basically a non-thinker and isn't worth your time.

Not that I said that but then that's what you interpretted in your rather
limited mind. It must be difficult not riding any more and having the only
thing that ever gave you anything similar to a life gone forever.

Tom Kunich wrote:
PLONK

It is good to laugh at yourself LITTLE BOY TOM every so often.
Why let everyone else have all the fun.

"Earl Warren had been a party faithful until he took the
seat at the Supreme Court, then he went walk-about. The
Eisenhower administration was not pleased."

I remember the John Birch Society's campaign to have Earl Warren
impeached because he was too liberal for them.

"Olebiker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Earl Warren had been a party faithful until he took the
seat at the Supreme Court, then he went walk-about. The
Eisenhower administration was not pleased."

I remember the John Birch Society's campaign to have Earl Warren
impeached because he was too liberal for them.

I worked on my first political campaign at age 8 to help keep a John Birch
Society member from being elected to the local school board. Lovely folks
those Birchers.

"B. Lafferty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Olebiker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Earl Warren had been a party faithful until he took the
seat at the Supreme Court, then he went walk-about. The
Eisenhower administration was not pleased."

I remember the John Birch Society's campaign to have Earl Warren
impeached because he was too liberal for them.

I worked on my first political campaign at age 8 to help keep a John Birch
Society member from being elected to the local school board. Lovely folks
those Birchers.

And they're still around http://www.jbs.org/

Howard Kveck said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tom Kunich said:

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 09/23/2005 02:09 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Tom Kunich"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

> Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.

Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

I would have said "the right", rather than "conservatives". Bush, Rove,
Delay, etc. are hardly conservatives.

Quoted message said:

Which party abolished slavery?

Lincoln was a Republican, however, you can in no way positively compare the
Republicans of the 1860s to the Republican leadership of today.

Quoted message said:

Which party selected Earl Warren to the Supreme Court who pushed through
Brown v Board of education?
Which party put troops in the south to enforce B v BoE?

Eisenhower was a Republican, however, you can in no way positively compare
his conservatism with that of the Republican leadership of today.
tanx,
Howard

If you take a good hard look at the backgrounds of most of this bunch
they either came out of the Nixon/Ford disaster, or believe that Tricky
[censored] was one of our greatest presidents. I didn't think there were
enough rocks scattered around for this many lowlifes to hide under, but
apparently there were since they are all now employed by this
administration. The more I see the sicker I get. I've been spending the
last couple of weeks doing the VA hospital thing with my Uncle and to
say that they've had the [censored] cut out of their budget, and staffing
would be a huge understatement. What was supposed to relieve this was
to cut aprox. 40% of those now eligible for VA care off the rolls.
Fortunately Congress blocked this, but after the former VA chief quit
in total disgust at what this administration was doing they replaced
him with a hack who is a yes man for Rumsfeld and the Administration.
Especially when their policy is creating 10s of thousands of wounded,
and who knows how many PTSDs they have totally screwed the system over
because the original plan was to privatize the VA and just give Vets a
chance to sign up for insurance.
I really have a lot of respect, and good things to say about the
people at the caregiver level trying to make things go. Most of them
are there because they chose to work there, but where he is now the
nurses are working 16hrs on 8 off as regular shifts because they are so
understaffed and don't have the money to do any more hiring. They say
there's an even bigger shortage of Docs.
Bill C

Bill C said:

Howard Kveck said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tom Kunich said:

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> On 09/23/2005 02:09 PM, in article
> [email hidden], "Tom Kunich"
> <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Leftists want to see everything changed and nothing fixed.
>
> Conservatives want to see nothing changed and nothing fixed.

I would have said "the right", rather than "conservatives". Bush, Rove,
Delay, etc. are hardly conservatives.

Quoted message said:

Which party abolished slavery?

Lincoln was a Republican, however, you can in no way positively compare the
Republicans of the 1860s to the Republican leadership of today.

Quoted message said:

Which party selected Earl Warren to the Supreme Court who pushed through
Brown v Board of education?
Which party put troops in the south to enforce B v BoE?

