A British Open Double Bogey
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Ping Alan Baker
Next: Where is the old boy today?
From: Alan Baker on 2 Aug 2010 12:06 In article <8bo3lgFmieU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > news:alangbaker-2C7824.19400201082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > In article <MPG.26bff8e5a51396c798a1a2(a)news.giganews.com>, > > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > >> In article <alangbaker-B376F5.19054801082010(a)news.shawcable.com>, > >> alangbaker(a)telus.net says... > >> > > >> > In article <MPG.26bfb482f0576a4b98a18d(a)news.giganews.com>, > >> > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > > In article <5bce0345-50d7-414d-b91e- > >> > > 63c4410f207f(a)u38g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com > >> > > says... > >> > > > > >> > > > On Jul 31, 5:50 pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > In article <MPG.26be3037a8c94fce98a...(a)news.giganews.com>, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > >> > > > > > In article <8bj63tFlh...(a)mid.individual.net>, > >> > > > > > d...(a)remove.ipns.com > >> > > > > > says... > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > >> > > > > > >news:4c542eaa$0$4990$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Greg, I know how you feel about Reagan and I concede that > >> > > > > > > > he > >> > > > > > > > was a > >> > > > > > > > convincing issuer of platitudes and was very popular > >> > > > > > > > throughout > >> > > > > > > > his > >> > > > > > > > Presidency. This was partly because the scandals, such as > >> > > > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > Iran-Contra affair, never seemed to stick to him. Now, why > >> > > > > > > > was > >> > > > > > > > that? > >> > > > > > > > IMHO, it was because when he went to the Hill and said "I > >> > > > > > > > don't > >> > > > > > > > know," > >> > > > > > > > and "I don't recall," all those hundreds of times, they > >> > > > > > > > believed > >> > > > > > > > him. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > I have a better answer. America didn't care. In of itself, > >> > > > > > > ripping > >> > > > > > > off the > >> > > > > > > Iranians to support the Contras wasn't that bad of an idea. > >> > > > > > > In > >> > > > > > > terms > >> > > > > > > of an > >> > > > > > > outstanding presidency, it was a bump in the road. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > It was a smart business decision. But, I wouldn't expect Carbon > >> > > > > > to > >> > > > > > understand what Iran-Contra was really about. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Yes, it's really worked out well, vis a vis Iran, hasn't it? > >> > > > > >> > > > I wonder how many Americans those TOW missiles killed. > >> > > > >> > > Zero. > >> > > >> > It must be simply terrific to be omniscient... > >> > > >> > You're sure, are you? No one in Iran ever fired those missiles at any > >> > vehicle or structure that had an American in it? > >> > > >> > >> Why are becoming tiresome. > > > > Really? You find being asked to support your nonsense "tiresome", do you? > > > > Seriously, how can you expect to have any credibility at all when you > > make fatuous remarks like that last one? > > > Why don't you tell us how many Americans were killed by the TOWs then. I don't know. I'm not afraid of those words. But what I'm pretty sure of is that neither of you know how many were killed either. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: MNMikeW on 2 Aug 2010 12:07 "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:wclark2-E45CCB.12475331072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... .. > > No she did not. She told a complete narrative which indicated how she > came to terms with the impulse for reverse racism, and overcame it. > Breitbart edited this quite deliberately to distort the story to look > 180 degrees different. That's a simple lie. That is the lie. The video on Breitbarts site clearly shows that part of the video. > > For example, I take "Breitbarts target was the NAACP, not Sherrod. She > made the statements. " of yours and edit it to say: > > "Breitbarts target was Sherrod. She made the statements. " > > It that the truth? He used Sherrod to make a point about the NAACP.
From: MNMikeW on 2 Aug 2010 12:07 "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:wclark2-7D398E.12485331072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > In article <8bgpp7FlhfU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >> news:3db65615cpe39s1qjhqr94pvjppkrdpn6n(a)4ax.com... >> > On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:46:15 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> >> >><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >> >>news:cs96565pcht63vii7n6ufcncmpdil3l6k4(a)4ax.com... >> >>> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:21:37 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> The White House has apologized. Breitbart, who started the mess, >> >>>>> hasn't. He's an idiot. >> >>>>> >> >>>>Breitbarts target was the NAACP, not Sherrod. She made the >> >>>>statements. >> >>>> >> >>> Try to watch this without your mind being closed and see where the >> >>> origins of the problem were. >> >>> >> >>> http://www.google.com/search?q=shirley+sherrod&hl=en&safe=off&client=safar >> >>> i&rls=en&prmd=nuvo&source=univ&tbs=nws:1&tbo=u&ei=mlBITJDrMIS8lQeUlZyiCw&s >> >>> a=X&oi=news_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CCUQsQQwAA >> >>> >> >>> BK >> >> >> >>Did you see the video posted on Breitbarts site? >> >> >> > Not on his site, but on news sites. Obviously Sherrod saw them too or >> > she wouldn't even think about suing him. >> > >> Well if you saw what Breitbart had posted, you would have seen that it >> included the part where she said she had the revelation that it wasn't >> about >> black and white. She has no case. > > Yes, well that has been posted since his weaseling came to light. he > doesn't even have the balls to stand by what he did. Wrong.
From: Don Kirkman on 2 Aug 2010 13:44 On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 18:07:26 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard(a)brazee.net> wrote: >On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:55:31 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >>I understand Science and the scientific method just fine. However, I >>don't pray at the alter of Science like some of you. >What are these people praying for? Altarnate realities. -- Don Kirkman donsno2(a)charter.net
From: William Clark on 2 Aug 2010 13:47
In article <8bo518Fv2bU2(a)mid.individual.net>, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message > news:wclark2-5C18F7.12513931072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > In article <4c536b4e$0$4970$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > > Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:37:55 -0500, MNMikeW wrote: > >> > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > >> > news:alangbaker-C06CE9.13143130072010(a)news.shawcable.com... > >> >> In article <8bgpttFmcfU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "MNMikeW" > >> >> <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> >>> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > >> >>> news:alangbaker-EDCC5B.13025030072010(a)news.shawcable.com... > >> >>> > >> >>>> The full video is 43 minutes long. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9NcCa_KjXk> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Don't you think a real journalist would have reviewed that before > >> >>>> putting up cherry-picked sections of it and passing judgement? > >> >>> > >> >>> What makes you think he didn't have the whole video? > >> >> > >> >> If he did, that makes his actions even worse, because it has been > >> >> pretty much universally agreed that anyone who has seen the whole > >> >> video could never have made the claims of racism that Breitbart made. > >> >> > >> >> You're really digging yourself a hole here, Mike, and for what? > >> >> > >> > I not digging anything. Breitbart is attempting to show racism at the > >> > NAACP, not specifically to Sherrod. Whether you think he does or does > >> > not accomplish this is debatable. > >> > >> He was attempting to smear the NAACP, not "show racism." Look at his > >> deliberately misleading excerpt. Then look at the full video. Unless > >> you're totally demented you'll be able to see what he did. > > > > I think you've hit the nail on the head with the "demented" bit :-) > > Carbons lap dog speaks! Woof! In future, "think twice, type once", might be a useful mantra for you. |