****ty exchange rate, any place in europe worth visiting?

Which alleged trample hasn't been
approved by Congress or oversighted by a
Congressional sub-committee?
Regards, Walter

David*Horne,*_the_*chancellor*(*) wrote:

It wasn't hard.

Then the answer to my *specific* question should be easy.

When habeus corpus was trod on, Bush
had the support of a like-minded
Congress and Senate.

Yes, so approved by Congress as I said.

Now that the latter two have gone to the
Democrats, little surprise they are seeking
a redress and AIUI even the relatively
middle to conservative supreme court
have said it was unconstitional.

The Democrats won in '06 and are ending their 2nd year in control.
So any trampling of Constitional Rights still going on *today* still
meets with Congressional approval?

Congress passed these laws.
Congress hasn't changed these laws.
So the blame lies where exactly?
Regards, Walter



...And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...

Poetic Justice wrote:

Which alleged trample hasn't been
approved by Congress or oversighted by a
Congressional sub-committee?
Regards, Walter

David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*) wrote:

It wasn't hard.

Then the answer to my *specific* question should be easy.

It was easy, I answered it.

When habeus corpus was trod on, Bush
had the support of a like-minded
Congress and Senate.

Yes, so approved by Congress as I said.

I was hardly disagreeing with you on that.

Now that the latter two have gone to the
Democrats, little surprise they are seeking
a redress and AIUI even the relatively
middle to conservative supreme court
have said it was unconstitional.

The Democrats won in '06 and are ending their 2nd year in control.
So any trampling of Constitional Rights still going on *today* still
meets with Congressional approval?

Overturning legislation like this requires time- I'd expect you to know
that.

Congress passed these laws.
Congress hasn't changed these laws.
So the blame lies where exactly?
Regards, Walter

With the president who enacted it, knowing that his cronies would vote
for it. It's being overturned as we write. Next question?

--
(*) of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate -www.davidhorne.net
(email address on website) "If people think God is interesting, the
onus is on them to show that there is anything there to talk about.
Otherwise they should just shut up about it." -Richard Dawkins

Martin wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:49:15 -0700, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
wrote:



Bert Hyman wrote:
In
Yer Pal Al wrote:

"It's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak
English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to
Europe and all we can say is merci beaucoup." - Barack Obama, July
2008

Say, what language was Obama speaking in Germany this past week?

Probably English - so what? Unless you are EXTREMELY fluent in a
language, you do not state proposed policies of your government in any
but your native tongue - too much margin for error where precision is
needed. (However, if he chose to use German phrases, I'm sure he'd
learn enough colloquial German not to announce to the world "I am a
jelly-donut"!);-)

The point is that there was no content to his speech, it was just waffle. GWB
gives a better speech.

Not in my opinion. I don't disagree that content is lacking in both, but
Obama is the better orator IMO, and his lack of content is an order
higher than Bush's. Bush's speeches are stunted, and the content is
usually nauseating.

--
(*) of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate -www.davidhorne.net
(email address on website) "If people think God is interesting, the
onus is on them to show that there is anything there to talk about.
Otherwise they should just shut up about it." -Richard Dawkins

Martin wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:54:20 +0100, (David Horne, _the_
chancellor (*)) wrote:

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:

Bert Hyman wrote:
In
Yer Pal Al wrote:

"It's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak
English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to
Europe and all we can say is merci beaucoup." - Barack Obama, July
2008

Say, what language was Obama speaking in Germany this past week?

Probably English - so what? Unless you are EXTREMELY fluent in a
language, you do not state proposed policies of your government in any
but your native tongue - too much margin for error where precision is
needed. (However, if he chose to use German phrases, I'm sure he'd
learn enough colloquial German not to announce to the world "I am a
jelly-donut"!);-)

I thought we went through that before? People understood exactly what he
meant.

Are you looking at me? :O)

I was reminded of the exchange, but not accusing anyone!

--
(*) of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate -www.davidhorne.net
(email address on website) "If people think God is interesting, the
onus is on them to show that there is anything there to talk about.
Otherwise they should just shut up about it." -Richard Dawkins

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:49:31 -0700, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:


AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:53:17 -0700, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:


AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 09:57:37 +0200, Martin wrote:
On 26 Jul 2008 22:51:55 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:
In
Yer Pal Al wrote:

"It's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak
English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to
Europe and all we can say is merci beaucoup." - Barack Obama, July
2008
Say, what language was Obama speaking in Germany this past week?
Standard cringe making US speech writers' cliches?
At least he can utter 6 words without forgetting what it was he was
talking about.

....Or inventing a border between Pakistan and Iraq! (At least Reagan
was no longer president, when he developed Altzheimer's.)

