[ MAIN GUESTBOOK ] [ Home ] [ Library ] [ What We think ] [ Founders ] [ Search ]
Guestbook
The Guestbook entries continue! Below are Rightgrrl's guestbook entries from January 15-30

Hi RAD!!!! :o]

Joy
USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 23:44:45 (EST) from dialup-67.24.23.25.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
Oh check it out... Dash-hole is challenging Vlad to a war... Vlad can outpost you using one pinky to type. lol

Joy
USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 23:44:18 (EST) from dialup-67.24.23.25.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
You want a war, Vlad?
-
USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 23:35:58 (EST) from 168.143.112.107
Happy Birthday Carolyn!
Rad
USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 23:31:35 (EST) from 209-145-163-10.dsl.accessus.net
The Spice Girls are skanks and not deities, therefore it is impossible to "blaspheme" their names.

Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 21:46:00 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Thank you, Monica!
-
USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 21:41:11 (EST) from 168.143.112.113
"-", I like your comments.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 19:17:59 (EST) from dialup-166.90.42.110.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
Vlad, you will not be going to Rock 'N' Roll Heaven, for you have blasphemed the Spice Girls. You will also not receive your dashboard Emma.
Rev. Dash
USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 18:41:57 (EST) from 168.143.112.103
Great news!:Fetuses Get 'Unborn Child' Status in Effort to Expand Health Care Coverage. WASHINGTON — Abortion opponents got a morale boost by the Bush administration Thursday when Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson announced that it was redesignating fetuses as unborn children.
Lori
NC USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 15:02:36 (EST) from gso57-101-063.triad.rr.com
Sheesh, it looks like people rarely post here anymore. If you've come here in error, the party's over here.

BTW, "-", aren't they all "Scary" Spice?
Ron
Gargaro website, USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 13:31:04 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com


Dashhole, you have sunk to a new low, even for you. You actually paid real money to see Spice Girls the Movie? (I think admitting to that is grounds for getting banned from this guestbook, also).
Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 31, 2002 at 11:53:08 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
And it doesn't bother you to admit this? Publicly?
Michael
USA - Wednesday, January 30, 2002 at 19:30:25 (EST) from adsl-78-166-48.gsp.bellsouth.net
Actually, Michael, a lot of people saw that movie. (If no one saw it, how did I know that quote?) I have the DVD and watch it quite frequently.
-
USA - Wednesday, January 30, 2002 at 18:51:40 (EST) from 168.143.112.107
Vlad, where's that pin? I heard it again.
Nick
USA - Wednesday, January 30, 2002 at 14:26:26 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Spice Girls? Well, no wonder. No one actually saw that movie.
Michael
USA - Wednesday, January 30, 2002 at 14:24:48 (EST) from adsl-20-147-169.gsp.bellsouth.net
Monica - I left you a very loooooooooooooooooooong post at Carolyn's. I am now the Queen of the Long Post and have dethroned PLM!

You see now-I KNEW it was just a matter of time before that happened and I was a shortie in comparison! :P Finding it hard to say all ya need to in one post, eh? heheehe hardee har har... :^D

DLM
Dethronedman
Austin, TX Shortpostland - Wednesday, January 30, 2002 at 13:48:42 (EST) from 63.232.112.220


Carolyn, Sorry to hear of your toothache and all. I'm glad Rightgrrl is still going strong!
Maureen
TX USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 23:24:58 (EST) from cs666984-192.satx.rr.com
Approximately 24 hours have passed since I posted the movie quote and nobody has guessed it, so I'll give you the answer. "Spice World".
-
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 23:12:37 (EST) from 168.143.112.113
Don't forget the 'My First Betty Blow-up' made from extra thick puncture-resistant vinyl for those who like the rough stuff. Guaranteed not to pop when switchblades are used!

Partner du jur
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 22:24:49 (EST) from 168.143.112.105
"Anybody got any Flintstones chewable Xanax?"

No, but I do have a Fisher Price "My first Hookah."
Michael
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 20:44:56 (EST) from adsl-156-181-93.gsp.bellsouth.net


Yes young NickWalker, you have it.
Mahamid
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 20:40:14 (EST) from pm13-s14.donet.com
Anybody got any Flintstones chewable Xanax?
Noelle
Tallahassee, FL USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 18:53:50 (EST) from 168.143.112.103
I agree with all this (except I'm for the suit against Mikrotrash), along with this opinion: Clintoon started to turn us into the USSA (Union of Soviet States of America) with his tax hike of 1993. No doubt this was a cause of the entire Congress having a majority of Republicans starting in 1994, with Senor Gingrich of balanced budget fame as Speaker of the House. Somehow, Clintoon kept the Congress from accomplishing a lot of what they set out to do. And Congress kept Clintoon from bringing his age of aquarius into reality. In a word: Gridlock. With the government interfering less in our lives, we did what we do best, and as a result, the entire economy prospered. It probably would have done best with some of Congress' proposed reforms, but you take what you can get.

For me personally, my taxes went up every year under the Clintonistas, including when my income was cut in half because of me going back to school. This year, preliminarily running through my taxes, I'm paying 40% less on April 15 than last year. I'd rather pay nothing, but hey, you take what you can get. Thank you, Dubya and right-wing House!
Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 18:34:14 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com


pretty good site, Mahamid. Another thing never to be forgotten, the economy had been growing for 22 consecutive months PRIOR to Clinton taking office. This is not my opinion, it is a fact of the historical record.
Adam
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 17:02:19 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
So if that were to happen now, I'd have to pay my 2001 taxes this April plus 2% for 2000? Is that how I understand what you are saying?
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:51:51 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Check this out for Reagan vs. Clintoon
Mahamid
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:50:04 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
He increased the tax rates retroactively for the previous year...so if you paid 33% in 1991 for instance, then with the increase you have to pay say 35% for 1992 AND the extra 2% for the previous year.
Mahamid
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:45:40 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
Muhamid, another thing that I don't understand...how do you raise taxes retrospectively? Or lower them for that matter. I was not a tax-payer yet, so don't really know.
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:26:02 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Nick, here's a way to look at it...the 1st thing that Clinton did in office was raise taxes retroactively to their highest level ever, and that's pretty much all he did economy-wise (Greenspan handled the rest). If that policy was the cause of the 90's boom, then why did Algore run on a tax-cutting (I use the term loosely) platform?

Clinton had zero initiatives regarding the economy, and it could be argued that his and Reno's persecution of Microsoft caused the tech stocks and the dot coms to suffer...

Mahamid
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:19:07 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


I have always maintained that the economic boom of the 90s was the direct result of the end of the Cold War. The efforts, technology, and intellectual resources that WAS being utilized to keep the Soviets in check was unleased into the private sector. This had nothing at all to do with Clintoon or Albore. The Internet was in fact, developed as an alternate communications system between strategic nuclear forces. When the cold war ended, it could be used for peaceful purposes.
Vlad
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:15:18 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Which, Professor Vlad, explains why the flat tax would be very successful. A % of a high income without deductions and loopholing would bring in more revenue, which in turn is more than a % of a lower income, and would completely eliminate the liberal's class warfare ammo.

Mahamid
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:13:31 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
Vlad, I have heard (and tend to believe it myself) that the economic boom of the early '90's into last year was a direct result of "trickle-down" economics. There is no way (I believe) that a president could do anything that would effect this economy that quickly as to give Clinton credit. I do give him credit for the down-turn with tax increases. I don't think history will reflect this, though.
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:11:26 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
The only thing that Reagan changed was lowering the marginal rates. This resulted in a rise in revenues and "the rich" paying a larger share of overall taxes. Top marginal rate of 75% dropped to 35%. The smaller percentage of an expanded economy reluted in more revenues. In fact, during Reagan's tenure, revenues to the federal treasury more than doubled.
Vlad
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 16:06:23 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Hey - who let Slick Willie on the GB???
Ron
Left Coast, CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 15:03:06 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
Invest in America! Raise taxes on the rich! Pay your fair share! We only wanna help yooooou! I didn't inhale!
Bill Rodham
Harlem, NY USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 15:02:37 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
Monica: Your post is all over the map. (Which is ok.) I was just talking about the tax code and what people pay. As for how that happened? I think the reason the top earners are paying more of the pie of taxes now is due to increased prosperity helped along by lower rates. That is, lower rates can lead to greater revenue. Whatever the reason, if you believe in progressivity in taxation (and I am not sure I do), you ought to believe that is a good thing. Anyway, it seems to me purchasing power is a totally separate issue, though a very important one. Thank you so much for responding.
Adam
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 14:52:19 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
In the last 35 years the real purchasing power of workers' wages has decreased. The fact that the to 5% of earners pay a greater share of taxes may be because they earn a much greater share of the money, thus have more to pay in taxes.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 14:39:17 (EST) from 129-pool3.ras10.casnc.tii-dial.net
Whoops! posted by accident. I was saying the % of taxes paid by the top 5% of earners is MUCH higher now than it was in the 30's, 40's and 50's and the change happened during the Reagan years. So, he's quite wrong. (but maybe he was joking)
Adam
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 14:06:22 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
I don't know if that Slick Willy person is serious or not but the % of taxes paid by the top 5% is MUCH
Adam
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 14:04:34 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
Vlad: I love Shakespeare. My love affair with him started back when I was 6 years old and memorized the entire 4 hour text of Hamlet. (Yes, you read that correctly.) To this day I can recite about 3/4 of it. Even that wasn't the first Shakespeare I memorized, my father teaching me a speech of Hotspur's from Henry IV Part I when I was 4. I acted in a great many Shakespeare plays back in the day. I played Hamlet 3 times, was in The Tempest at the Guthrie, Taming of the Shrew, 12th Night, and a bunch more I just can't remember now. I continue to study Shakespeare and love him very much. The Harold Bloom book ^^Shakespeare the Birth of the Human^^ (maybe it was the creation of the human) is the first work of Shakespearean criticism worth reading since the 1950's. I'll stop now but suffice it to say, I will talk about Shakespeare anytime, anywhere and for any length of time. GO WILLY BIG BOY!
Adam
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 14:03:09 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
"The crime rate in the United States was lower in the 30s, 40s, and 50s, when abortion was illegal." The tax burden on the ultra-wealthy was much higher as well which meant the poor and middle class had a lower rate and could afford to live a better life with just one job instead of the three required since the disasterous Reagan years. Perhaps that had a larger effect on the crime rate since that actually concerns money and not healthcare. I found your other "logic" on this site just as lacking in thought or reason. PS: I'm sure you've got the other Repubumpkins fooled, however. :)
Slick Willy <indyhb@yahoo.com>
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 14:02:04 (EST) from dtam-176-112-159.pompano.net
Monica - I left you a very loooooooooooooooooooong post at Carolyn's. I am now the Queen of the Long Post and have dethroned PLM! It's hard to say everything you want to say typing posts... lol My fingers get tiiiiired... :o]

Joy
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 12:13:05 (EST) from 03-111.076.popsite.net
The Queen Is Back!!! Good morning, Joy!

And no, Monica, I don't find your posts offensive, just dissending. (Is that a word?) It's the dissention that causes us to reexamine our views, and either defend them better or change them if necessary. There are some on this GB who go out of their way to offend others (hence the other GB shutting down), but I've never thought you were one of them. Go Rams.
Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 12:08:27 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com


Hi Sue! Just sent you an email. :o]

Joy
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:45:17 (EST) from 1Cust59.tnt2.phx1.da.uu.net
No, I can't. And there's nothing you can say to make me go. I am like that thing on Aliens that sticks to your face and won't let go.

Besides, someone needs to annoy Nick to no end. Jus' doin' my job!!
Poultricide
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:41:03 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Hi, Joy!
Sue
CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:40:56 (EST) from dial-167.arc-01.lodinet.com
Chuck,

My sympathy to you and your friend's family.

***********
Poultricide, you just can't stay away, can you?

Sue
CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:38:23 (EST) from dial-167.arc-01.lodinet.com
I think everyone in this GB could read into my sarcasm, including Carolyn, who is sitting at her desk, working.
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:38:13 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Nick - Please remember that Carolyn either has a toothache or she had work done on it. If you've ever had that done, it's very painful, and she may not be up to doing anything with her board right yet. She said she'd reopen and she will. Allow her tooth to heal so she'll feel up to it.

Thank you Monica. :o] Just FYI to clear up what I do for a living: I volunteer with the Police Department and respond concerning victims of all kinds, from child molestation and rape to murder, robbery, car accidents, domestic violence… on and on. I am an accountant, a photographer and graphic artist, and I invest.

Joy
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:36:21 (EST) from 1Cust59.tnt2.phx1.da.uu.net


Sue, I was wondering how your son was doing. Please keep us updated.
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:36:19 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Hi, everyone, I just got up, and decided to pop in before I visit my son. His O2 saturation levels are much better than yesterday, and now they just have to get him to breathe room air instead of the extra oxygen they give him through his nose. I hope they release him soon.

Have a great day, everyone!

Sue
CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:35:28 (EST) from dial-167.arc-01.lodinet.com
I still haven't completely unpacked. Don't make me come out to NJ, there, Carolyn!!! I can carry a sign with the best of them!!!
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:29:31 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
I'm here. I am just upset that Carolyn is opening up her &*^%*& guestbook. Oh, well, it gives me one more medium to spread my coccynism
Poultricide
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:27:47 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Wow, Chuck. Just remember to be there for your friend and although uncomfortable, words are not always necessary; your presence and willingness to help speaks for itself.
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:26:07 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
I gotta go take care of business
http://miva.herald-dispatch.com/miva/cgi-bin/miva/hdobits.mv?Search=horan&ID=19633

This is one of my best friends' son. *sigh* Sure changes perspective,,,,,,,
Chuck
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:22:46 (EST) from A010-0130.CLMB.splitrock.net


Monica and that pseudo lifeform got lumped together by me by using the same tactics...I don't find Monica or her opinions offensive...her defense of that pseudo lifeform, however, gave me the willies.

Where's my homey Poultricide? I am gonna eat me some dead bird at lunch today...wanted to give him a shout out
Mahamid
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:22:05 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


C'mon, Chuck, have you EVER known me to be patient????
Huh????
How come you haven't answered yet?

Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:12:57 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Nick,,, I see you're not going to get a patience award :)
Chuck
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:10:19 (EST) from A010-0130.CLMB.splitrock.net
I will take your pain.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:09:40 (EST) from 63.221.109.187
Hey, Carolyn, how's the tooth? Did you get to hear the drill? Did you have chunks of tooth flying all over the room requiring you to wear safety glasses? Did you hear the snap of whatever holds our teeth in as the dentist pulled it out?

I hope it feels better!!
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:08:17 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


"Ok ok! OK!!!!! I'll reopen !!!
Carolyn
"

Well?
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:04:56 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Monica...I don't think anyone here finds you or your opinions offensive. You just happened to be lumped in (unfairly) with another...uh..."person" that is offensivs as are his opinions.

As I stated before, I DID NOT break into the other GB. I was just...let's see...persistent. I went into the GB archives and found an "Add to Guestbook" link and used it. I couldn't break into my own website...I forget the password all the time and find myself up the proverbial creek without a paddle.
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 10:02:57 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Joy and all police officers, my apologies for the insulting comment I made the other day. My thanks for enduring danger and aggravation to protect us.

Victoria, now you say you sent Joy a "joke"? So why did you say Joy lied the other day? I'm dissappointed.

Sue, I hope your child's okay.

Nick and Vlad, breaking into the Guestbook when Carolyn closed it? Come on! Do you just sit at the computer all day and post? Don't you have a lives? (This applies to me too.)

I'm keeping my posts to a minimum, maybe laying off this guestbook altogether, out of respect for Carolyn and regulars who find my opinions offensive.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 03:45:03 (EST) from dialup-166.90.33.63.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Michael, I don't think terrorists are any more representative of Islam than clinic bombers and assassins of M.D.'s represent the Pro-Life movement.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 03:37:40 (EST) from dialup-166.90.33.63.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
Okay, that first one was a little tough. It's "Debbie Does Dallas", and she does get his name right sometimes. But how about the second one, the movie quote? It's easy.
-
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 23:41:47 (EST) from 168.143.112.102
Here's an easy one: "When the speeding melon hits the wall, it's Christmas for the crows". What movie does that come from?
-
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 23:26:52 (EST) from 168.143.112.114
Okay, Vlad, here's one for you: a girl gets a job at Greenfeld's Sporting Goods store, but refers to the owner as "Mr. Greenfield". What movie does that describe?
-
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 23:23:54 (EST) from 168.143.113.108
So, what does everyone think about John Ashcroft having the statues in the Hall Of Justice covered up? I know you people think Ashcroft is great, but come on...isn't this just crazy?
-
- Monday, January 28, 2002 at 23:18:21 (EST) from 168.143.112.107
"Don't play dumb with me, 'cause I'm better at it than you"

Vlad? Do you recognize that one?
Chuck
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 23:13:08 (EST) from A010-0712.CLMB.splitrock.net


Hey Adam,
Have you ever acted in any Shakespearian plays?
If so, what parts have you played.
I was surprised when you and Sue recognized the Introduction to Henry V.
Which are your favorites; Comedies, Tradgedy, or Chronicles?
It is a strange hobby of mine that I try to work obsure dialogue from movies or plays into everyday conversation and I am pleased and surprised when someone recognizes it.

Vlad the Impeacher
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 22:18:25 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Was it on this board that there was a link to something about a woman human bomb? I just got around to reading the article and can only say the author did not do his homework. I know of at least one other who blew herself up at an Israeli checkpoint. She wanted to get into Israel, of course, but when she was about to be searched, she just set herself off then instead. Killed the two women searching her as well as a guard and wounded others. According to this article at ... http://www.voy.com/27358/1/710.html ... it won't be the last. Also this article speaks of another female bomber who was stopped in time. No Virgins for You! (The Hamas Soup Nazi).

I have to wonder, are we really going to be able to deal with the Muslim world in the long run? Or is it just going to eventually be some sort of stand off like the Cold War? It is said not all Muslims are "like that." I'm sure that's true, but the more I read, the more it seems most of them ARE "like that." Just look at our slogans. Ours ..."United We Stand, God Bless America." Theirs ... "United We Stand, Kill All Americans." I hate to think we will have to use force forever to live in coexistence with them, but I have to wonder.
Michael
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 19:39:16 (EST) from adsl-156-182-243.gsp.bellsouth.net


I see, Vlad, so you consider a person's worth to be in monetary form? Or was that just a little joke?

Yes, Vlad, NOW you are posting without venom. Now that it has been pointed out to you for the umpteenth time. Still, thank you.

Did you notice something else? Things she did NOT say? She did NOT single me out for any chastisement in the post to which you alluded. She did NOT say she wanted me to leave. She did not come right out and blame me for any of it, period. Of course I am to blame to an extent, but not just by my mere presence, as seems to be the reasoning of some. She only thanked you for sticking around. This in contrast to those who did not. I don't think that is much of a compliment. Heck, she did not specifically thank Lem or Sue or Chuck for sticking around either. Does this imply she would rather they leave?

As I mentioned she DID say ... "don't feel like having my email box filled with guestbook posts (I get notified every time someone posts)." ... That is what I was referring to when I mentioned needless posts. She would get fewer, making her job easier, if the posts were of substance instead of attacks and silly crap about me, or Vic, or Monica, or whoever might be the target du jour, in one form or another.
Michael
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 19:05:45 (EST) from adsl-156-182-243.gsp.bellsouth.net


"Worthless little s&%$ like you..."

Worthless???
Would you like to compare liquid net worth or shall we include land, homes, and business assets?

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 18:46:30 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Carolyn,,,,,
I hope you DO reopen your other GB. I really do enjoy reading the page even though I don't post so often. I found your GB through this site & observed for at least a year before making my first post. I'm SURE some of my comments have added the atmospere around for the last couple of months or so. You see, THAT's why I prefer to sit on the sidelines, only commenting occasionally. But you took the ball, and the sidelines, and left!! Vlad and nick were certainly entertaining today! I had the same idea they had, but waited too long.

Anyways, if there's anything I can do to help support you, please contact me.
Chuck <warhost@prodigy.net>
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 18:40:53 (EST) from A010-0422.CLMB.splitrock.net


That is what she posted. Read it for yourself, if you don't believe me.
She correctly pointed-out that Monica, while liberal, is well-intentioned and posts in good faith. She is welcome here.
She thanked "Nick and Vlad".
Maybe the truth hurts, but delude yourself, no longer. There it is in plain English. Monday - January 28, 2002 12:42:10..........
You are free to read Carolyn's own words if you don't believe me. (Notice that I am not engaging in venomous personal attacks, but rationally discussing the issue of Carolyn's actual post from earlier today.)

I think that I have been unfair with Monica. She does voice a dissenting point of view, but she does it in good form and adds to the GB. She is an asset to us. I am sorry about getting overly belligerent with her.

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 18:31:51 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Interesting, though, I see there's a femecide@hotmail too. Seems to be a woman named Patsy. Why don't you harass her for using that name as well?
Michael
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 18:31:34 (EST) from adsl-156-182-243.gsp.bellsouth.net
At this point Vlad, I wouldn't give a worthless little s*** like you the satisfaction. Continue your witch hunt, dipstick. Just goes to show how obsessed and petty you really are.
Michael
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 18:22:48 (EST) from adsl-156-182-243.gsp.bellsouth.net
Carolyn's post from the other GB:
(I can't believe that you lumped Monica in with Femecide, Ted.)

Yea, right Bunky....she really does sound like she's mad at me.

From the same post:
"To those who have not taken-off (like Nick and Vlad) thank you."

You are really a deranged creep. Go haunt another GB.

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 18:08:24 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Yeah sure, Vlad, just keep digging stuff about me that's fine. It gives you an excuse to ignore your own behavior. Who do you blame your crap on in the real world? What an idiot you are. Did you learn NOTHING from the closing? Now you are starting that same crap here? Didn't you note she gets an email for every post? That means, when you post these endless, mindless, silly messages, you cause her mailbox to get filled with notifications. How about just posting things of substance, as needed, so she does not have to wade through all that stuff?
Michael
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 18:01:31 (EST) from adsl-156-182-243.gsp.bellsouth.net
Hope the tooth is better....
well?

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 17:46:53 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Do my eyes decieve me?
Thanks, Carolyn!

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 17:18:35 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
She couldn't have been referring to us, Nick.
Even if we tried real hard, we couldn't be anywhere near as weird as the real femepoo.
While banana pudding, stove-top stuffing, chocolate cheesecake, and roast chicken can cause weight-gain and high dry-cleaning bills...they are not nearly as threatening as a switchblade in the hands of a leering mysogynist (it's probably just one of those novelty combs, however).

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 17:17:33 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Dear Sue: My prayers are with you, your middle child and your whole family. God Bless.
Adam
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 17:03:04 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
Ok ok! OK!!!!! I'll reopen !!!
Carolyn
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:59:49 (EST) from carolyn.interstat.net
Mmmmmmmmmmmmm....stove-top and sausage....
Homer Simpson
Springfield, USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:58:39 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Hey, Internet-Al
Your link doesn't work.

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:56:49 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Carolyn, since I invented the internet AND I am the actual President and won the popular vote; I think that the gargano dot com guestbook should be immediately opened. I am going to FIGHT for the people against the powerful. In fact, I co-sponsored the Dingell-Norwood bill that prohibited the capricious and unjust shutting-down of website guestbooks and as an investigative reporter and vietnam veteran, I took the wet papyrus and molded the very paper for the legislative with my own two hands.
Algore (super-genius)
Carthage, TN USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:55:30 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Oh, I thought she was referring to us, Vlad...who did she call a wierdo, then? G'night!!
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:49:09 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Yes, Sue....
We shall ignore all those weirdos.

We wish you and your family the best and hope to talk to you soon.

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:47:10 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Sue, I am sorry to hear that. Keep us updated, please.
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:40:43 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
OK, I am going home now. I EXPECT the other GB to be up and running by tomorrow. Got it?

****ducking incase the hard*** act doesn't work or offends****
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:39:57 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


I won't be posting anymore for a few days. No, it's not because I'm trying to involve myself in the mini-drama here, but something much more serious has happened.

My middle child's an asthmatic, and he's had a severe attack, and he's in the hospital. Talk to everyone later, and I hope there's a resolution to the problems that people are having. As for the weirdos, it's best not to pay any attention to them. Dangerous people are another matter, though. That's all I'm going to say about that.

Sue
CA USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:39:54 (EST) from dial-239.arc-01.lodinet.com
I prefer to stuff them with a stuffing made of apples, Stove Top, and sausage. You get that from experience.

Stuff Me-The Movie.
Poultricide
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:37:33 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Film it and name it what? Pie Me-The Movie???
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:31:31 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Femepied, I wanted to ask you if womyn are just receptacles for cream filling, but that just wouldn't be right.

Mahamid
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:30:59 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
When I get one of them alone, I make her think that I am one of the Three Stooges (Curley...nyuk, nyuk, nyuk). After the cream puffs, chocolate, and cheesecake, they just can't help themselves. They find it irresistable.
Femepied
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:28:32 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Of course, I fear Carolyn may be drugged while at the dentist and she may never be the same!!! What if she shuts this one down, too????

WHAT WILL WE DO?!?!?!?!?
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:24:55 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


I am really starting to like Vlad's altar ego!! Sounds good to me, Femepied!!
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:23:41 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
I lothe all womyn who are not covered with gloppy foodstuffs.
Femepied
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:20:55 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
OK, OK, OK, folks. It maybe that Carolyn is less patient than normal because her tooth has been hurting. So before we all pack up and go to the front door of Interstat (or whatever their name is now). Let's continue as normal and see if she might be her usual gracious self upon her return. I will cease packing for now.
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 16:04:24 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Since Carolyn will not listen to reason, I am going over to the dark side. From now on, I am to be known as:
Femepied
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:50:57 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I was wondering why Richard Gere called me and asked for my mom. That answers a lot!!!
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:50:13 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
My turn to get banned: Your mother is a hamster, and your father smells of elderberries! I fart in your general direction! Go away before I taunt you some more!
Ron
Camelot, UK - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:46:16 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
Dagnabbit...jus' like that one time I thought of the internet, only to find out someone already invented it!
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:42:50 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Sorry to break the news...but, it's been done already. (gee, how would I know?)
Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:41:15 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
VLAD!!! We're gunna be millionaires!!! Imagine the advertisement slogan: "Watch it jiggle".
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:37:12 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Trashy Jello Molds?
Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:35:02 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I'm ignoring those who try to keep me down...I have loosed my shackles and I am ready to claim something...
Mahamid (formerly kept down as Ted)
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:33:19 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
How about your collection of tras...oops, nevermind!

I'll buy some Jell-O molds!!!
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:32:18 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Maybe a bribe would work....
What can we come up with?
I will donate Mrs. Vlad's collection of trashy romance novels....

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:29:40 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Mahamid, ignoring what or whom?
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:28:20 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Amen, Brother!
Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:28:11 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I can't ride a bus,
I am stuck riding a scooter,
I feel I have been disenfranchized,
By someone b'hind a computer!!

If the book doesn't fit,
We must never quit!!


Jesse Jackson
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:27:06 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Mahamid - I thought only bleached blondes had roots...

HuggyBear (formerly kept down by white men, now kept down by black men)
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:24:52 (EST) from dialup-64.158.215.144.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
I might do that, too, Vlad. Ashley and Carolyn go well together.
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:24:20 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
If Carolyn reopens the guestbook...I will name our first daughter after her. (at least let me run that idea past Mrs. Vlad...)
Vlad the desperate
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:23:35 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I just want you to know, I have discussed the reopening of the GB with Hadessah, sought counsel from my Rabbi, called Dr. Laura, and found that I feel both ways strongly.
Joe Lieberman
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:23:34 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
I just want Carolyn to know, that I would like to return to the guestbook to mend some fences.
Algore
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:19:35 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I just started a rumor...ooops, I mean heard from a reliable source....that she had State Troopers with big dogs blocking the entrance to the guestbook.
We've been disenfranchised!

Vlad Berry the civil rights commissioner
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:18:14 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Hello...I am breaking my self-imposed exile (to find my roots) to say that I was only leaving temporarily to calm myself down and practice my ignoring techniques. So, to show my love for Carolyn, I will continue posting here from time to time, ignore Phlegmecide, and try to be a nice citizen.

And I would welcome a return to Carolyn's Guestbook, hopefully it's only been temporarily closed for renovations.
Mahamid (formerly kept down as Ted)
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:17:05 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


Black people around are forsook,
Carolyn must re-open her guestbook.


Jesse Jackson
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:14:07 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


We've been disenfranchised!
Shocking!

Vlad the Florida Elections Supervisor
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:13:31 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I still think that the guestbook was shutdown due to white racism.
That' my story and I'm sticking to it.
Jesse Jackson, should be around shortly.
It's Selma, all over again...!
The man is just tryin to keep us down!

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:12:41 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
All Hail, Queen Joyteefah!
All Hail, Queen Joyteefah!
Long may she post!

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:10:03 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I think I know what happened now.
Carolyn figured-out that one of the regular posters on the GB is in fact.......a black man. (gasp! shock! I wonder who?) So, you know how those conservatives are...right? So, she closed it all down!
I tell you, it's SELMA all over, again!
It's time to march! "WEeeeee shall overcoooome...."
"We shall Over-coooome, somehowwww!" (just kidding)

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:08:14 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
These miners can only be rescued by Queen Joyteefa!
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:07:46 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
"The ship sinks and now we're stuck in this lifeboat with Feme****" I just want you to know how much you crack me up! You are hilarious... rofl

What a picture... you and Nick with Poo in a life-boat... Hey, maybe Carlos will use THAT as an example, instead of miners. But that might not work... let's see... to save you and Nick we have to save Poo... hmmmmmmm... dunno Vlad... I sure do like ya a lot... but hey. :op

Joy - I MISS YOU GUYS! (well, not everyone) Hey, if everyone else can say 50 good-byes, I can too! Here I go and leave so everything can go back to how it was, (like that's possible with Poo) and the whole mess gets shut down! And I've already gotten blamed for it to boot! lol
Joy's Evil Twin
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:05:33 (EST) from dialup-64.158.215.144.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net


No, I am pouting, too about all of this. I am leaving. I am a whiner!! Good riddence!!
Poultricide
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:04:16 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
LOL!!!
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:03:04 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Except for the poo from the seagull when I wring its neck. I wish we had something to cook it with.
Do you think Poultricide would have any ideas?

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 15:02:22 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
No, Nick!
You throw the parachute over Poo, and I beat him senseless with this balaying-pin (it's that club thingy that pirates used to fight with). When he's unconcious, we heave him over the side. (I don't think he's edible. Eeeeeew!) We can clean the parachute and use it to catch rainwater or net a sea gull. That way, we get to keep the lifeboat, poo-free.

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:59:45 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Poo,
Carolyn zinged you a few times, herself.
So, I don't think that she was referring to me. Albeit, her flame-posts are much more classy than mine. (but, I jist a simple unedjikated Country-Boy)

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:56:39 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I tried that too and it didn't work.
I did get that cute picture of the gracious and fair Carolyn hiding her pretty face in her sweater.(maybe if we try flattery, she will let us back on the GB).

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:54:13 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I ain't handing you nothin', Vlad. You are trained in knot-tying and using your bell-bottoms to float. I can use a parachute, I think.
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:52:27 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Vlad, I actually got a couple of e-mails asking me how I did that. All I did was go into the GB archives and find and old "Add to Guestbook" link. Carolyn even shot that down. We looked pretty computer savvy there for a minute, didn't we?
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:51:01 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Yeah, I'm surprised.
The ship sinks and now we're stuck in this lifeboat with Feme****. Hand me that belaying pin, Nick.

Vlad the sailor man (poop Poop)
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:50:05 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Hey Nick,
I had saved an earlier screen that I was going to post, tried it and it worked. It keeps blocking me now. Only worked once.
Enjoyed the email.
Thanks.

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:48:18 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I did the same thing, Vlad...interesting results, eh?

Hey, isn't anyone else upset that the GB is closed?
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:47:28 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Yeah, right. Look who is lecturing me about appropriate behavior. I did a google search on your bizarre nom de plume and you seem to like disrupting website guestbooks. What's next, maybe you could go over to the Simon Wiesenthal center and post some holocaust jokes?
I'm sure the Indian Reservation posts are only the tip of the iceberg. (What a creep)

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:45:56 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Nevermind the IP thing, Mike changed it.
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:29:43 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Vlad, check your e-mail, yet?
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:28:11 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Dangit, Vlad...you always have to be one up on me, don't you???? I had the last one and you had to go and post with Mike's name (see the IP). I say we all start the picket!!!!
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:27:04 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
You promise to "behave" Vlad? You can't even "behave" in the post in which you promise to behave. You are still venomous even there, and you expect Carolyn to believe you are sincere?

Tell you what she wants? She should never have had to tell you anything in the first place. You should have always KNOWN what was the right thing to do and done it.
Michael
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:26:41 (EST) from adsl-20-145-22.mem.bellsouth.net


OK, so I am not so good at HTML art.
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:24:13 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Hey, Vlad, we almost looked like a couple of hackers, didn't we. She really made that thing so we can't post.

..._---_
..|.....|
..|.....|
...-___-
Nick and Vlad's halo!!

Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:22:10 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Really Beth? If that is so, why does she just not turn that feature off? I'm not sure that is the only email to which she is referring. Also, I have done my best to ignore the constant harassing and slanderous posts of others. I finally had enough and let my opinions on the matter known. As I have said many times, look to yourself first. I cannot stop anyone from posting. Vic and I did not ruin anything. It was the endless postings of those who could not leave it alone. Those who generated needless post after needless post. Monica, Vic and I run nothing. Everyone has their own free will to do as they please. We are not the ones engaged in on-line crusades /vendettas trying to run US off. We have not tried to harass anyone into leaving. We have merely responded to the slurs and outright slander of others. Yes, I came here with both guns blazing. As Mike said, that should have resulted in maybe a week of posts, not MONTHS. It's the "clique's" own doing that some of the first left. By her own admission, it was because of private emails from her supposed friends, Joy left. Place the fault where it lies, Our mere presence does not compel anyone to do anything. That's just childish. It's like stomping ones feet and saying if "they" don't leave the playground *I* will! Carolyn would not ban any of us (or the others for their hundreds of flames) and they simply could not handle not getting their way. They stomped off in a huff when their tantrums did not produce the desired results, completely forgetting any support they owed Carolyn. No, I don't feel good about it, but I also don't feel entirely responsible either.
Michael
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:19:25 (EST) from adsl-20-145-22.mem.bellsouth.net
I, for one, have never emailed Carolyn.
I wouldn't dream of it. She is too darn busy to be bothered with me.
Just tell us what you want, Carolyn, and we will comply.

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:15:24 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
You're right, Adam.
I am really bummed-out.
I wish Carolyn hadn't done that.
I know that it is her perogative, but I'm still bummed. My insults starting getting especially venomous when I believed that getting rid of the cretins would bring my friends back.
So far,
Dungbeatle - gone
Dash-hole - gone
Virus Vic - gone for a little while (but keeps checking-in to say Bye, again)
Femefool - keeps showing up like a case of Herpes.

I just wish I could bring my friends back. If they would comeback and Carolyn would reactivate the GB, I promise to behave.

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:13:20 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
I accept, can you reopen it now??
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:07:55 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
that should read, ^^degree of responsibility.^^
Adam
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 14:00:13 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
It really is a shame what happened to Carolyn's GB. I don't remember when I first happened across it but it was at least a couple of years ago. I can't recall it ever degenerating into personal stuff until just the last few months. You know, there is a long list of folks who can sit here and post and say, ^^That guy is worse!^^Or, ^^what he said was terrible^^ But it is my personal opinion that every last person who tossed even one insult to another person bears a degree on responsibility. It doesn't much matter if you felt someone else insulted you more or if you felt someone else insulted you worse. It was just more personal vindictivness that feeds on itself. And one last thing. If you think someone is a troublemaker and say ovk you for reading this far.
Adam
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 13:57:30 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
"constant campaign of email harassment, and whining to her through that means"

Nice assumption o blind-as-a-bat. The emails she receives are automatic emails generated from every post made. The board is set up 2 email her everytime someone posts. They are just for her information, not from individuals.

Also, look in the mirror, if u and Victoria had had the decency 2 leave, no 1 else would have gone. Monica 2. Apparently you 3 enjoy ruining her Guest Book and driving the regulars away. Hope u feel good now.

Beth
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 13:48:55 (EST) from 168.143.112.103


Oh no . . . I just read the posts from Saturday and Sunday, and this guestbook has sunk to a new low. First, the KPFA krap comes back up, then there's a word war where the participants try to imitate George Carlin. Am I the only compassionate conservative left??? (besides a friend who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.) I got sick reading this garbage. And I'm close to leaving this site too.

And, and word to my new liberal friend Monica: The only conservative trash I've ever run across, besides David Duke, are some of the posters here. This tripe is NOT typical. I know there are very few of us in the Bay Area, but you can't judge the right wing by the guys on this guestbook. And if I'm going to be lumped with them, maybe I should leave.
Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 13:43:55 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com


Hey, Carolyn...is it okay to still use this one? Will you reconsider your closing your GB? What can we do? I am truly saddened here. But, hey, I am the last poster on there, does that count for anything?....a Kewpie Doll? I'll give it up in a second for you to reopen the GB. Please reconsider.
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 13:34:40 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
(This is already posted on Gargaro, but now that it's unpostable, I'm including this here where Monica also goes)
Hey Monica - I saw Pride & Joy in Berkeley last Friday night. They cooked. If you were there, I was the worst dancer on the floor. I know, nothing political here, but a little something to lighten the mood on this guestbook . . . Go Rams.

Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 13:30:32 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
Way to go, guys, your constant campaign of email harassment, and whining to her through that means has caused Carolyn to abandon her own guestbook.
Michael
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 13:12:12 (EST) from adsl-78-166-193.gsp.bellsouth.net
Carolyn, did you read the posts that I posted on the other GB before you cut it off? What about us folk that ARE there????
Nick
USA - Monday, January 28, 2002 at 13:08:42 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Naw, in the 6th grade I was just getting into finding the ones who would play doctor. Girls were still good back then. Ahh innocence ... Ahh youth!
Michael
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 23:39:26 (EST) from adsl-156-181-65.gsp.bellsouth.net
I'm out of here...between Femecide and Monica there is too much stupidity in this guestbook. ba bye
Ted
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 22:28:58 (EST) from pm12-s05.donet.com
Ted, do you have any letters or essays written by Michael while he was in High School? Any mean notes he wrote to girls as a 6th-grader?

Carolyn, my apologies. I was planning not to post all day out of respect for you request, but I had to answer this post from Ted.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 19:20:37 (EST) from dialup-63.208.135.81.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


My my, Ted, you have been busy. No, you're not obsessed with me. Nothing like that. Again, here we have postings taken out of context as usual. Not only that, dredging them from other places. Again, note: I am not the one bringing this stuff here. I can count on the fanatics to do that. Apparently, since Aaron has decided to bug off, Ted has taken up the dredging operations, going out of his way to find things I have posted years ago. Shall we put this one in context as well? It may have been in response to a site selling all sorts of hateful things about men put on buttons and signs. All this passing as humor. It was YEARS ago after all, AND it was only ONE post. It may have been posted on the "Heartless Bitches" site. I'm not sure. Again, if so it would have been in response to a similar situation there. You think I'm bad, you should go there.

Gee, Ted, you're much like having a wife. It would, usually, be her that remembers and dredges up every little thing about the hubby when they get into a little snit fit. Through with your little snit fit yet? Just when I thought you could not get any more petty ...
Michael
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 19:03:15 (EST) from adsl-156-181-65.gsp.bellsouth.net


No idea what happened there...
Ted
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 18:08:12 (EST) from pm10-s13.donet.com
Hey Mon, here's something from your new best pal:

From: Femicide Femecide@AOL.COM
Subject: BoardRoom: Reinforcement
Time: Fri, 29-Jan-1999 05:25:30 GMT
IP: 209.154.95.106 UUNET, MCI Worldcom Company. Hilliard, OH

Thankyou for reinforcing my view that women are cruel, souless, untrustworthy balck holes of endless "needs".
Apparently they have not yet learned the difference between funny and hateful.
Ofcourse, this seems to be the usual case.

Ted
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 18:07:38 (EST) from pm10-s13.donet.com


Hey Mon, here's something from your new best pal:

From: Femicide Femecide@AOL.COM
Subject: BoardRoom: Reinforcement
Time: Fri, 29-Jan-1999 05:25:30 GMT
IP: 209.154.95.106 UUNET, MCI Worldcom Company. Hilliard, OH

Thankyou for reinforcing my view that women are cruel, souless, untrustworthy balck holes of endless "needs".
Apparently they have not yet learned the difference between funny and hateful.
Ofcourse, this seems to be the usual case.

Ted
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 18:06:23 (EST) from pm10-s13.donet.com


No, Arror, you refuse to argue with someone who is right about what you said. Why? Because you can't and you know it. Maybe we should post the definition of "Definitely" as well, since you said it definitely was a person of the ilk of the protesters. Yeah, typical do as I say not as I do double talk.

Gee, isn't all this "friendly" banter fun?
Michael
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 16:41:16 (EST) from adsl-156-181-65.gsp.bellsouth.net


Yawn...why are you still here, Femecide? Don't you have another site to infest?
Ted
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 16:05:55 (EST) from pm10-s13.donet.com
I'm leaving this GB. If anyone wants to talk to me, do it on Gargaro's other GB.
Aaron
CO USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 12:59:29 (EST) from dialup-64.156.33.66.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
And just for the record, I never said I KNEW that the shots were fired by protesters and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong.
Aaron
CO USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 12:53:57 (EST) from dialup-63.211.246.148.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
It was an offer. You declined. No problem. Ignore mode back on. I refuse to argue with mysoginystic asswipes.
Aaron
CO USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 12:52:40 (EST) from dialup-63.211.246.148.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Bull. That WAS a threat. Finished beating your little chest? Got anymore big talk to spew out? Typical. When you can't think of anything else to say, it's "Lets step outside." You can say whatever foul thing you wish, but when someone calls you on a topic, it's "F*** off. Just more of the same from the same petty little man. Thump your chest some more, might impress the babes with how macho you are. What a joke. "I never said I KNEW, you weasling miscreant. I only said it most likely came from them and were part of the riots." Talk about weaseling. Maybe we should post the definition of "Clearly?" You being so big of definitions you are unable to let even one go. You said they CLEARLY were. You did NOT say most likely. You are just backtracking hoping it will all go away. Don't like having YOUR feet held to the fire do you? SOME of the protesters may have been violent, but it does NOT follow one of their kind fired the shot. Apparently technicalities aren't YOUR thing when you are caught in an accusation with no proof. Definitions are only meaningful when YOU present them. Yeah, you don't try to weasel out of anything. Come on, Arror, don't live up to your new name. Give me the proof you have for your statement "This was clearly done out of rage towards the station, as were the riots. They definitely DID SHARE the agenda." This refers to the person who fired the shot. Come on, YOU said it was clearly done out of rage. There was no maybe in that statement. Lets see the proof. Who fired the shot? What did the authorities determine was his motive? Well? "They were violent" OK, fine, lets have the proof they were ALL violent. Why did you not say some of them were violent? Sounds like a blanket statement to me. Where in the links you posted did it say all the protesters were violent? Where did it list each one and give their violent crimes? Point out to me where I said the protest was not violent. I am only talking about your comment on the gunshot.
Michael
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 12:38:26 (EST) from adsl-156-181-213.gsp.bellsouth.net
It sounds like the same mentality as a "Ho" that stays with her pimp even after he has b!tch-slapped her a few times.
(He didn't really mean it.)

Vlad
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 11:36:34 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I don't think there's anything funnier than Monica calling us conservatives all sorts of names for disproving all her distortions and contradictions, and befriending the one person here who despises her strictly for her gender, even if he did 'defend' her.

I don't like your earlier comments on women and I don't believe you could really believe that

That sentence is so staggering in its ignorance and utter lack of anything approaching cognitive reasoning that I have trouble believing it was actually written. You have surpassed yourself, Monica.

Mahamid (used to be known as Ted when whitey shackled me)
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 11:33:33 (EST) from pm11-s05.donet.com


"I don't like your earlier comments on women and I don't believe you could really believe that"

You think he is making this up??? LOL you really are alergic to the truth. I guess you'll avoid any obvious act in order to help any cause you make.
Aaron
CO USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 10:24:40 (EST) from dialup-63.211.240.111.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"Aaron, the way I see it, you came with your biasedhalf-truths and distortions to smear and redbait people and put your own spin on events."

And the way I see it, I came up with whole truths and facts that you could not and did not answer at all. Not even a little. Your half truths, oh hell, let's just call them what they are, LIES, were no reeponses to the facts that I have brought up. You have made false accusations or racism, admitted they were misteks, and refused to even apologize for your slanderous comments. You are a worse than a moron. You are a liar.

"I responded with the facts."

You have yet to respond with a single fact yet.

"I was there so I know."

Given your propnsity for lies, I doubt you know anything.

" Then you repeated your half-truths and smears and said you had "won"."

If ANYONE repeated half-truths, it was you, Repeating that KPFA received no federal funding, repeating that certain people were racist, repeating that we were trying to deceive people. These were half truths. Not my TRUE facts.

"Calling your own personal interpretation "truth" and mine "lies""

Honey there is nothing personal about my interpretation. I was quoting interpretations from people actually there and from police reports, articles and such. I dug up the definition ofthe term violent and it applied in this case. YOU had NO REPONSE but to insist it wasn't violent even in the face of the fact that it clearly was!

"and saying you "won" makes it so, according to you."

I clearly did win. I was not teh one who resorted to lies. I was not teh one who resorted to slander because I couldn't make a point. I was not the one who had to make up facts and then refuse to admit they were wrong when soemone posted financial statements that proved me wrong.YOU did all these things, and you have yet to admit your many mistakes.

Since from the beginning you did not have an open mind your interpretation of events has no validity as far as I'm concerned."

"I have an open mind to facts, not your banter and lies.

"Say or think what you want."

Isn't that what this is about?

"You can't control my thinking."

Even if you did any thinking of your own, I wouldn't want to control it. I just enjoy proving you wrong, and I do it well.

"Blame the liberals."

Blame the conesrvatives, opps.... I mean the fascists.

"The above link has a description of events, which is biased by the protesters, granted, but I believe tells the truth."

Ahh yes, save pacifica.net, a truly unbiased and free source. Yes THIS is the truth. YOU make me laugh.

"Aaron, sometimes I think maybe you're really a member of the Democratic Party pretending to be a conservative Republican in order to make them look bad and get Republicans to change their affiliation."

That's ok. It doesn't surprise me that you have to come up with lame accusations like this in orderto keep from admitting you are wrong. You have brought no facts to the table, only rhetoric. You have been proven wrong several times, only to refuse to admit it. You have been proven to use stereotypical thinking, only to turn around and acuse others of the same. And you have refused to think on your own, only spout the latest andmost convenient liberal rhetoric and then get offended when it is countered and rebuffed with facts and/or logic. On top of that, you make gigantic assumptions about people you have never even met and purport them as truth. "Joy is a police officer and knows how to lie"? You dodge the central issue and say that we just want the radio station shut down. You call us fascists because we disagree with your slanted and narrow view. Your insecurity and allergy to the truth shines in every post you make.

"Maybe Joy's really a pro-abortion radical feminist posing as a pro-life conservative to promote the liberals' stereotypes of pro-life conservatives."

Maybe you are a hard-core right winger trying to make liberals look as stupid as they can be. Nah, you're just a moron.

"You, Joy, Vlad and Ted act as if you were a charicature of pro-life conservatives created by a pro-abortion liberal."

And you act worse than the worst caricature I have ever seen of the dumb, thoughtless, knee-kerk, head-in-the-sand, reactionary, allergic to all facts liberal that I have ever seen. This is a new low, even for you.

"Michael, thank you. As often happens, you rebutted Aaron better than I ever could."

He didn't rebut a single thing and has spewed hatred since he came on here. At one point you even shouted at him. But, being the self loathing liberal that you are, you look to him for help when you can't get the job done yourself. What he says about women, he is certainly right when it comes to you.

"I don't like your earlier comments on women and I don't believe you could really believe that, but I appreciate your more recent ones."

Just like any liberal, you will take any "help" where you can get it, especially if you are getting verbally "slammed" by a conservative.
Aaron
CO USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 10:18:51 (EST) from dialup-63.211.240.111.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Aaron, the way I see it, you came with your biasedhalf-truths and distortions to smear and redbait people and put your own spin on events. I responded with the facts. I was there so I know. Then you repeated your half-truths and smears and said you had "won".

Calling your own personal interpretation "truth" and mine "lies" and saying you "won" makes it so, according to you. Since from the beginning you did not have an open mind your interpretation of events has no validity as far as I'm concerned. Say or think what you want. You can't control my thinking. Blame the liberals.

The above link has a description of events, which is biased by the protesters, granted, but I believe tells the truth.

Aaron, sometimes I think maybe you're really a member of the Democratic Party pretending to be a conservative Republican in order to make them look bad and get Republicans to change their affiliation. Maybe Joy's really a pro-abortion radical feminist posing as a pro-life conservative to promote the liberals' stereotypes of pro-life conservatives. You, Joy, Vlad and Ted act as if you were a charicature of pro-life conservatives created by a pro-abortion liberal.

Michael, thank you. As often happens, you rebutted Aaron better than I ever could. I don't like your earlier comments on women and I don't believe you could really believe that, but I appreciate your more recent ones.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 05:55:15 (EST) from 1-pool1.ras10.casnc.tii-dial.net


One other thing, Monica. What would you know about a logical, well worded rebuttal?? You have yet to make one!!
Aaron
CO USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 05:05:43 (EST) from dialup-65.58.58.62.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
And just to clear thinsg up. I did address the topic. I stated the mostprobably motive for the shots fired, which easily is believable, much more so than the passing redneck theory. And I answered the statement about whether or not a private citizen can ORDER the police to arrest another private citizen. This obviously cannot happen. Anyone who disagrees can feel free to go to the police and ORDER them to arrest me.
Aaron
Awaiting the feds to knock at my door again., CO USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 05:03:43 (EST) from dialup-65.58.58.62.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Monica, Femecide doesn't deserve the best that I have to offer in any way, shape, or form. He twists words, makes up statements, changes definitions, and weasel's out of arguments. He is the lowest kind of scumbag. He deserves nothing more than "F*** off". But it doesn't surprise me that youy pick this to harp on, since I have verbally kicked your pedantic, sophmoric ass througout this whole time and you have not refuted any thing I have said. In fact, you yourself have resorted to lies and distortions. Shame on the generous, self-righteous liberal.

As for you Michael.

"By the way, MAKE me f*** off, loser. Empty words from an empty mind."

"LOL, what an child. "No ... YOU Are!" Nighty night, Arror."

And let's not forget that you are so stubborn you must make up definitions of words to weasel out of admitting that you were bested in a verbal spar. But you want me to make you fuck off?? I'll tell you what. I live in the Denver, CO area. Anytime you want to meet and settle this you just give me a holler when you are in my neck of the woods. We'll settle this in a way that won'tleave you the option of weaseling out. Say the word and it shall be done. This is not a threat but an offer, you only need decline or accept.

