 | | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) It's funny you posted that here, because I thought about doing the same thing. I was more interested in the article as to what exactly is the government doing this time than actual mormon bashing. Seeing as how the /. "community" has been (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) :-, (...) Yes, it was this more than anything else that got my goat. (...) Same here. There's a cliche for a Utah Mormon; e.g. "the Church is true, but even more so in Utah". I know a few induhviduals who have earnestly earned that title, but (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Like it or not the ten commandments had a lot to do with the foundation of our entire way of life in this country. They are a historical example of a great legal system, just as Hammurabi's code. This country was founded by people who accepted (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) I agree, partially. I would wholly endorse the Ten Commandments in school if similarly profound texts from other religions were posted as well. The Constition doesn't seem to ban the government from mentioning or even accepting religion; it (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes: <ka-schnip!> (...) of real estate, in any case! The local LDS haunt near my office is right off of the freeway; a large white marble fantasy-castle looking building sitting by itself in the (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) "My Life for Aiur!" :) Somehow, I don't think that's the sort of Zealot you meant... (...) As a historian, one truly marvelous thing about the LDS church is the recordkeeping. It's stunning, and with good doctrinal reason. It's the only place (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Oh...don't get me started on separation of church and state. Some recent steps in this country like posting the ten commandments in schools and teaching creationism are complete violations of this in my opinion. Of course my family has a long (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) Hey now, try to stay on-topic in off-topic, soldier;-) -John (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
Jeremy & All, Hmm.. I never had anything against Mormons. I think, overall, they are a good bunch of folks. Scott S. < snipped message > (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) I have to say, yes. It's like, if you got through this, you can probably get really far... :-) -Shiri (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) <mucho snippage> (...) Zealot. :) I don't really have any significant beefs with the LDS - at least, no more than I have with any other organized religion(1), including my own. I have beefs with some individuals, but I make a distinction (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
WOOHOO! Greetings Jeremy. I'm a recent convert, coming up on my one-year mark (April 25th), and preparing to go on a mission. If anyone cares to "flame" Mormons here, they'll have me to deal with as well. =) Of course, this really isn't the place (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
Good call on the keeping of chuch and state seperate. I wish more Americans felt the way that you do. I am from another conservative denomination, the SDA church yet I am still compleatly for individual liberties. Oh well good call. Ian (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Mormon bashing again
|
|
Arg. I gotta vent. Slashdot is carrying an article (1) on how the Utah legislature is trying to enfore internet filtering in public libraries. Somehow, this topic has become a Mormon-bashing extravaganza. I was going to post there, but I suspect (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) So the US public school system is best viewed as one big trick question? Steve (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) Unfortunately the US system of teaching science depends a lot on simplification of topics in the early years and then clarification when the subjects are taught again in high school and college. Of course over simplification often leads to (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) Yeah, I know what you mean, except it's the opposite here. I love the sun and the beach - not very common around Boston... Well, at least I had a week in Florida and stocked up on some sun for these cold winter days :) (...) Yeah, maybe we (...) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Thanks! (...) Yup. American political stuff. Not to be confused with Canadian political stuff, or European political stuff. Stuff is a great word. It can be used to indicate distaste without being particularly harsh. :) James (URL) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
James, (...) Well, I will look it up tonight, it is at home. Stuff..... Hmm.... Scott (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) th (...) and some of us have no interest in digging through the American political...stuff to find an obscure reference. James (URL) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) It is difficult to understand the connection between a Sabra (native Israeli) and Eretz Yisrael (The land of Israel) for an American. We take everything we have for granted; we even feel we *deserve* many luxuries; in Israel nothing is taken (...) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
On Mon, 28 Feb 2000 23:10:36 GMT, "Shiri" <shirid@hotmail.com> wrote: *snip* Yes, I too am thousands (Okay about 1700) miles from all my friends. Moved from Salt Lake City, Utah to to wild and wacky town of Houston (technically in Humble), Texas. I (...) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) I grew up in the UK, emigrated to Canada in 1981, and definitely prefer the culture here. Not that there aren't things I miss from the UK, or things I dislike about Canada, but on balance I far prefer it here. The main difference is the lack (...) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) quite possible - though I think we talked on the lugnet.loc.Yisrael... hurmph - need to write to Todd about that. (...) moved (...) heheh, apparently it's not that rare... When I lived in Brookline (which is not Brooklyn, NY), there were about (...) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
Hi Dan, First off, nice to meet you! I don't think we talked before, but I think [your wife?] Jennifer told me you're from Israel. (...) Wow, that is too similar to what's happening to me... only with a one year delay (first moved at 3, now a soph (...) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) heh, I feel I need to jump in here too - Since I was in a very very similar situation. I'm from israel, originally, and lived in boston for a couple of years when I was 4 (got the bilingual thing you mentioned later) and again when I was a (...) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
<snip> (...) Couldn't help but toss in a couple of pennies; this conversation often comes up with friends of mine who have travelled internationally. The USA tends to have a "colder", more "closed" culture than many other countries of the world. I (...) (25 years ago, 29-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) :-) (glad I have cable connection to the net) I'm trying to keep busy as well. Now you know the real reason I'm hogging .castle ;) (...) Right. This isn't my first time living in the US, and the previous one (ages 3- 6) literally made me a (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) Ahh. I wondered if it was something like this. I do know what you mean - I spent a semester in London while I was in college, with none of my close friends there. I only got through by keeping very busy, and spending way too much money at the (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Non-LEGO family experiance (Nice Story)
|
|
(...) Nothing is BAD about the US specifically - I'm just not getting along here. Kids aren't very friendly in my school, I don't like the cold weather, I miss my house, family and friends. Basically, it's been eight months since I've moved here, (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Somebody Tell Me this isn't for REAL!