Eisenhower was a Republican, however, you can in no way positively compare
his conservatism with that of the Republican leadership of today.
tanx,
Howard

If you take a good hard look at the backgrounds of most of this bunch
they either came out of the Nixon/Ford disaster, or believe that Tricky
[censored] was one of our greatest presidents. I didn't think there were
enough rocks scattered around for this many lowlifes to hide under, but
apparently there were since they are all now employed by this
administration. The more I see the sicker I get. I've been spending the
last couple of weeks doing the VA hospital thing with my Uncle and to
say that they've had the [censored] cut out of their budget, and staffing
would be a huge understatement. What was supposed to relieve this was
to cut aprox. 40% of those now eligible for VA care off the rolls.
Fortunately Congress blocked this, but after the former VA chief quit
in total disgust at what this administration was doing they replaced
him with a hack who is a yes man for Rumsfeld and the Administration.
Especially when their policy is creating 10s of thousands of wounded,
and who knows how many PTSDs they have totally screwed the system over
because the original plan was to privatize the VA and just give Vets a
chance to sign up for insurance.
I really have a lot of respect, and good things to say about the
people at the caregiver level trying to make things go. Most of them
are there because they chose to work there, but where he is now the
nurses are working 16hrs on 8 off as regular shifts because they are so
understaffed and don't have the money to do any more hiring. They say
there's an even bigger shortage of Docs.
Bill C

Here's another piece about how much they care:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-5309922,00.html
Bill C

Bill C said:

Here's another piece about how much they care:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-5309922,00.html
Bill C

Bill, all this nasty [censored] that has you all worked up is happening
with the overwhelming electoral support of veterans and military
families. For an example just look in the mirror. Nothing Bush
has done since the election should be considered a surprise. Yet
even you, who is as cranked up as anyone about it, couldn't bring
yourself to oppose him.

I just thought I'd point that out.

Bob Schwartz
[email hidden]

Bob Schwartz said:

Bill C said:

Here's another piece about how much they care:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-5309922,00.html
Bill C

Bill, all this nasty [censored] that has you all worked up is happening
with the overwhelming electoral support of veterans and military
families. For an example just look in the mirror. Nothing Bush
has done since the election should be considered a surprise. Yet
even you, who is as cranked up as anyone about it, couldn't bring
yourself to oppose him.

I just thought I'd point that out.

Bob Schwartz
[email hidden]

The first time election he was an unknown quantity, butter than what
Al Gore had become IMO(the Gore that was first elected from Tennessee
would've won in a landslide)and I voted for him. The second time I
voted Libertarian because I'm still convinced Kerry would've been
worse, even in hindsight with all that's gone wrong.
What really surprised me, and shouldn't of, was an AOL poll along with
the story and 80% of the people weren't aware of either the body armor
issue, or inadequate equipment. I know that AOL isaimed at the
"People's Court/Oprah" audience, but that was still a shock.
The VA stuff just makes me nuts because I'm seeing mainstream news and
press conferences with Bush saying how much he's increasing the VA
budget and services, and he is in certain places, while I'm reading the
whole story in either the VA's newsletter or the other MilNews stuff I
get.
Bush is doing a pretty good job of killing military/vet support for
the Republicans though. It's still a large majority but had dropped by
about 20% in the last good poll I saw. That puts it at about 60/40 I
think. The problem is that the last Democrat who viewed the military
positively was JFK and we all are very aware of that. Clinton gets
bashed a lot more than he deserves. He and Gore both detest the
military, that's a fact despite the pr spin, but he really pretty much
left the core of it alone. Kerry has been brutally anti-military since
he got out. His voting record is overwhelming, and until he wanted to
be Pesident he was firmly in the "Jane Fonda, I hate those war
criminals camp" which plays really well to his base in Mass.
I would've voted for Lieberman, but he was too moderate to have a
chance in a party being led by Dean/Kerry/MoveOn.org and I can't
support them. I think they screw up again and nominate Hillary and we
have the nastiest, most divise election in over a century, and it's
close as hell because her negatives are so huge. They are still
complaining that Kerry wasn't vicious enough and their campaign wasn't
negative enough. Hillary will fix that. I just don't think it's a good
thing. They might win the election with it though.
I just hope that Obama stays clear of all the [censored] that's going to be
flying in this next election. He really does seem to really have his
head on straight:
http://tinyurl.com/cxume
You're right about how frustrated I am, but it's with both parties and
I don't see it getting better any time soon.
Bill C