" He KNOWS all protesters don't care about their causes. He KNOWS the shot was fired by one of the protesters He has no basis for that knowledge, or any facts to back up his claim as he chastises you for, but that's ok, he "knows.""

I never said I KNEW, you weasling miscreant. I only said it most likely came from them and were part of the riots. They were violent and I demonstrated that using the dictionary definition. But I understand since technicalities and truth aren't really your thing. Only bullshitting and doubletalk, so I won't hold it against you that you don't know the definition of violent.
Aaron
CO USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 03:28:34 (EST) from dialup-209.245.8.98.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Of course he can't answer that point. Monica, then he would have to retract his statement ...

"Protesters don't CARE about the causes. This was clearly done out of rage towards the station, as were the riots. They definitely DID SHARE the agenda. Your ludicrous, baseless theory that someone did this to make the rioters look bad is insanely stupid."

He KNOWS all protesters don't care about their causes. He KNOWS the shot was fired by one of the protesters He has no basis for that knowledge, or any facts to back up his claim as he chastises you for, but that's ok, he "knows." Must be sort of like Chuck just "knew" about who posts to me. Of course it doesn't matter if his theory on the shooter is baseless, that's ok, it was "clear" who did it.
Michael
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 01:24:58 (EST) from adsl-156-181-213.gsp.bellsouth.net


So, in the fine anglo-saxon tradition began by valiant men-at-arms and in memory of a great moment in History; I repeat the gesture, here.
vlad
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 00:51:48 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Oh yeah, I forgot what an "adult" I was dealing with. One who would never display any immaturity or resort to "this kind of s***.

It doesn't get any emptier than you, Femefuckface.
Femeturd - fuck off!.
Again, you are full of shit.
What I mean is get your head out of your ass and stop spewing lies!
This is more than I can say for the many tasteless, brainless, and thoughtless statements you have made. Grow up!

What WAS I thinking?
Michael
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 00:38:03 (EST) from adsl-156-181-213.gsp.bellsouth.net


I read an interesting article that examined the origin of "shooting the finger".
It said that the gesture origionated during the Battle of Crecy in 1346, during the Hundred Years War between Enland and France.
The Earl of Alcenon had remarked that he would cut the index fingers from the hands of the English archers when he had vanquished them.The battle resulted in a tremendous victory for the outnumbered Britains with much of the credit being earned by the accruacy and rate of fire of the longbowmen. The English taunted the vanquished French by extending their middle fingers in offering to give them the chance to take the other one.
I thought that it was an interesting story.

Vlad
USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 00:30:13 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Aaron, can't an intellectually enlightened conservative come up with a better answer to Michael's statement than "F--- off, femeturd?"It must have really angered you to have a third party come with such logical, well worded rebuttal.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Sunday, January 27, 2002 at 00:19:52 (EST) from dialup-209.244.97.203.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
That last post was not directed towards anyone in particlular and was just intended as an example.
Vlad
USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 23:52:07 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
You, deity-cursed son of a pregnant dog!
Vlad
USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 23:50:19 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Good point. I do apologize for the obscenities.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 23:49:44 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Gentlemen, Gentlemen....and you, too, Femeflatulence: lets keep it somewhat clean.
That epithat should have been "Femefornicateface".
There, that's much better.

Vlad
USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 23:48:29 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
"By the way, MAKE me f*** off, loser."

Ahh yes, this is the height of maturity. I guess someone who has to make up his own definitions must resort to this kind of shit.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 23:16:37 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Are we going by the dictionary definition of "child"? ROFL!

Sorry I had to get that jab in. I love when someone with the mentality of a 6 year old calls me a child.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 22:55:11 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


LOL, what an child. "No ... YOU Are!" Nighty night, Arror.
Michael
USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 22:53:11 (EST) from adsl-156-181-213.gsp.bellsouth.net
It doesn't get any emptier than you, Femefuckface.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 22:49:20 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Whatever you say, Arror. Leave it to you to take up the petty issue and not address the main one. By the way, MAKE me f*** off, loser. Empty words from an empty mind.
Michael
USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 22:47:21 (EST) from adsl-156-181-213.gsp.bellsouth.net
A private citizen can NOT order the police to arrest another private citizen. Period.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 22:29:27 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Femeturd - fuck off!
Aaron
USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 22:28:41 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
There is NO "clearly" anything about who fired the shot. Without hard evidence it could be either theory as to motivation. Hell it could have been some passing redneck with a .22 who decided to "spice" things up a bit. One theory is as good as another in this case. Odd how absolute proof is needed until it doesn't fit a pet theory. Then it is "clear" without proof.

Actually, a private citizen can order the arrest of another private citizen. All they have to do is charge them with some crime, maybe swear out a warrant. Doesn't mean they actually committed the crime, just that they were accused by someone.
Michael
USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 22:28:09 (EST) from adsl-156-181-213.gsp.bellsouth.net


"You care about putting out your own twisted version of events to smear anyone who doesn't share your rightist viewpoint or gets in the way of your group having control of the country."

Monica, you have got to be the biggest jackass on the face of the Earth. NOT ONCE have I lied. Not once have I distorted facts and not once have I knowingly made a statement that wasn't true. FUrthermore, YOU have tried to smear and slanderme. YOU have lied. YOU have misrepresentedand YOU have tried to pigeonhole all you disagree with, slapping the fascist label on anyone who dare cross you. You are the fascist. Your smear tactics would make Hitler jealous.

"At least I'm not so arrogant and narrowminded as to assume that anyone who doesn't share my political beliefs is not "intellectually enlightened"."

My opinion about your intellectual enlightenment has nothing to do with whether or not your political beliefs coincide with mine. It has to do with the fact that you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, that you make false statements and accusations, that you spout the same liberal rhetoric and label anyone who contradicts it with facts, and that you can't think for yourself. You are ignorant and intellectually stunted, not to mention narrow-minded.

"I don't belittle and smear people for disagreeing with me."

Bullshit, You do it everyday on here. ALL THE TIME.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 21:28:48 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"I don't give a damn baout your opinion. I care about truth and making sure the truth gets told."
<

You care about putting out your own twisted version of events to smear anyone who doesn't share your rightist viewpoint or gets in the way of your group having control of the country.

" And like I said before, you aren't intellectually enlightened enough for conservatism."

At least I'm not so arrogant and narrowminded as to assume that anyone who doesn't share my political beliefs is not "intellectually enlightened". I don't belittle and smear people for disagreeing with me.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 21:22:30 (EST) from 189-pool1.ras10.casnc.tii-dial.net


There are citizens arrest laws in virtually every state. You said that the police didn't want to arrest anyone but the manager ordered it. Sorry, but this is false. A private citizen can't order the arrest of another private citizen. They person being arrested has to commit an arrestable offense. Citizen's arrest laws have NOTHING to do with this. Again, you are full of shit.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 21:02:28 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
"That is an assumption you're making. I think since it damaged the protesters' cause, one could argue that the person who fired the shots did NOT share the protesters' agenda."

Protesters don't CARE about the causes. This was clearly done out of rage towards the station, as were the riots. They definitely DID SHARE the agenda. Your ludicrous, baseless theory that someone did this to make the rioters look bad is insanely stupid.

"It could be someone who shared the same agenda as the people who wanted to shut down the station or even someone trying to shoot at someone in the street and the bullets got into the office by accident."

Yeah, one of those conservative Berekely citizens. I am dying laughing over here.

"Since we don't know who did it we can't know. You are making assumptions to back up your bias."

So you can't say for a fact that I am wrong then, can you?? I am making some pretty logical assumptions based on some supporting facts.

"You call it what you want."

I'm gonna call it what it is, unlike you.

"The ones who tried to take over the station in my opinion were the people who got on the Pacifica Board who didn't share the philosophy of Pacifica founders and KPFA station and staff and the KPFA staff, listeners and community resisted the takeover."

well lets look at this quote:

"Station critics picketed Pacifica and KPFA and held a rally outside the buildings Wednesday. Fabbri said that crowds broke down the station's door and that Pacifica employees fled to a location she said she did not feel safe disclosing. She said Pacifica has requested federal mediation to defuse the crisis."

So once again facts refute your opinion.

"I maintain it was a peaceful protest and not a riot."

Yet another example of how facts contradict your opinion.

"I have a right to say and think this."

And I have the right to say you are wrong, which you are.

Its obvious we have different opinions and you won't change my opinion (except to the extent of turning me off to conservatism forever) and I won't change yours."

I don't give a damn baout your opinion. I care about truth and making sure the truth gets told. And like I said before, you aren't intellectually enlightened enough for conservatism.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 21:00:33 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


In California there is a law that allows people to make citizens' arrests and this was how the Pacifica Board had the community sitting in at the station and staff arrested the night of July 13, 1999 when the newscaster was taken off the air and the station shut down, and one other time when there was a protest during the spring.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 20:53:25 (EST) from 189-pool1.ras10.casnc.tii-dial.net
In California there is a law that allows people to make citizens' arrests and this was how the Pacifica Board had the community sitting in at the station and staff arrested the night of July 13, 1999 when the newscaster was taken off the air and the station shut down, and one other time when there was a protest during the spring.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 20:53:16 (EST) from 189-pool1.ras10.casnc.tii-dial.net
Oh and one other thing. The manager can't "order" that anyone be arrested. This isn't Moscow circa 1964. They had to commit crimes to get arrested. That is, unless the manager of the radio station is also Chief of Police in Berzerkeley. And even then you have to commit an arrestable offense. Darn those tricky facts!
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 20:49:28 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
"It obviously was someone who had the same agenda as the protesters and quite possibly one of the protesters themselves."
That is an assumption you're making. I think since it damaged the protesters' cause, one could argue that the person who fired the shots did NOT share the protesters' agenda. It could be someone who shared the same agenda as the people who wanted to shut down the station or even someone trying to shoot at someone in the street and the bullets got into the office by accident. Since we don't know who did it we can't know. You are making assumptions to back up your bias. You call it what you want. The ones who tried to take over the station in my opinion were the people who got on the Pacifica Board who didn't share the philosophy of Pacifica founders and KPFA station and staff and the KPFA staff, listeners and community resisted the takeover. I maintain it was a peaceful protest and not a riot. I have a right to say and think this. Its obvious we have different opinions and you won't change my opinion (except to the extent of turning me off to conservatism forever) and I won't change yours.

Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 20:49:19 (EST) from 189-pool1.ras10.casnc.tii-dial.net
"You don't know this. And even if it was, it was only one individual acting against the wishes of the other protesters, whose leaders condemned the act."

So who was it? One of those "conservative" Berkeley-ites??? It obviously was someone who had the same agenda as the protesters and quite possibly one of the protesters themselves. I don't give a damn that "some people" condemned it. Some person fired the shots. That is violence!

"the police initially didn't want to make arrests, and the manager ordered citizens' arrests of all people in the station, including staff who were there to work. "

Again this is pointless. Police don't WANT to make arrests for petty riots like this. It’s their job. You obviously can't read at all.

"What I read is a description of a non-violent protest that a person on the other side falsely characterized as violent. "

Well let's examine the definition of violent since you obviously don't know what the word means.

Mirriam-Websters Dictionary defines violent as follows:

"vi·o·lent (v -l nt)
adj.
1. Marked by, acting with, or resulting from great force.
2. Having or showing great emotional force
3. Marked by intensity; extreme
4. Caused by unexpected force or injury rather than by natural causes
5. Tending to distort or injure meaning, phrasing, or intent. "

So we have people taking over a radio station, gunshots being fired, lawbreaking "protests", police being called in, several dozen arrests, and physical confrontation with authorities. Sounds pretty violent to me! I call them riots, and I have the facts to back it up.

"" Can't you read?" The fact that I don't share your bias doesn't mean I can't read. Can you?"

I didn't ask you if you could read because you didn't share my "bias" (which, if exists at all, exists in favor of FACTS, something that has never been your strong point). I asked you that question because everything you are saying has been contradicted by the facts presented. Don't put words in my mouth, dearie.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 20:37:59 (EST) from dialup-65.58.57.97.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"It was never found out who fired the shots." So what? It was obviously someone with the same agenda as one of the protesters and quite possibly one of the protesters."

You don't know this. And even if it was, it was only one individual acting against the wishes of the other protesters, whose leaders condemned the act.
The facts the some people condemned it doesn't change the facts.
It shows shows the shooting was not representative of the protests. "The incident with the shots was NOT part of the protests. There was NO RIOT." They were violent riots where police came in to keep the peace.

When the manager the Pacifica Board brought from Texas called the police, after people came to the station when they heard the plug pulled on the News, the police initially didn't want to make arrests, and the manager ordered citizens' arrests of all people in the station, including staff who were there to work.

What I read is a description of a non-violent protest that a person on the other side falsely characterized as violent.
" Can't you read?"

The fact that I don't share your bias doesn't mean I can't read. Can you?"
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 20:00:33 (EST) from 103-pool2.ras10.casnc.tii-dial.net


"HUNDREDS OF PROTESTERS, saying they were fighting to save free speech at the Berkeley radio station whose history is entwined with the city's protest movement, rallied outside KPFA-FM on Wednesday, a day after 53 people were arrested during a sit-in at the station."