You're joking right? He was going senile when he entered office and he
had completely lost it by his last year in office. Bush Sr. and the
cabinet were running everything by then.

If you say so. But is that any reason we should elect someone already
EMBARKED upon such a decline? (Obama would not have been my first
choice for the office, but since he's the only viable alternative.....)

Carter was that unpopular. The economy was ****ty and he was blamed.
Instead, we got reagon and his unprecedented spending spree all on
borrowed money. The money borrowed during his term will probably
*never* be paid back, the money borrowed during Bush Sr's term was
even worse and will probably *never* be paid off. Clinton managed to
pay off a little of what was borrowed during his first terms. Bush
Jr. has simply said **** it. Mortgage *everything* loot the federal
budget, and hope that the complete collapse will cover up the looting.

I used to think the U.S federal govt. would be bankrupt in about 20-30
years. If we get another republican borrow'n'spend president, it'll
happen in less than ten.

In article ,
(David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*)) wrote:

Bert Hyman wrote:

I understand that Bush speaks Spanish about as well as he speaks
English.
That isn't saying a lot!

You understand incorrectly then. His Spanish is pretty good from what
I've heard, but it's not at all fluent, and despite his 'issues' when
speaking English, he _is_ a native speaker.

Hard to tell at times.

--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka Erilar)

You can't reason with someone whose first line of argument is
that reason doesn't count. --Isaac Asimov

Erilar's Cave Annex: http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo*

Martin wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:10:05 +0100, (David Horne, _the_
chancellor (*)) wrote:

Martin wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:49:15 -0700, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
wrote:



Bert Hyman wrote:
In
Yer Pal Al wrote:

"It's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak
English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to
Europe and all we can say is merci beaucoup." - Barack Obama, July
2008

Say, what language was Obama speaking in Germany this past week?

Probably English - so what? Unless you are EXTREMELY fluent in a
language, you do not state proposed policies of your government in any
but your native tongue - too much margin for error where precision is
needed. (However, if he chose to use German phrases, I'm sure he'd
learn enough colloquial German not to announce to the world "I am a
jelly-donut"!);-)

The point is that there was no content to his speech, it was just
waffle. GWB gives a better speech.

Not in my opinion. I don't disagree that content is lacking in both, but
Obama is the better orator IMO, and his lack of content is an order
higher than Bush's. Bush's speeches are stunted, and the content is
usually nauseating.

Ignoring Bush, what was the message lurking amongst the cliches in the speech
that Obama gave in Berlin? Same old script writing hacks new deliverer?

The message was that Rumsfeld's "old Europe" was forgotten.

--
(*) of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate -www.davidhorne.net
(email address on website) "If people think God is interesting, the
onus is on them to show that there is anything there to talk about.
Otherwise they should just shut up about it." -Richard Dawkins

David*Horne,*_the_*chancellor*(*) wrote;

It was easy, I answered it.

My specific question was

Which alleged trample hasn't been
approved by Congress or oversighted by a
Congressional sub-committee?

To which you answered what???

Overturning legislation like this requires
time- I'd expect you to know that.

The Democrats won on an anti-war platform.
In early '07 they controlled both Houses.
After they won they did basically nothing which ****ed-off many of those
that voted for them and not just Democrats.

Being the majority with alot of Republicans on their side they could
have started overturning or writing major new legislation easily in
their 1st session, if not at least by this '08 session and have passed
it.

Typical Liberal answer though, it's not their fault, time or whatever
was against them. Actually I'm surprised you didn't blame Bush.

I wrote;
Congress passed these laws.
Congress hasn't changed these laws.
So the blame lies where exactly?


With the president who enacted it,
knowing that his cronies would vote for it.

Complete bull****!
And what was the vote on the 'Patriot Act'? I guess Bush had alot of
Democratic cronies also?

Bush isn't on my A-list but everything in this World isn't his fault
and he didn't act alone and those that agree with him aren't all lap
dogs and cronies.

Tell me did the BBC or other UK media report the US transfer and Iraqi
sale of 550 tons of Saddam's Yellow Cake (you know the Bush Lied stuff)
to Canada earlier this month?
If not, google cameco uranium iraq and just read the reliable hits
(Canadian TV, business, newspapers, etc).

It's being overturned as we write.

Sure it is. I'm certain Congress is burning the midnight oil on this and
not heading off on Holiday.

Next question?

Why bother, as usual for Liberals it's just a wasteful run-around if
they don't/can't/won't answer a question (in this case my original
post).
Regards, Walter



...And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...

Poetic Justice wrote:

David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*) wrote;

It was easy, I answered it.

My specific question was

Which alleged trample hasn't been
approved by Congress or oversighted by a
Congressional sub-committee?