|
|
My thought was that it was to be 10.25 or 12.50... (...) for (...) (25 years ago, 27-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
In Oregon you have to declare your political party when you register... Greenback is still a recognized party, even if it puts "Independant" on my Oregon Voter's card. -The Cheese (...) the (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) the (...) Found this: mugwump from Algonquin 'chief' In US political history, a colloquial name for the reform Republicans who voted in the 1884 presidential election for Grover Cleveland, the Democratic candidate, rather than for the (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) and (...) Idunno if they actually went by that name or if that was what everyone called them. It refers to fence-sitting on issues: their "mug" was on one side of the fence, and their "wump" on the other. In any case, I was a registered (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) In Texas, the system is very simple. There is no "register under a party." You just register to vote, period. The registration is good for two years and automatically renews. You can register by mail, by picking up and filling a simple form (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
Bill, (...) Bill, I was just throwing a mild jest at Selçuk, I am a pessimist anyway, but I have run into so many people that have this attitude, it is hard sometimes, especially when you dabble in politics as much as I do. (...) I agree! : ) I have (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) In response to both of you I would say that the pessimism should not be expected and that the optimism is not foolish. Our "system" is very unique here. The "system" is great, the current bunch who occupy it may not be. Yet I still have faith (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Well, most Americans believe that as well, but some of us have foolish optimism every now and then! : ) Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> Being a third worlder, I follow this "Foofoo is better than Blahblah" kind of debates between you, USians, that consider politicians with a kind of amaze..:-) Here in our country things are very clear and (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) I would say Al is pandering so much as lying. Al was one of my senators. He's not a Tennessean, though. I'm more of a Tennessean than he is, and I wasn't even born here. (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Oh, I almost forgot...You honestly don't think Al Gump is pandering?! IMO, he is pandering more than anyone. Now, he's playing the race card, again. That's not pandering?! How 'bout a guy, who in local politics was pro-life and fervently so; (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) radical (...) No more than you meant that anyone religious is a right wing extremist. The problem in this matter is that only the outrageous get the attention and taint the entire issue. (...) Morality tanscends the state. It's not just a (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Well, speaking as a veteran, I'd rather have someone in office who knows firsthand what the real consequences of armchair warfare are for real soliders. I'd value the leadership that a retired general could bring to the office but I'd also (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Noise Level
|
|
Larry, (...) Hmm.... I am not a huge fan of the entire political process, I am not a huge fan of anything in politics, really. I pick my sides and the people I support, I never even got involved really until I started seeing how screwed up things (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Noise Level
|
|
(...) Well that's true. It seems we've dredged up the same old arguments. I'd rather that the thread i kicked off focus on the mechanics of the campaign rather than ideologies but one can't control one's thread. I used to get Campaigns and (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Noise Level
|
|
Larry, (...) Why? Sometimes, it just seems so pointless, futile, and just makes me upset. I prefer talking about LEGO rather than politics sometimes. It calms the nerves when there aren't so many debates for me, at least. Scott S. (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Noise Level
|
|
Why? (...) Larry Pieniazek - lpieniazek@mercator.com - (URL) Mercator, the e-business transformation company fund Lugnet(tm): (URL) ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet. Note: this is a family forum! (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
There's a Mugwump party? What's their platform? :-) Yahoo came up dry when I searched on Mugwump... (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) In California, you remain a member of your party until you re-register. I don't know if it varies from state to state, it probably can, but I don't know if it actually does. California is a winner-take-all state: you win by one vote, you get (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) up (...) the (...) the (...) vote (...) I've never registered under a party, btw--is that registration permanent (unless voluntarily changed), or does it have to be reinstated each election term? Or does that vary from state to state? (I know (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Yes and no. We can vote for any candidate for any party, but only votes from party members count towards the delegates. Anyone who wants to have their vote for McCain (or Bush) actually mean something had better register as a Republican. Bruce (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Noise Level
|
|
(...) Bah, I liked it quiet for once, actually. Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Noise Level
|
|
