Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: lucasea on 8 Nov 2006 09:36 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eislmu$8qk_006(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <eirjrn$qa6$4(a)blue.rahul.net>, > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>In article <eipsta$8qk_001(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>In article <RRH3h.6197$B31.1642(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, >>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>> >>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>news:ein6vl$8qk_002(a)s943.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>> >>>>> My state is going to have an all Democrat political system with >>>>> no checks nor balances. >>>> >>>>....and yet somehow you completely fail to see how unhealthy that has >>>>been >>>>for the entire country. >>> >>>You do need to learn about Consitution. There are checks and >>>balances working. >> >>They don't mean Jack Abramoff is adding checks to the balances in the >>republican's bank account when they refer to checks and balances. > > If the Constitution's checks and balances weren't working, these > kinds of people would still be operating. There seems to be > one of these types in the news and on trial about every two > years. Clinton's terms had theirs. Regan's did. Carter didn't > need others to make his messes. You point to the imprisonment of Jack Abramoff as evidence that the checks-and-balances in the Constitution are working? What clause of the Constitution, exactly, speaks out against unethical lobbying practices? It is amazing the mechanisms you develop to support your contentions, and blind yourself to the real issues. ERic Lucas
From: lucasea on 8 Nov 2006 09:40 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eisls4$8qk_008(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <0d14h.8294$B31.2861(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:eipt15$8qk_002(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <454FA606.6BE1BCE2(a)hotmail.com>, >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>> >>>>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>> > >>>>> > My state is going to have an all Democrat political system with >>>>> > no checks nor balances. >>>>> >>>>> ...and yet somehow you completely fail to see how unhealthy that has >>>>> been >>>>> for the entire country. >>>> >>>>She doesn't think that Republicans require any checks and balances. >>>>That's >>>>what's really scary as they gradually dismantlke the provisions of the >>>>US >>>>Constitution ! >>> >>> The Republicans do not have a voting majority in Congress. >> >>What planet are you living on????? > > Earth. Uh...noooo....here on Earth, on 11/6/06, the Republicans do, in fact, have a voting majority in Congress. Using factual untruths to extend the length of your trolling? Eric LUcas
From: lucasea on 8 Nov 2006 09:46 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eismvd$8qk_001(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <eirk14$qa6$5(a)blue.rahul.net>, > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>Where does the money really go? "the general fund" is an accounting >>device not the final destination of the money. > > Patronage pockets. Extending all infrastructure projects 2 or > 3 decades. The so-called social services. Building disintegrating > buildings. You really do need to see more of your own country. Not every infrastructure project is "The Big Dig", and not every state in this nation is phenomenally stupid enough to let a fiasco like the Big Dig happen. Eric Lucas
From: Eeyore on 8 Nov 2006 09:50 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote > >> ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message. > >> >> > >> >> My state is going to have an all Democrat political system with > >> >> no checks nor balances. > >> > > >> >....and yet somehow you completely fail to see how unhealthy that has been > >> >for the entire country. > >> > >> You do need to learn about Consitution. There are checks and > >> balances working. > > > >Bush has been busy removing some of them. > > He can't. His powers are checked by the legislature and judicial > branches of our government. All presidents have tried to do > certain things. So far they have failed, as the Constitution > designed it. You're saying he *hasn't* effectively removed habeas corpus ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 8 Nov 2006 09:54
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <1162901489.499250.295790(a)e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, > hill(a)rowland.org wrote: > >Winfield Hill wrote: > >> > >> 4200 postings and still going strong. Amazing. > > > > Wow, now 7200 posts and still going strong. And most > > of the posts were under the original subject title. This > > must be some kind of a record. > > I don't think so. > > >Certainly it's a stress > > test for the Google Groups web-page display code, etc. > > KEWL!!!! Has there been any glitches? None I'm aware of. 7360 posts and counting. Graham |