""It is a mutiny," Fabbri said. "We have not locked out the staff, we have placed them on indefinite administrative leave until this calms down. This confrontation has been violent from day one. We've received death threats, we have been followed. We feel very unsafe and threatened." Founded by pacifists after World War II, the network has always prided itself on offering listeners a left-leaning alternative to commercial and mainstream public radio. It has weathered many labor disputes, but no one can remember a conflict as ugly as the one unfolding in Berkeley."

Sounds vioent to me. Call it what you want. I'm gonna call it what I think it is: a RIOT! That is my right. Right??
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 17:48:27 (EST) from dialup-209.245.13.12.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"It was never found out who fired the shots."

So what? It was obviously someone with the same agenda as one of the protesters and quite possibly one of the protesters. The facts the some people condemned it doesn't change the facts. "The incident with the shots was NOT part of the protests. There was NO RIOT." They were violent riots where police came in to keep the peace. Rioters fought back and were arrested. Can't you read?
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 17:43:59 (EST) from dialup-209.245.13.12.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


It was never found out who fired the shots. It was one incident shortly before the protests which was condemned by protesters who disassociated themselves from it. The incident with the shots was NOT part of the protests. There was NO RIOT. There was a peaceful sit-in the night of the protests, a camp-out and peaceful marches and rallies, some with permits.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisoc, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 17:39:18 (EST) from dialup-206.15.3.105.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
Oh, and I haven't said one thing that you have proven wrong. Not one. Once again you show you are great at rhetoric but horrible at facts.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 17:32:43 (EST) from dialup-209.245.13.12.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
What I mean is get your head out of your ass and stop spewing lies! I have absolutely NO tolerance for bullshitters like you.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 17:31:57 (EST) from dialup-209.245.13.12.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
"Aaron, I don't have time right now to scroll all the way back to Joy and someone else's comments when KPFA initially came up."

Good, so you admit you are wrong. Glad to see it.

"Thats when she said they wanted the station provided free. " No one ever said that the protests by KPFA were about getting the station funded for free. No one.

"If you like, I can scroll back and find the entry later."

You can't find it because it was never said. I have already asked you to find it and you haven't, for obvious reasons.

"But I'm glad at least you're admitting that isn't true. "

I've never said it was true. I'm so sorry that you have a weakness for facts.

"I think KPFA could manage without the government funds. They could make cutbacks or maybe listeners or supporters would donate the difference. "

I think so as well.

"I already said in the entry before yours that the protesters and staff all denounced the one incident of shots fired into Pacifica offices a few months before the protests and disassociated themselves from it."

So what? One of the rioters obviously did it. They can condemn it all they want but shots fired = violence. Plain and simple.

"So why are you bringing that one incident with the shots up and linking it with the protest after I already addressed it?"

Because you didn't address it. In your quest to bend the truth to fit your narrow viewpoint you are dodging the issue.

"I think you're not interested in the truth, just in manipulating people and spreading disinformation. "

I don't think you'd know the truth if it sat on your face and wiggled. You have constantly spewed out half truths and distortions, misrepresented facts and tried to put words in our mouths. You have made false accusations of racism and refused to admit that you were wrong until backed in a corner. On top of that, you are trying to pigeonhole me in the above statement. Quite a common liberal tactic for someone who has no facts left.

"Assembling without a permit and breaking laws is not in itself violence."

Oh no?? Firing gunshots is violent. One of the rioters did that.

"No protester ever hurt anyone. The police did hurt some protesters."

The police tried to arrest some of the rioters. They fought back, violently, and injuries happened. That is how it goes when you physically fight the police.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 17:30:31 (EST) from dialup-209.245.13.12.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Aaron, just what do you mean by saying, "Get with the program?" Everyone doesn't have to get with your program. The more you say the more you show how wrong you are.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 17:25:25 (EST) from dialup-206.15.3.105.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
Aaron, I don't have time right now to scroll all the way back to Joy and someone else's comments when KPFA initially came up. Thats when she said they wanted the station provided free. If you like, I can scroll back and find the entry later. But I'm glad at least you're admitting that isn't true. I think KPFA could manage without the government funds. They could make cutbacks or maybe listeners or supporters would donate the difference.

I already said in the entry before yours that the protesters and staff all denounced the one incident of shots fired into Pacifica offices a few months before the protests and disassociated themselves from it. So why are you bringing that one incident with the shots up and linking it with the protest after I already addressed it? I think you're not interested in the truth, just in manipulating people and spreading disinformation.

Assembling without a permit and breaking laws is not in itself violence. No protester ever hurt anyone. The police did hurt some protesters.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 17:21:00 (EST) from dialup-206.15.3.105.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


"Someone said the people protesting to keep KPFA open wanted the station provided to them FREE. A reader would get the impression the government was covering the 100% of the station's expenses and programmers and listeners were contributing or doing 0."

Monica, your weakness for facts is exceeded only by your ideological myopia. NOBODY said that the protests were about keeping the station 100% funded by the government. Let me repeat that because I feel it needs repeating. NODBOY said that the protests were about keeping the station 100% funded by the government. I challenge you right here and now to prove me wrong on that point.. No reader would get the impression that this is what anyone said unless they were galactically stupid AND unable to click on a link. Joy said from the get go how much they received in federal funding and she also provided a link to their financials. All anyone has to do is look at the financials that she provided a link to. No reader with any grasp of facts (which excludes you) would get the impression that KPFA was 100% funded by the government given the information provided. Period.

"Then one of the posters on this board had to admit the tax money only covered 10% of the budget and the other 90% comes from listener donations, other private contributions and volunteer labor. I was just pointing out the inaccuracy of saying the KPFA listeners wanted the station free."

We stated from the get go that this was how much money they received! Do you have absolutely NO short term memory?! There was no inaccuracy except on YOUR part when you stated that they received NO federal funding. The only mistake was made by you. And as I clearly showed, KPFA could not operate without the federal funding unless they made major cutbacks or decided to go into the red (that means have net losses).

"I said that I myself think accepting government funding was a mistake and a compromise of the original mission of the Pacifica Foundation, which was to refuse advertising revenue and other funding from large institutions in order to have an independent station."

Then why are you calling us fascists for not wanting our tax dollars to fund left wing pet projects??? Hrm??

"The comment on "nostalgists for Mussolini" had nothing to do with KPFA. It was a response to a comment Michael made about some posters he thought were trying to control the board and drive certain people off they disagreed with."

I understand to whom the comment was made. What I don't understand is why you made it. Nobody has tried to chase anyone off the board.

"Vlad, thank you for posting the link to the newspaper article which told what really happened at KPFA in July 1999."

I provided the link and it clearly shows the riots were violent. Shots were fired, people were dragged off kicking and screaming. The protesters did NOT have a license to peacefully assemble. People were hurt and laws were broken. Get with the program.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 16:59:47 (EST) from dialup-209.245.13.12.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"I understand where the comment came from. We proved you wrong on the KPFA front, showed how your statements were factually inaccurate"

Someone said the people protesting to keep KPFA open wanted the station provided to them FREE. A reader would get the impression the government was covering the 100% of the station's expenses and programmers and listeners were contributing or doing 0. Then one of the posters on this board had to admit the tax money only covered 10% of the budget and the other 90% comes from listener donations, other private contributions and volunteer labor. I was just pointing out the inaccuracy of saying the KPFA listeners wanted the station free.
..."
and stated that we didn't want your radio station funded (even partially) by our tax dollars."I said that I myself think accepting government funding was a mistake and a compromise of the original mission of the Pacifica Foundation, which was to refuse advertising revenue and other funding from large institutions in order to have an independent station." You had nothing leftof substance to say, so you resorted to the famous insult that all liberals do when they have nothing left: the fascist label. But in doing so you made yourself look even more ignorant since what we are advocating is nothing even close to fascism
The comment on "nostalgists for Mussolini" had nothing to do with KPFA. It was a response to a comment Michael made about some posters he thought were trying to control the board and drive certain people off they disagreed with.

Vlad, thank you for posting the link to the newspaper article which told what really happened at KPFA in July 1999.

While we're on this subject, an answer to a question I didn't get around to answering earlier. Mention was made of an inciden t in Spring 1999 when the conflict between KPFA staff and the National Board of the Pacifica Foundation when someone shot into the offices of the Pacifica Foundation, which at the time were in the same building as KPFA. The shooting was condemned by station staff on the radio and during speeches in peaceful rallies in front of the station a number of times. The protests were non-violent and also legal means were used to challenge the power of members of the Pacifica Board who didn't share its traditional mission.

The conflict is being resolved now.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 15:26:09 (EST) from dialup-206.15.3.105.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


See, everyone? Monica IS human!
Oh, I just love compassionate conservatism - the act of defending and debating convictions (conservative) without trashing the person stating things we disagree with (compassionate). I say we put that into practice more.

Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 13:58:43 (EST) from dan33.contra-costa.lib.ca.us
". Personal attacks on me for not having the opinion you want me to have don't convince me you position is correct. In fact, they discredit people who belong to your ideological group."

So why did you attack us for not coming around to your way of thinking? What's worse, why did you lie about the sequence of events? Seems like you are doing an awful lot of what you are accusing us of.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 13:21:19 (EST) from dialup-63.211.246.96.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


I understand where the comment came from. We proved you wrong on the KPFA front, showed how your statements were factually inaccurate and stated that we didn't want your radio station funded (even partially) by our tax dollars. You had nothing leftof substance to say, so you resorted to the famous insult that all liberals do when they have nothing left: the fascist label. But in doing so you made yourself look even more ignorant since what we are advocating is nothing even close to fascism.
Aaron
CO USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 13:19:43 (EST) from dialup-63.211.246.96.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Vlad, I apologize for the personal attacks in yesterday's post because I did go overboard. I also apologise for calling you a "bigot". I still don't apologize for the comment on the the post about Lieberman which did not include mention of any name of any individual and was not intended as a personal attack. But that was so long ago can we let it go?

The comment on "nostalgists for Mussolini" was in answer to a post from Michael about some people in the guestbook who he thought were trying to control too much and insulted people. It was NOT a comment on Conservatives in general.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 05:15:39 (EST) from dialup-166.90.40.35.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Ted, it sounds like you're upset that I won't come around and adopt your political line. You're just going to have to do a better job convincing me. Personal attacks on me for not having the opinion you want me to have don't convince me you position is correct. In fact, they discredit people who belong to your ideological group.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 26, 2002 at 04:10:06 (EST) from dialup-166.90.40.35.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
So, basically, it is more important to "score points" than to debate an issue?
Michael
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 20:52:16 (EST) from adsl-156-180-92.gsp.bellsouth.net
Really, Victorrhea...and how would you do that?
Pleae, we are waiting....

Vlad
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 20:46:07 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
I could get Monica wet without pushing her into a pool...
-
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 19:06:33 (EST) from 168.143.112.103
The joy of disputing with someone is when you either change their mind or they say something that establishes their position, ending in an 'agree to disagree' area. With Monica, she says things that are completely hypocritical, has nothing to back them up, then contradicts herself within moments. As a individual liberal (which is like saying individual Borg to a Trekker) she has continuously attributed every factual and quoted rebuttal to her ridiculous posts to right wing whatever. That moves nothing forward. Hey, if you wanna disagree or dispute, go for it, but you better have your ducks in a row...I love the disputes, but I love the endings better. I will continue to challenge Monica until at some point she realizes her ignorance and hypocrisy. We can disagree till the end of time, but at some point she needs to exercise some intellectualy honesty. At this point, a conservative could push her into a pool and she would argue that she's not wet.
Ted
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 15:55:49 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
Monica, I did not did back four months in the archives to find your comment that was mentioned. It was 25 January 01:43. That is not four months ago, but a matter of hours ago. That is what you said, that they killed themselves and didn't benefit from the act.
OH, I am not loved?
Haha...
Scrappy the puppy still loves me...

.-,__.-,
\/)"(\/
.(_O_)
Woof! Woof! Vlad, woof!

(shows what you know, Nyaaaaaaaah)

Vlan
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 14:58:27 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
I don't pop into this GB too often. I am mostly in Carolyn's GB. But there were things going on in there that puzzled me and I came here to try to figure them out. I am still pretty baffled but here is one I can help with. Monica, since you saw Joy's joke last November you probably also saw my response. I didn't condemn her in any way. But, I did point out that, I was a live witness to the first 15 minutes of the attack and pass smouldering wreck every single day. It went past the point of humor for me. But that people do need room to react to trauma in their own way and humor is one such way. (this is not verbatim, it's how I remember it.) ANYWHO, Joy came right back in with an apology and an admission that it was a bad joke and she should have thought longer before she made it. This little ancedote brings to the forefront some of what I think has been going wrong (at least, wrong IMHO) on these boards. My guess is that an awful lot of us (and Monica I did single you out here but you are LESS likely to do this than many others) just enjoy the disputation. It isnt' that we really want to move the debate forward, it is that we want to keep on debating cause it's fun. That's fine! But it can be misunderstood very easily and can turn into rancor very easily. That's my two cents. (or maybe, Those are my two cents.)
Adam
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 13:36:05 (EST) from gate.timeinc.com
Aaron - Also make note that she almost never addresses us seperately... she speaks as if you, Vlad, Ted, Matt, and me have all said exactly the same things. too funny.