Ah, much better. Carry on until November. Steve (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) If I remember correctly, the California primaries are simultaneous -- every candidate for every party is run on the same ballot. So potential sabateours (sp?) have to choose between knocking down the opposing party, and building up their own (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No Longer Quite So Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Really? They must have misreported it here (not surprising, considering how confused NJ media are). But is Reed working for the Bush campaign? I recall seeing that mention in the Times. I stand corrected. best Lindsay (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
Larry, (...) No, I think what Bill is saying is that there are many nuts, on both sides, through a variety of causes, and the like. But there is a significant bias towards the right wing religious groups, some justified, most not. You do not see the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Just being a homosexual or an environmentalist makes you a left wing fringe group??? Surely you didn't mean that. I'm an environmentalist, I recycle, I give scads of cash to the Nature Conservancy, and I try to buy green whenever it makes (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
Frank, (...) Oh, I thought you were talking about someone here on Lugnet. My fault. Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) The author of The Declaration of American Independence and the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom. (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Hmm... well, the system is rigged, but like most things, outside of revolution, or a major economic upheaval, I don't think much will change. I just hope the leftists are kept at bay. I would never mess with any other party's primary or (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Well, there are organizations. What was that web site that posted a "most wanted list". There have also been highly visible personalities whoi have come pretty close to endorsing clinic bombing. Then there's all the folks who seem to think (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) The latest big poll showed McCain ahead 24 points vs Gore, with Bush only ahead 5 pointes vs Gore. I think McCain could beat Gore if he got the nomination, which he won't. (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No Longer Quite So Quiet in here
|
|
(...) This immediately reminds me of the Tom Lehrer album which he recorded live in San Francisco where at one point, he's talking about how great Massachusetts is, and says "after all, Massachusetts has three senators"... (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
Bill, (...) Nicely said, Bill. There seems to be a lot of bias around here for right wing people. Not diverse enough, I guess. Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) All this talk about right-wing fringe groups, what about the far more radical left-wing fringe groups: feminists, homosexuals, environmentalists, etc. Environmentalists have carried out numerous acts of violence against HUMAN BEINGS for the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No Longer Quite So Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Sorry, Bauer endorsed McCain. Bill (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
To All, and Lindsay in particular, I am getting really tired of getting labeled as an extremist, a nut, etc. just because I don't worship leftist policies. Just because I have religious convictions, and that I am conservative, I seem to be (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
"Bill Farkas" <kfar@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:FqF0zx.9B@lugnet.com... (...) beating (...) abandon (...) doesn't (...) intention (...) Gump (...) without (...) like (...) to a (...) goods on (...) I would say the Republican primary race at (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) What if McCain is "their man?" Just because someone wins the Democratic primary doesn't mean that all Democrats will vote for that person. You'd be surprised. (...) That's not why McCain is acting like that. He's doing it to get votes, (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | No Longer Quite So Quiet in here
|
|
(...) I'm still convinced that Republicans were responsible for Fieger being the Democratic candidate for Governor. He was about the only person available who polarized people more than Engler. Had I been in Michigan, I would have gone to the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Because with a rigged ersatz 2 party system, it's sometimes the only time I get to influence the decision. Influencing who the nominee is may have a bigger impact than voting in the general. In NY especially, I lived in heavily democratic (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Come on guys, it's time to put the thinking caps on! Do you really think Democrats would cross over and vote for McCain if he had a chance of beating their man. And why would a man running for the Republican nomination abandon everything that (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) That's interesting, Larry. Why do you that? (...) I like Mccain in some points, I don't like him in others. I do think letting people, mostly independents and Democrats voting in a Republican primary is kind of weird, however. Especially when (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) I think his chances are much better after last night. It would be a real shame for the republican party if Bush wins. Gore would likely beat Bush in the general election. I don't think Gore would have a prayer against McCain. KL (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) I like McCain, but I doubt he'll win, not with the entire party establishment lined up against him. :/ (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Like that's going to stop me. I'll just register republican. It's not like you have to sign an oath or anything. I used to switch registrations in NY all the time so I could vote in the D primary. I still have my republican membership card (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Hmm.. another reason to have a CLOSED Republican primary. Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Quiet in here
|
|
