To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *22331 (-10)
  Impeach Bush now
 
Impeach Bush now Unmasking a CIA agent is bad, lying to Congress worse. With each U.S. death in Iraq, the case against the President grows stronger, says JOHN MacARTHUR (URL) Now that the U.S. government's chief weapons inspector in Iraq has, in (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  More of the Usual Lies
 
Bush hits back at Iraq critics (URL) Mr Bush's speech was part of a new White House public relations offensive aimed at countering growing criticism of US policy in post-war Iraq, where US forces are coming under fire daily and suffering mounting (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
 
(...) We are the chorus, and we agree, we agree, we agree, we agree - Bored of the Rings (...) No, we dismiss the anonymous simply because they are anonymous. I don't have a clue as to who they are. I at least knew beforehand who Arnold was, I could (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote: Once again, you're forgetting my prohibition against posting except when you agree with me. I just don't understand you sometimes. (...) There's a difference, I think, between ignoring anonymous (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
 
(...) Honestly, I dismissed most of them for pretty much the same reason - I didn't know their name simply because they were not seriously running for governor. And let's add to that I dismissed the names that were similiar to better known people (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
 
(...) Absolute political unknown. I had presumed that you would be able to identify the term within the context of the discussion, but I see that I am in error. You dismissed a range of other candidates just because you didn't know their names. This (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
 
I think its all very funny but then I don't live in CA Tim (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
 
(...) "Absolute unknown" can take on a lot of possibilities. If you mean unknown to the public in general then Arnold not an "absolute unknown". I have my sample ballot in front of me right now and am going down the list to see which names I (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
 
(...) Character flaws? If true, the actions described are generally in the way of sexual assault. I might have a bad temper -- yeah, that's bad. But if I grope your wife, daughter, brother, son, or even you -- I've probably committed a crime! (...) (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
 
(...) Okay, answer me this - would you assign 3 reporters to investigate bad temper when everyone involved is in one spot, or 3 reporters to investigate alleged criminal transgressions with the witnesses scattered about? Which is newsworthy? Davis (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR