An Olive Branch

"Richard Hertz" no one@no one.com wrote in message
et...
Well, with taunts from you like this

What taunt? Taunts like what?

[...] Jay does n ot seem one to vote and it was an (ill-advised) attempt I
think to nudge the posts back to flying...

If he wants to do that, he needs to stick to posts about flying.
Conversely, as long as he refuses to stick to posts about flying, it's hard
to take him seriously when he claims to want to stick to posts about flying.
No one's forcing him off-topic.

Pete

This reminds me of an old Paul Simon 's song:
One man's genius is another man's idiot?

Anyway, give him some credit. He is no dumbya. He fooled sixty millions
gun toting, bible thumping, evangelical right wing nuts, twice.

in article , AES/newspost at
wrote on 11/4/04 8:15 AM:

In article ,
Philip Sondericker wrote:

myself actually hopeful for the future. With Republicans enjoying an
unprecedented mandate, controlling the White House, having substantial
majorities in both Houses of Congress, and even an advantage in
Governorships and state legislatures, I'm looking forward to the following:

1. Fiscal responsibility
2. Balanced budgets
3. Smaller and less intrusive government
4. Greater personal liberties
5. A strong and all-volunteer military
6. Strong alliances and respect around the world

All of the above are, of course, the bedrock philosophy of the Republican
party. Or so I've been told my whole life. I can hardly wait for all of it
to happen.

Re-read this post 3 times, and I still, seriously, can't decide if it's
really intended to be serious or sarcasm -- particular items 3 and 4
(with the Religious Right in the ascendancy).

Scary either way, I guess.

Whether or not the post is sarcastic is really not the point. The GOP has an
almost unprecedented opportunity to advance its agenda, and I will be quite
curious over the next four years to see how many of its supposedly core
beliefs are put into practice.

What say the Republicans in here? Can we look forward to smaller government
and a balanced budget?

And one other thing I thought of (un-related)... Doesn't it bother anyone
that the Bush campaign REQUIRED people to sign an oath of allegiance
before allowing them into his rallies. Actually, that one issue would
have prevented me from voting for him. That was absolutely deplorable.

That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.

He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and the
untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
possible.

Sadly, with the country at war, there are more nutcases than usual who have
pronounced their willingness to assassinate the president. Recording the
names and phone numbers of everyone admitted to a rally (and running
security checks on them) was just the most visible way they kept Bush safe
throughout the campaign -- and the Democrats played that up big politically.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

What say the Republicans in here? Can we look forward to smaller
government
and a balanced budget?

I wish -- but now is not the time.

Maybe after the war?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article iWCid.365126$D%.160998@attbi_s51,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

And one other thing I thought of (un-related)... Doesn't it bother anyone
that the Bush campaign REQUIRED people to sign an oath of allegiance
before allowing them into his rallies. Actually, that one issue would
have prevented me from voting for him. That was absolutely deplorable.

That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.

He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and the
untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
possible.

Sadly, with the country at war, there are more nutcases than usual who have
pronounced their willingness to assassinate the president. Recording the
names and phone numbers of everyone admitted to a rally (and running
security checks on them) was just the most visible way they kept Bush safe
throughout the campaign -- and the Democrats played that up big politically.


Just reading the subject lines in some of the newsgroups confirms Jay's
last paragraph. We see nutcases calling for assassination, impeachment,
all kinds of vicious names, etc.

Also, the recent campaign brought out the worst in both sides of the
election, with a lot of hard feelings to go around. It is enough to push
some unstable personalities over the edge.

I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity evaporate,
so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!

My regret is that we have to be subjected to this crap in the first place.
It is well known that religion and politics get the juices flowing like
nothing else (except perhaps aviation?). If it were up to me, I would
cause off-topic material to be deleted.

Is that censorship? I don't think so. I'm sure that there are other
forums where such discussions would be appropriate - and maybe even
welcomed. Those who wander off-topic should be encouraged to find
a more suitable place to express their opinions.

Having said that, let us remember that the beauty of discussion groups
is that the user has complete freedom of choice when it comes to
following (or not following) a thread. So if you find something
annoying or offensive - just ignore it and go on to something else.
A captive audience we are not!

David Johnson

"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
"Allen" wrote:

If it were not for the
electoral college the U.S. would be governed by the residents of large
cities and the rural population (who tend to be more conservative) would
have no say in the law-making process.



that's dictatorship of the majority.

No, that's democracy.


#m
--
Buck Fush!

"Jay Honeck" wrote in news:nQhid.53372$R05.50592
@attbi_s53:

To live in a country where, by design, our leaders come and go,
instead of sticking around and really doing damage. What a privilege
eh? I'll bet there are millions of people around the world who would
literally give their left arm to take my place, or anybody's place in
this group.

Well put, Bob!

We do, indeed, live in wondrous times, and in a wonderful country.

Yes, but those wonderous times have a strong correlation with the economic
indicators. Ask almost anyone from India why they would like to move to the
U.S. It is not because of our democracy, religious tolerance. racial
tolerance, or social values. It is because of money. In almost every other
measure of an advanced society, we fall seriously behind countries like
Canada and western Europe. There are scholars who believe that our voting
system is worse than in some third world countries. Yes, we live in a great
country, but we need to understand why we are so great, and fix the areas
that are not so great. Despite all our greatness, we too can make mistakes.
What separates the men from the boys is the ability to admit when a mistake
is made, and take steps to fix it. Just blindly cheering that we are a
great country despite all the mistakes we continue to make is why the rest
of the world think we are so arrogant and ignorant.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
om...

that's dictatorship of the majority.


No, that's democracy.


Same thing.