(...) Zing. Ouch. So, how about McCain's upset of Dubya yesterday in the MI primary? Jo and I did our bit (Hey, it's an open primary so natch I voted in the race that made a difference) to stop the Dubya train. That man is all hat and no cattle... (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Quiet in here
|
|
Well, there's one good thing about the new lugnet.admin.council group -- nobody has to come in here to argue... Steve (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
Actually, had you read the previous replies to the message you just replied to, you would see that most of this has already been covered. BTW, the 82nd had considerably more than just "their M16s" when they landed, as anyone who has had to hump a (...) (25 years ago, 21-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
Leaving out the quasi-military Coast Guard and Merchant Marine? For shame! -- William A. Swanberg CPT, SC Commander, 229th Signal Company (TACSAT) swanberg@msn.com "Jeff Stembel" <aulddragon@wamalug.org> wrote in message (...) (25 years ago, 21-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) Nitpick Time! There are actually six banches of the military. Army, Navy, Marine Corp, Airforce, NOAA Corp, and the Public Health Service. And no, I am not kidding about the last one. :) Jeff "Broken sword and shield and tears that never fall" (...) (25 years ago, 21-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Please remember to post on-topic
|
|
(...) OK, I think it's definitely time to get this thread _away_ from .general (it's gotten waaaay off-topic, and the original post wasn't really on-topic for .general in the first place). The best place to continue this current branch of argument (...) (25 years ago, 21-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
Bill Farkas <kfar@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:Fq3pFs.Cqn@lugnet.com... (...) in (...) the (...) Marines, (...) equipped (...) knows (...) force, (...) units and (...) unit (...) top of (...) I must point out that your statement, especially (...) (25 years ago, 21-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) My reference to Viet Nam was soley to point out the non-beach landing aspect, not that they were a main force. I agree with your assessment of the debacle over there, but that was due to politicians and not tacticians. Viet Nam had far more to (...) (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Double Negativese (was Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images)
|
|
Ice wrote in message <38AEC563.B2C84529@i...ve.com>... (...) in (...) Well, I have to admit that I'm way out of practice having been out of New England for almost 10 years now, but what I remember and grew up on were double negatives which were (...) (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) Watch your mouth soldier boy. =) Regards, Kurt (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | My [blank] is bigger than your [blank] (was Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) While this is an interesting debate, may I remind you that this is a family forum? I'd rather you used more powerful rhetoric and less pungent words to get your point across... thanks. (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
(...) Not to start a flame war, but I think those are great examples negatives. Maybe not no simple double negatives, but great negatives none the less. :) Mark (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
"James Powell" <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote in message news:Fq6DA5.5Gu@lugnet.com... (...) planet (...) be (...) Forces (...) Let's take these one at a time. 1) This *is* a family forum, so please use appropriate language. 2) Don't confuse (...) (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
"Bill Farkas" <kfar@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:Fq5B2D.I06@lugnet.com... (...) we in (...) staying (...) with the (...) Marines (...) Well, I wasn't going to mention the debacle that was Viet Nam, but since you brought it up... First, I (...) (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) Misconception. The Marines do far more than secure beaches. Why else were we in the forward areas of the desert and Viet Nam (and most conflicts for that matter)? The Marines, pound for pound, pack far more punch. We have staying power and (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
"William A. Swanberg" wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) <snip> (...) <snip> Go on boys, maybe TLC by following this, will realize it's time to start marketing a military theme. Look at this market potential..:-) Selçuk (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
I, too, appreciate your pride in your service. But as to "top of the food chain," I have to disagree. I will admit that, to a certain extent, the Marines are an "elite" force, and this is precisely why they are not "at the top of the food chain." No (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) I may have news for you--that "who" wasn't anyone actually doing the fighting. One of the benefits of being at the "top of the food chain", as it were, in an corporatist imperial state means being able to sit in your boardroom sipping (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote in article <Fq3tKE.9sx@lugnet.com>... (...) in (...) Well, in my case, Todd gave me the best laugh I've had today. I suspect he knows his double negatives better than that. :) Thanks Todd. Regards, Allan (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote in article <rqepaske3v1t1f7b8og...ax.com>... (...) postings (...) since (...) Sounds like a reasonable answer to me. :) I didn't mean to suggest that Larry WASN'T all that his reputation suggests, but (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
(...) If I were to take a guess at it I'd say that Larry was probably one of the first people outside Todd & Suz to really talk with them and help them test things out before LUGNET went live. I was one of the original handful of BETA-testers (I (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) lugnet.off-topic.mil...y-bluster? (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
