[kj] Congrats Obama

[The Exorcist]

You're missing the entire point. Oh Well.

You ask me if I was there or not, to make a point. (Good one! Though 
it doesn't matter if I had signed up or not
to you.) and then go on to say that even if I was there it wouldn't 
advance the argument. *scratches head*
Well then, if it has nothing to do with the argument why even bring 
it up? To try to get a nice "gotcha" moment?
Well then, fine by me. I've always agreed to disagree with people and 
I don't try to convince anyone.

As I said before, I state my opinions and move on. However at least I 
won't go around calling people obnoxious for saying
things I don't agree with.

Freedom of speech and tolerance of others and their opinions must be 
a vast right wing conspiracy!

Best Wishes,
Me

At 07:26 PM 6/4/2008, Karen Weil wrote:

>OK, Me, but it WASN'T true.

>And this government happily funded that "psychotic regime" for a 

>decade. And if Saddam had any WMD's, it probably because the U.S. 

>paid for them in the 1980s.

>Let's agree to disagree here -- nothing you write will ever convince 

>me going into Iraq was right.

>And forgive me, sir, but if you believe so deeply in this cause, why 

>aren't you over there?

>(If you actually have served over there, fine, but that doesn't 

>advance your argument

>I'm done now, and really don't care to discuss this any further with 

>you. You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine.

>Have a good week, and take care.

>

>k.w.

>San Diego

>----- Original Message -----

>From: <mailto:killingjoke at theimmortalfool.com>The Exorcist

>To: <mailto:gathering at misera.net>A list about all things Killing 

>Joke (the band!)

>Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 4:18 PM

>Subject: Re: [kj] Congrats Obama

>

>Taking out a psychotic regime with weapons of mass destruction IS in 

>the public's best interest.

>You recall what Israel did to Iraq quite a few years ago??? Today, 

>everyone is glad they did it.

>

>The intelligence was a joke, the information pathetic and yes there 

>were massive fuckups and heads

>should hang for that. However, that's not the point. If the 

>statements that were made about Iraq WERE true it would have

>been acceptable.

>

>Cheers,

>Me

>

>At 01:43 PM 6/4/2008, Karen Weil wrote:

>>Really? Isn't that essentially what we're doing in Iraq? Babysitting?

>>And I hate to break this to you, but pre-emptive wars/occupations 

>>are NOT in the public's best interest!

>>

>>k.w.

>>

>>----- Original Message -----

>>From: <mailto:killingjoke at theimmortalfool.com>The Exorcist

>>To: <mailto:gathering at misera.net>A list about all things Killing 

>>Joke (the band!)

>>Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 9:16 PM

>>Subject: Re: [kj] Congrats Obama

>>

>>YAY. WOOOHOO! Join the rest of the world be like everyone else.

>>Gimme a break. The US should do what's in its best interest for its people.

>>It's not a fucking popularity contest to get "the world" to love you.

>>The Gov't is here to protect, secure and defend. Not baby sit.

>>

>>

>>At 11:24 PM 6/3/2008, B. Oliver Sheppard wrote:

>>>It's definitely always a strategic matter of voting for the 

>>>lesser. With Obama the US has a chance to join the rest of the 

>>>industrialized world and have universal health coverage. McCain 

>>>wants to privatize it EVEN MORE than it is. Also, the two do have 

>>>substantial differences over Iraq.

>>>Australia just pulled out of Iraq a couple of days ago.

>>>The US hangs on - just like it hangs on to stuff like the death 

>>>penalty, privatized for-profit health coverage that leaves 47 

>>>million uninsured, allowing private bounty hunters to collect on 

>>>bail (I recently learned this was another unique, Wild West-style 

>>>Americanism that few other countries utilize -- in the US any 

>>>yahoo can go take a class for several weeks and then get certified 

>>>to become a bounty hunter and legally enter peoples' homes, stun 

>>>them, apprehend them, take them into prison if they miss bail payments).

>>>Also, I think with Obama at the masthead the world might like the 

>>>US an iota better than McCain, who voted with Bush 95% of the time 

>>>last year. Int'l goodwill would bode well for terrorist type 

>>>threats, as in making them less likely.

>>>

>>>I'll be voting for Obama, but I'll be holding my nose, sure. Even 

>>>McCain would be better than Bush, but Obama would actually be 

>>>several shades even better than that.

>>>-Oliver

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>T.B. wrote:

>>>>IMO, all three (well, now two) major candidates (Clinton, Obama 

>>>>and McCain) are equally terrible choices, each with plenty of 

>>>>negatives and few positives.  In Obama's case, he's basically a 

>>>>snake oil salesman peddling "change" to plenty of po-faced wide 

>>>>eyed people but he really has little substance behind his rhetoric.

>>>_______________________________________________

>>>Gathering mailing list

>>>Gathering at misera.net

>>>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>>Competition is a barbaric, insensitive ritual that reeks of social 

>>Darwinism.

>>We cannot allow the fittest to survive on our pages. Your loss is someone

>>else's gain, and your gain is someone else's loss. Therefore, 

>>losers contribute

>>to the society and winners take away from it. Being a winner is 

>>unethical, while

>>a society of losers is happy and striving as a collective. In the 

>>spirit of diversity,

>>inclusiveness, and collectivism our contests shall have no winners.

>>Everyone is declared a loser, which in our book means an ethical 

>>team player.

>>

>>

>>----------

>>_______________________________________________

>>Gathering mailing list

>>Gathering at misera.net

>>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>>

>>_______________________________________________

>>Gathering mailing list

>>Gathering at misera.net

>>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>

>Competition is a barbaric, insensitive ritual that reeks of social Darwinism.

>We cannot allow the fittest to survive on our pages. Your loss is someone

>else's gain, and your gain is someone else's loss. Therefore, losers 

>contribute

>to the society and winners take away from it. Being a winner is 

>unethical, while

>a society of losers is happy and striving as a collective. In the 

>spirit of diversity,

>inclusiveness, and collectivism our contests shall have no winners.

>Everyone is declared a loser, which in our book means an ethical team player.

>

>

>----------

>_______________________________________________

>Gathering mailing list

>Gathering at misera.net

>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>

>_______________________________________________

>Gathering mailing list

>Gathering at misera.net

>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering


Competition is a barbaric, insensitive ritual that reeks of social Darwinism.
We cannot allow the fittest to survive on our pages. Your loss is someone
else's gain, and your gain is someone else's loss. Therefore, losers contribute
to the society and winners take away from it. Being a winner is 
unethical, while
a society of losers is happy and striving as a collective. In the 
spirit of diversity,
inclusiveness, and collectivism our contests shall have no winners.
Everyone is declared a loser, which in our book means an ethical team player.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://four.pairlist.net/pipermail/gathering/attachments/20080604/50c82d1e/attachment.htm>