To which you answered what???

You're dishonest snipping missed my response to that-

"When habeus corpus was trod on, Bush had the support of
a like-minded Congress and Senate"

Overturning legislation like this requires
time- I'd expect you to know that.

The Democrats won on an anti-war platform.

Not just that, actually.

In early '07 they controlled both Houses.
After they won they did basically nothing which ****ed-off many of those
that voted for them and not just Democrats.

No, it didn't- they've done a lot, but it's taken a lot of time for them
to overturn the damage.

Being the majority with alot of Republicans on their side they could
have started overturning or writing major new legislation easily in
their 1st session, if not at least by this '08 session and have passed
it.

Sez you.

Typical Liberal answer though, it's not their fault, time or whatever
was against them. Actually I'm surprised you didn't blame Bush.

Liberal? I suggest you evalute your terminology. This isn't us.politics,
and what fits your narrow definition of liberal is off the mark.

I wrote;
Congress passed these laws.
Congress hasn't changed these laws.
So the blame lies where exactly?


With the president who enacted it,
knowing that his cronies would vote for it.

Complete bull****!

Not at all.

And what was the vote on the 'Patriot Act'? I guess Bush had alot of
Democratic cronies also?

What made you think otherwise? You mistake me for someone who gives a
**** for the relatively close US political parties.

Bush isn't on my A-list but everything in this World isn't his fault

Iraq _is_.

and he didn't act alone and those that agree with him aren't all lap
dogs and cronies.

Iraq is _completely_ his fault- his, and the cronies around him.

Tell me did the BBC or other UK media report the US transfer and Iraqi
sale of 550 tons of Saddam's Yellow Cake

LOL!

It's being overturned as we write.

Sure it is. I'm certain Congress is burning the midnight oil on this and
not heading off on Holiday.

They don't have to.

Next question?

Why bother, as usual for Liberals it's just a wasteful run-around if
they don't/can't/won't answer a question (in this case my original
post).

I answered your questions. Given this is a European news group, I
suggest you leave your very limited US-skewed viewpoints at the door.
Ta!

--
(*) of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate -www.davidhorne.net
(email address on website) "If people think God is interesting, the
onus is on them to show that there is anything there to talk about.
Otherwise they should just shut up about it." -Richard Dawkins

David*Horne,*_the_*chancellor*(*) wrote;

You're dishonest snipping missed my
response to that-
"When habeus corpus was trod on, Bush
had the support of a like-minded
Congress and Senate"

Yea ok sure, what part or your "support" and my "approved" statement is
lost on you? My original question below.

Which alleged trample hasn't been
approved by Congress or oversighted by a
-Congressional sub-committee?

The Democrats won on an anti-war
platform.

Not just that, actually.

Oh yea that's right 'lower gas prices' also.


No, it didn't- they've done a lot, but it's
taken a lot of time for them to overturn the
damage

That *they* voted for! Not everyone got booted ya know.

Sez you.

Yes, only your statements are facts.

Liberal? I suggest you evalute your
terminology. This isn't us.politics, and
what fits your narrow definition of liberal
is off the mark.

Look in the mirror when it comes to pigeon-holing groups over the
years. Cronies, lap dogs, bigots, racists, etc.

And only you have the correct definitions of political viewpoints to be
used on Usenet?

Your comments on Conservatives, Christians, etc over the years has been
so very fair. I'm an Atheist so don't jump on that bandwagon also.


What made you think otherwise? You
mistake me for someone who gives a ****
for the relatively close US political parties.

You seem to be the one defending just one side?

Tell me did the BBC or other UK media
report the US transfer and Iraqi sale of
550 tons of Saddam's Yellow Cake

LOL!

Did this happen or not? I'm curious also.
If it did though I'd doubt you'd confirm it.

Iraq is _completely_ his fault- his, and the
cronies around him.

How many countries were in on the invasion?
Which countries didn't believe he had WMD's prior to Bush becoming
president based on *their* intellegence?

I answered your questions. Given this is a
European news group, I suggest you
leave your very limited US-skewed
viewpoints at the door. Ta!

What Balls!!! Again look in the mirror!
You have posted for years your non-European news group OT views based
on your own narrow viewpoints.

I have seen you twice go into a very on-topic thread by a newbie to
post Bush/Iraq bull**** to GoFig when he was responding on-topic to a
travel post.

All I asked was a very simple question which once again gets a
run-around non-answer, except now you accuse me of dishonesty!
Does posting after midnight muddle your answer for some reason?

I can be muddled anytime of the day though but this repeated
non-answer answer is just wasting time.
Do you honestly believe you answered my original question?
Whatever...Regards, Walter



...And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...