Obama/Marx

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:58:54 -0500, Jim Logajan
wrote in :

(4) The author of the article, Cliff Kincaid, is alleged to have made
false claims in the past, as claimed he
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512100001

Wow! That's about what I suspected.

The Swift Boaters are a busy lot: http://mediamatters.org/index

If you don't like erase the message, kill the messenger!

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:58:54 -0500, Jim Logajan
wrote in :

(4) The author of the article, Cliff Kincaid, is alleged to have made
false claims in the past, as claimed he
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512100001

Wow! That's about what I suspected.

The Swift Boaters are a busy lot: http://mediamatters.org/index

If you don't like erase the message, kill the messenger!

Eh? I have no intention of voting for Obama - but not because I believe he
is a Marxist, which he does not appear to be by my understanding of the
definition of that term. I will be voting Libertarian. (I'm guessing if
Obama were elected his policies would be similar to those of the Clinton
administration.)

The message from the messenger you quoted didn't prove a thing re Obama
being a Marxist. Sorry.

On 2008-06-25, Jim Logajan wrote:
Eh? I have no intention of voting for Obama - but not because I believe he
is a Marxist, which he does not appear to be by my understanding of the
definition of that term. I will be voting Libertarian. (I'm guessing if
Obama were elected his policies would be similar to those of the Clinton
administration.)

A vote for Bob Barr is a vote for Obama.

Either Obama or McCain will be elected. Voting for someone else will simply
take votes away from the candidate of the two that you might find more
acceptable.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (got it!)

Recently, Jay Maynard posted:

On 2008-06-25, Jim Logajan wrote:
Eh? I have no intention of voting for Obama - but not because I
believe he is a Marxist, which he does not appear to be by my
understanding of the definition of that term. I will be voting
Libertarian. (I'm guessing if Obama were elected his policies would
be similar to those of the Clinton administration.)

A vote for Bob Barr is a vote for Obama.

Either Obama or McCain will be elected. Voting for someone else will
simply take votes away from the candidate of the two that you might
find more acceptable.

A vote for a candidate that you don't want is a wasted vote. One's vote is
their "hat in the ring", and it should represent their point of view. In a
situation where none of the candidates that one wants is likely to be
elected, the worst choice is to misrepresent one's point of view.

Jay Maynard wrote:
A vote for Bob Barr is a vote for Obama.

Either Obama or McCain will be elected. Voting for someone else will
simply take votes away from the candidate of the two that you might
find more acceptable.

Circular reasoning. When performed by persons untrained in logic in IMC a
graveyard spiral will result.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:43:48 -0500, Jim Logajan
wrote in :

Jay Maynard wrote:
A vote for Bob Barr is a vote for Obama.

Either Obama or McCain will be elected. Voting for someone else will
simply take votes away from the candidate of the two that you might
find more acceptable.

Circular reasoning. When performed by persons untrained in logic in IMC a
graveyard spiral will result.

But, if you hadn't voted for Nader, who would be president now?

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:43:48 -0500, Jim Logajan
wrote in :

Jay Maynard wrote:
A vote for Bob Barr is a vote for Obama.

Either Obama or McCain will be elected. Voting for someone else will
simply take votes away from the candidate of the two that you might
find more acceptable.

Circular reasoning. When performed by persons untrained in logic in IMC a
graveyard spiral will result.

But, if you hadn't voted for Nader, who would be president now?

(Shudder) AlGore -- and we would STILL be grounded after multiple
post-9/11 attacks!

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

Orval Fairbairn wrote in
news
In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:43:48 -0500, Jim Logajan
wrote in :

Jay Maynard wrote:
A vote for Bob Barr is a vote for Obama.

Either Obama or McCain will be elected. Voting for someone else
will simply take votes away from the candidate of the two that you
might find more acceptable.

Circular reasoning. When performed by persons untrained in logic in
IMC a graveyard spiral will result.

But, if you hadn't voted for Nader, who would be president now?

(Shudder) AlGore -- and we would STILL be grounded after multiple
post-9/11 attacks!


YOu have evidence of this, do you?







Bertie

In article , Jay Maynard
says...

On 2008-06-25, Jim Logajan wrote:
Eh? I have no intention of voting for Obama - but not because I believe he
is a Marxist, which he does not appear to be by my understanding of the
definition of that term. I will be voting Libertarian. (I'm guessing if
Obama were elected his policies would be similar to those of the Clinton
administration.)

A vote for Bob Barr is a vote for Obama.

Either Obama or McCain will be elected.

Before Obama can be elected he has to live through Election Day

Voting for someone else will simply
take votes away from the candidate of the two that you might find more
acceptable.


--

"Tis an ill wind that blows no minds"