Joy
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 13:34:15 (EST) from dialup-67.24.238.28.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
My God People! Move the F*** ON! This constant back and forth recrimination is absurd! Get past it and stop this inane one-upmanship crap.
Michael
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 13:20:47 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net
"This is a typical right-wing tactic, to treat all people who do not support their agenda as if they were all part of one unit and all exactly alike, and then equate them with the worst extremes attributed to leftists or liberal."

People should stare at this statement for quite a while while reflecting on her Mussolini comment. The funny thing about hypocrites, they always react the same way when you point out their hypocrisy to them.
Aaron
CO USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 13:06:32 (EST) from 208.9.202.224


“You are doing something very evil in digging up a comment I made from months ago and twisting it to make it look as if I condoned the acts of September 11.”

So, if this is an evil act 9and I’m not saying it is), then by your logic aren’t you doing something very evil by digging up Joy’s comment?? Especially since you purposely left out the apologies she made afterwards?? Can you even see your hypocrisy?

”This is a typical right-wing tactic, to treat all people who do not support their agenda as if they were all part of one unit and all exactly alike, and then equate them with the worst extremes attributed to leftists or liberal.”

Right-wing tactic?? Ahh yes you mean the truth! Again you make a blanket accusation. I’m going to ask you to back this one up as well. Don’t worry, I’m not holding my breath. All this from the person who attempted to label all those that disagree with her as “nostalgists for Mussolini”. I find it incredibly ironic that she accuses us of doing things she herself is doing.

”I am a unique, special individual. I thought conservatives believed in treating people as individuals. Yet instead of really reading my words and analyzing them separately, you link them with your stereotypes about "liberals".”

You are a liberal lemming that is virtually incapable of thinking for yourself. You spout the typical liberal rhetoric and then when it is refuted using simple logic and facts (as all liberal rhetoric can be), you resort to namecalling and pigeonholing. You want to be treated like an individual? Then act like one and not like a robot programmed by James Carville. “As for the hijackers supposedly believing they would go to heaven and be with 70 virgins, we don't know for sure if that is true, but if it was, then they were certainly deceived. “

Actually we DO know for certain that it is true. This is a fundamental belief of Islam. If you die in a Jihad you go to heaven, get the 70 virgins or whatever, all is good. They believed this. But that isn’t even the point. The point is they went of their own free will. Whether or not they were being led by some moron in a turban doesn’t change the fact that they made the choice to go. Conservatism is about accepting responsibility for your actions and not shifting blame.

”Would you react the same way to my statement if it came from a conservative who agrees with your views?”

A conservative who agreed with my views wouldn’t peddle this tripe.

”Joy's joke really did in a sense condone the mass murder of people at the World Trade Center, just because they may have exercised the right that American Democracy gives them to vote for the candidate and party of their choice and Joy doesn't like the choice they made. “

I’m not surprised you may think this. But to anyone who can think for themselves it did not condone that act. Make of it what you will, but given your lack of ability to interpret statements, I won’t be surprised when nobody takes you seriously.

”Joy wishes Americans didn't have the freedom to choose between different political candidates or political parties to vote for. “

Now who’s projecting?? Now who is putting words into people’s mouths??? This is a keeper because I’m going to drag it out everytime you accuse someone of trying to put words in your mouth. Thanks for making it easier for me. Joy’s statements were tasteless, but she recognized that and apologized immediately. This is more than I can say for the many tasteless, brainless, and thoughtless statements you have made. Grow up!
Aaron
CO USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 13:03:28 (EST) from 208.9.202.224


"...they did not benefit from their actions."
I thought that as holy Martyrs, they recieve a one-way ticket to paradise and 72 doe-eyed virgins to frolic with in the hereafter for eternity. I know that it is hogwash, but the followers of that death-worshiping cult actually believed it, therefore they had a motive of profiting from their actions.
You see, that is another hallmark of liberalism; "As long as nobody profits from an evil act, it is not actually evil.""

I NEVER said their act was not evil. You are putting words in my mouth I didn't say to smear me and all people who don't accept your right-wing line. You had to dig a long time to find something to twist and smear me. You are doing something very evil in digging up a comment I made from months ago and twisting it to make it look as if I condoned the acts of September 11. By making the choice to do this, you have given up any right to be respected or loved or feel good about yourself. Vlan, you are disgusting!!!!!

This is a typical right-wing tactic, to treat all people who do not support their agenda as if they were all part of one unit and all exactly alike, and then equate them with the worst extremes attributed to leftists or liberal. I am a unique, special individual. I thought conservatives believed in treating people as individuals. Yet instead of really reading my words and analyzing them separately, you link them with your stereotypes about "liberals".

As for the hijackers supposedly believing they would go to heaven and be with 70 virgins, we don't know for sure if that is true, but if it was, then they were certainly deceived. I never said their act wasn't evil. I said part of the evil was that in addition to the innocent people killed by these acts, the people who order them are wasting the lives of the young men they send to their deaths. Would you react the same way to my statement if it came from a conservative who agrees with your views?

Joy's joke really did in a sense condone the mass murder of people at the World Trade Center, just because they may have exercised the right that American Democracy gives them to vote for the candidate and party of their choice and Joy doesn't like the choice they made. Joy wishes Americans didn't have the freedom to choose between different political candidates or political parties to vote for. When she says God has a preference as to how we should vote, and wants to kill off Democratic voters, she's displaying the same thinking as some extremists in Muslim countries who think Allah wants people to vote for a party which gives the mullahs they consider to be correct Muslims power to run the country. If this act was done by Muslim extremists, their reasoning is probably similar to Joy's.

Doc Weasel did not condone the acts of September 11, even if what he said was in questionable taste. I brought that up in response to Vlad's bringing up statements I made four months ago about the suicide bombers being victims of the people who planned the mass murders and ordered them to do it in addition to the many innocent people killed. This does NOT say the action wasn't evil, on the contrary it condemns the evil.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 12:46:13 (EST) from dialup-63.208.133.174.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Zounds... notice she posts the dubious at best 'joke' and fails to post the many apologies that followed. Did she ever post an apology for any of the offensive things she has said? (trying to keep from laughing...)

Joy
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 12:03:36 (EST) from dialup-67.24.238.28.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
Monica really had to dig deep in the archives to find that old post by Joy.
I remember when she posted that, and she came back immediately afterward and apoligized, saying she didn't know what she had been thinking. All was forgiven.
That was two months ago, it's time to move on.
As for dash, I'm not lost because I know exactly where I am and who I am. That is why I have a name and not a punctuation "-". You must be racist and bigoted. (See, I can play that game, too.)

Vlad
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 10:00:29 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
"...they did not benefit from their actions."

I thought that as holy Martyrs, they recieve a one-way ticket to paradise and 72 doe-eyed virgins to frolic with in the hereafter for eternity.
I know that it is hogwash, but the followers of that death-worshiping cult actually believed it, therefore they had a motive of profiting from their actions.
You see, that is another hallmark of liberalism; "As long as nobody profits from an evil act, it is not actually evil."

Vlad
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 09:52:50 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
So where does Joy condone these acts?

Man, you really need to learn to read.
Aaron
CO USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 09:20:57 (EST) from 208.9.202.224


“I am not excusing what those suicidal murderers did. I'm just pointing out that since they also killed themselves they did not benefit from their actions.”

Saying they are victims IS excusing them from what happened. And yes they did benefit from what happened. Their goal was acheived. And as for them being sent out, they went willingly. Nobody forced them. They went on their own accord and became mass murderers.

My God I finally thought people were getting sick of this whole “victim” charade.
Aaron
CO USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 09:19:06 (EST) from 208.9.202.224


Hey Monica...since you're on such a contradicting-yourself-with-every-post roll...does this look familiar?

I find Doc Wiesel's site, despite its questionable taste, a relief. Sometimes, when faced with grim realities, humor helps to deal with them.
Monica Luz
San Francisco, CA USA - Tuesday, September 25, 2001 at 02:35:00 (EDT) from ip-111-122-200.stockton.navipath.net

Mahamid (formerly kept down as Ted)
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 08:44:44 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


I scrolled back to November to see the point that Victoria sent the virus. I couldn't believe it! I had a virus last spring and I had to use the reinstall disc that erases everything. I had to go to the used computer store to find a zip drive that works with DOS to save my files because they don't make discs that work in DOS anymore.

Speaking of condoning the terrorist acts of September 11, I found this little gem from Joy.:

- I have a theory about Hillary and New York, but some might not find it humorous. Although it's meant to be funny, so please take it that way. I figure New York has been targeted will all these planes because they elected Hillary and God is really pissed about that. He wanted them BOTH gone. Ok... throw rocks at me if you must. :o] Joy USA - Friday, November 30, 2001 at 11:17:15 (EST) from dialup-64.158.227.156.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net

I wonder how "funny" survivors of the crashes and building collapses or those who lost loved ones that day would find this "joke".

I must not have a sense of humor.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 01:53:15 (EST) from dialup-209.244.96.180.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


I would say "Get lost, Vlad", but I think you already are. So I say, "Get found, Vlad".
-
- Friday, January 25, 2002 at 01:47:53 (EST) from 168.143.112.102
"Oh God the victim excuse!! LOL Yes they were forced to do it! Someone MADE them. God that is a sad excuse."

I am not excusing what those suicidal murderers did. I'm just pointing out that since they also killed themselves they did not benefit from their actions. Somebody sends these men to their deaths and has them kill many innocents in the process and is getting something out of it, perhaps power?

Saying the suicide bombers are also victims is a way of emphasizing the evil of the act. Far from excusing them, it condemns them for killing themselves as well as others.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 01:43:08 (EST) from dialup-209.244.96.180.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


I'm gonna have to go with Rad on this one. He's usually right. Later!
Matt
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 01:23:36 (EST) from 199.38.133.55
I love it. "I never sympathized with them. They are victims but I'm not sympathizing with them."
Aaron
CO USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 00:43:06 (EST) from dialup-63.211.245.15.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
I think that she's referring to my post; "Get lost, Dash..."
She must think that telling someone to "Get Lost" means - "by the power invested in me, you are hereby prohibited to post on this guestbook, ever! Now, begone...for you are now banished to the furthest regions of the cornfield."
It means nothing of the sort...just "get lost".

Vlad
USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 00:42:52 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
"Saying the hijackers were victims in a sense of the organizers who ordered them to do the evil deed because they also died is not sympathizing with either them or whoever sent them. It is a condemnation of the terrorist acts, not sympathy for the perpetrators."

Oh God the victim excuse!! LOL Yes they were forced to do it! Someone MADE them. God that is a sad excuse.

"I think it is very presumtuous of some posters to act as if they own the guestbook and have the right to decide who posts here."

Monica, I am going to ask you yet AGAIN to please show where we anybody told anyone whether or not they can post here. Come on. JUST THIS ONCE back up what you have to say, or at least try.
Aaron
CO USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 00:37:17 (EST) from dialup-63.211.245.15.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


I think it is very presumtuous of some posters to act as if they own the guestbook and have the right to decide who posts here. I think the only person who has the right to tell anyone not to post is Carolyn or someone she designates as her representative. If she were to delegate someone else the right to decide who can post, she'd let readers know. I think Carolyn is quite capable of speaking for herself so you don't need to speak for her.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 00:14:10 (EST) from dialup-209.244.96.180.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
Ted, anyone who reads your entry saying I "sympathized with terrorists" who massacred people on 9-11 would think I defended the hijackings and mass murders, which I did NOT. Saying the hijackers were victims in a sense of the organizers who ordered them to do the evil deed because they also died is not sympathizing with either them or whoever sent them. It is a condemnation of the terrorist acts, not sympathy for the perpetrators.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Friday, January 25, 2002 at 00:10:00 (EST) from dialup-209.244.96.180.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
Get lost, Dash. Take Femepoo and Virus-Vic with you.
Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 23:12:50 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
There are no bigots here. All points-of-view are accepted. Nobody here insults or attacks another over a difference of opinion or for holding different beliefs...right?
;)
- Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 19:58:52 (EST) from 168.143.112.114
To a left wing nut, a bigot is someone who criticizes left wing nuts, which makes everyone with a brain pretty much a bigot.

And Monica said the terrorists in the planes were victims, just like the people they killed. I read it again today...darn that pesky truth...
Ted
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 19:46:48 (EST) from pm09-s21.donet.com


Well, no reply yet. I am so bummed, because I somehow offended some whiney paranoid group and I don't even know who they are or how I offended them. BooooHooooo. Help.
mean-spiwited bigot...booohooo hoooo.

Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 18:10:22 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
I'm still trying to figure out how not nice = bigot.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 17:51:52 (EST) from 208.9.202.224
What, insensitve? You broke their bleeding hearts.
Ron
Left Coast, CA USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 17:47:11 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
Well, since she will not specify what specific group that I am supposed to be "bigoted" and "racist" against, then I will just let it go at that.
Consider the source.
I admit that I have made many insensitive comments about liberals, but I don't think that liberals could be classified as a "race". Huh?

Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 16:32:18 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Vlad - try "stoopid."
Ron
Left Coast, CA USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 16:10:17 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
I'm on the edge of my seat.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 15:21:56 (EST) from 208.9.202.224
(This is gonna be funny)
Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 15:16:42 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
or is that "more stupid"? (or is it even possible to be "more"?)
Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 15:15:32 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
And what group am I supposed to be racist and bigoted against? Hmmmmmm?
Be careful, you're about to make yourself look even stupider...

Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 15:13:55 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
"Vlad is a racist and bigot and has shown it. “

How??? What has he said?? How has he shown it?? Once again you prove that you are great at blanket accusations but piss poor when it comes to backing them up.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 15:01:11 (EST) from 208.9.202.224


"I clearly remember you sympathizing with the terrorists who killed thousands of our citizens in September by imploring us to 'understand why' they would do this..."

I always condemned those who ordered the murders of September 11. This is another lie designed to influence readers against me and liberalism.

Vlad is a racist and bigot and has shown it.

Chuck, you have a right to write to whoever you want to and if anyone sends you harassing e-mails about writing to someone they don't want you to write to, tell them where to go!
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 14:39:26 (EST) from dialup-209.244.96.180.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


"I will not exploit for political purposes my opponent's youth and inexperience."
(can anyone think of similar lines to use about the cast of characters, public or private, that shows up here?)

Ronald Reagan
Santa Barbara, CA USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 11:40:38 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
"Be nicer to me when I'm mean and wrong, or I won't apologize!" oh MAN that's so rich!

Mahamid (keeping my breakfast down)
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 09:35:13 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
Isn't that funny? Because we are not "nice" to her, we're bigots. She's demanding ways for us to behave and WE'RE the Fascists??? ROFL!
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 09:32:59 (EST) from 208.9.202.224
If you respond that way, it shows you're a bigot. Why not just say in a nice way that you didn't mean what you said to be anti-Semitic or Racist. Then I might apologize.

This is quite possibly the funniest, most intellectually-void statement Monica has made...and that's saying something. Because she placed her stereotypes on Vlad, and found racism where none existed, Vlad is guilty, and therefore must explain himself to the false accuser before she will apologize for falsely accusing him. So, to recap, proving that someone's statements aren't racist isn't the right way, you must first prove that you are innocent, THEN the false accusation will be remedied. That is so @#$%&*ing funny I can't sit up straight!

Monica, my dear, I certainly hope that you do all you can for Democrats...you will guarantee GOP victories as far as the eye can see.

I seriously doubt you gave anything Conservative any sort of consideration...I clearly remember you sympathizing with the terrorists who killed thousands of our citizens in September by imploring us to 'understand why' they would do this...and calling us 'right wing extremists' and Mussolini fascists and saying the men here think exactly the way Femecide does, and that we manufactured him to give us an enemy to make ourselves look good. You continuously portray yourself as the victim, and to a point, that's true...you are the victim of an underdeveloped intellect and a high susceptibility to leftist propaganda.

Since you want to help Dems so badly, I wonder, is Gary Condit in your district? He needs your help, STAT. Make sure you have your bags packed ahead of time and you may want to give away any pets you have...and tell Chandra I said Hi.

Mahamid (formerly kept down as Ted)
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 08:17:08 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


I know you are, but what am I?
heh heeeh!

PeeWee Herman
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 01:21:54 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
"You are truely naive AND stupid."

You mean we have something in common? I guess this just shows, it takes one to know one.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:54:02 (EST) from dialup-63.208.133.7.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


"I'm sorry I spoiled your Black Panther Party."
Forrest Gump
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:44:59 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Oh yes, Monica....I almost forgot...the prisons are filled with innocent people. In fact none of them did anything wrong.
You actually believe him? You are truely naive AND stupid.
Yes, you can count that as a personal attack.

Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:43:00 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Direct quote from the article: "Event organizers said that it is imperative that more people register to vote to try to elect more black judges. They also said that education is very important, so that the defendants learn how to defend themselves whenever they find themselves in the legal system. "

So what Vlad said was correct.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:42:15 (EST) from dialup-64.156.38.122.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Wow, someone accused of a crime who claims they "didn't do it". How rare. Interesting that he says he didn't have the resources to fight, the state provides you with an attorney. If he was innocent, than he only has himself to blame for pleading guilty.

The legal system is not perfect, it never will be, but I guarantee you that if you don't commit crimes, your chance of being thrown in jail will plummet.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:41:00 (EST) from dialup-64.156.38.122.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Another good one was back when Clintoon and Janet Reno used to brag; "The Brady Law has prevented over 100,000 dangerous felons from buying firearms."

That is an extremely stupid statement to make, because they are admitting that there are over 100,000 dangerous felons running-around loose and the authorities are not doing anything about it. In fact, they recently filled out federal paperworked, listing their names and addresses. It is also fun to point-out that prosecution of firearms law violations went down over 50% during Reno's tenure and out of those 100,000 less than 12 were prosecuted.

Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:40:11 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Vlad:
"Why don't they use their education to keep from committing crimes and finding themselves in the legal system? "

What the article said:

"Protestor Wilford Lewis said that he recently served time in jail for a crime he DID NOT commit, but he didn't have the financial resources to fight."

You don't have to commit a crime to find yourself in the legal system.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:36:54 (EST) from dialup-63.208.133.7.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Vlad, I was reading that and thinking to myself, "Come on, guys. Think real hard. There's a corrolation here!"

That whole website is great. It documents liberal bias in the media.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:23:53 (EST) from dialup-64.156.38.122.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


From the article:
"That the number of people in prison would grow even as crime fell, seemed to befuddle New York Times reporter Fox Butterfield who didn't see the logical connection between the two events."

That he would find this to be a paradox is indicative of how so many modern Journalists severely lack any common sense.
It is like saying; "Hey, I keep eating pizza but my belly is still getting bigger!"

Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:15:53 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincome.html

New tax statistics out. Figures show that the top 1% of income earners pay 36.2% of the income taxes. The top 5% pay 55.5% of the taxes. The top 10% pay 66.5% of the taxes. By contrast, the bottom 50% pay 4.0% of the taxes. Just FYI.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:06:26 (EST) from dialup-64.156.38.122.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


CLick on my name and scroll down to number 2, the one about inmate population rising. This is exactly what I mean when I talk about a liberal's inability to think independently.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:03:36 (EST) from dialup-64.156.38.122.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
"If you respond that way, it shows you're a bigot."

No it most certainly does NOT show that I am a bigot. It shows that I think you are full of shit when you call us racists or bigots. Nothing in this statement makes me a bigot.

"Why not just say in a nice way that you didn't mean what you said to be anti-Semitic or Racist."

Because 1) I don't react nicely to false accusations of racism, 2) I don't have to. The First Amendment guarantees me Freedom of Speech. I don't have to be nice to you at all. That is my right. As long as I am not slandering you or falsely accusing you of something I have the right to speak my mind. And also, I don't think you are being to nice to me when you take my words and project them to mean something else. Does this mean that YOU are a bigot??

"Then I might apologize."

I don't care if you apologize or not. The more you choose not to, the more your immaturity is revealed, so feel free to refrain from doing so.

"I never slapped labels on anyone."

Wow, you really have no memory at all. You called us facists and you insisted that I have an ulterior motive. You are pigeonholing me because you have no factual or substantive response to what I am saying. You are unable to counter what I am saying so you are attempting to change what I said in order to have something to argue with.

"You're the only people who do that."

Wrong. Just plain wrong. See above.

"That shows you and all people who think like you are BIGOTS!"

Ahh yes, you never label anyone.

"You have convinced me there is nothing good in conservative ideology. Before this experience I was considering it."

Monica, you aren't intellectually evolved enough for the conservative ideology. You don't know how to think for yourself and debate an issue without spewing rhetoric. You should read Carolyn's "You know You're a liberal if.." section. These had to have been written by someone who knows you. You are incapable of thikning independently and using any type of logic and concrete facts. So please, stay liberal. You'd give conservatism abad name.

"Now I will always do what I can to get Democrats elected rather than let any politician who reflects your narrow-minded means-spirited beliefs get into public office."

Take a look at your feeble attempts to break our logic and the verbal smackdown you have received in return. This was not difficult for us because YOU are the narrowminded, mean-spirited individual and you can't base anything you believe on anttning solid. When the foundation is shaky, it only takes a mere gust of wind to blow down the house.

"You've just given the Democratic Party and liberalism a big boost. "

Now you are mistaking me for Chinese government. But seriously, until you decide to use your mind and break from the narrowness that permeates you. Stay a Democrat. only when you open your eyes and think on your own will you truly understand what conservatism is all about.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 00:00:46 (EST) from dialup-64.156.38.122.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


As a statist liberal, she probably meant the Mussolini comment to be complementary. After all, Mussolini did reinvent government, make the trains run on time, AND invented government-corporate partnerships even before Algore invented it.
Vlad
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 23:59:48 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
"You, Ted, Vlad and JOy are the ones who have attacked me over differences in ideology and opinion."

I challenge you to come up with ONE TIME where I have ever attacked you because your ideology differed from mine. I have NEVER done this...EVER.

"I never have."

Oh really?? I guess the Mussolini comment doesn't count, eh?? You have attacked me several times because my ideology differed from yours. This is recorded on the guestbook for all to see. You know you have done this. There is no doubt.

"I noticed you people project alot, saying things about me that are really true for you."

You need to take a good look in the mirror. YOU are the one who projected. YOU are the one who called me fascist. YOU are the one who said that I made the claim that KPFA was funded completely by taxpayer dollars. YOU are the one who kept insisting that what I really wanted was to have KPFA shut down because I disagreed with their ideology even though I explained in very simple English that this was NOT what I wanted. Even though I have made my thoughts on this matter to you very clearly, YOU have projected what you think I feel about this, and you have done so inaccurately.
Aaron
CO USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 23:47:03 (EST) from dialup-64.156.38.122.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Heres an interesting story on a protest that happened in Houston.
I just love this quote:
"Even organizers said that it is imperative that more people register to vote to try to elect more black judges. They also said that education is very important, so that the defendents learn how to defend themselves whenever they find themselves in the legal system."
Now isn't that a positive goal? Is this what they really consider to be the purpose of an education? Why don't they use their education to keep from committing crimes and finding themselves in the legal system?

Vlad
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 23:46:01 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
But, I thought you said that the Berkeley City Council were conservatives?
Vlad
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 23:31:56 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
d""And again, it is my right to say if I think something is anti-Semitic or racist. "

And it is our right to say that you are full of shit."

If you respond that way, it shows you're a bigot. Why not just say in a nice way that you didn't mean what you said to be anti-Semitic or Racist. Then I might apologize. I never slapped labels on anyone. You're the only people who do that. When I criticised the statement I didn't call anyone a bigot. When you said by criticising a statement I felt was prejudiced I was calling someone a bigot and needed to apologize you were saying people don't have the right to say if they see prejudice. That shows you and all people who think like you are BIGOTS!

You have convinced me there is nothing good in conservative ideology. Before this experience I was considering it. I also used to think there was no difference between the Democratic and Republican Parties. Now I will always do what I can to get Democrats elected rather than let any politician who reflects your narrow-minded means-spirited beliefs get into public office. You've just given the Democratic Party and liberalism a big boost.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 23:25:45 (EST) from dialup-63.208.133.7.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


"Unlike you, I do not attack people simply over ideological differences."

You, Ted, Vlad and JOy are the ones who have attacked me over differences in ideology and opinion. I never have. I noticed you people project alot, saying things about me that are really true for you.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 23:15:24 (EST) from dialup-63.208.133.7.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Yeah...NObody here is a bigot. Nobody here is intolerant of another's views. Nobody here "labels" anyone else. Nobody here insults, ridicules, or blasts anyone else for having a different point-of-view...right?
;)
- Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 20:45:07 (EST) from 168.143.112.101
Yeah...NObody here is a bigot. Nobody here is intolerant of another's views. Nobody here "labels" anyone else. Nobody here insults, ridicules, or blasts anyone else for having a different point-of-view...right?
;)
- Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 20:44:54 (EST) from 168.143.112.106
"THis isn't telling Michael to leave or not post"

No. This is NOT telling someone to leave. I find your lack of understanding of the English language unsettling.

"You, Aaron, Vlad, Joy and Ted have personally attacked me on a number of occasions just because you don't agree with my opinions. "

WRONG! I attacked you because you attacked me. Ahh yes, I know, the "he/she started it" excuse. Doesn't make me the most mature person on the face of the Earth. But it definitely exposes your hypocrisy in this situation. Unlike you, I do not attack people simply over ideological differences.

"And again, it is my right to say if I think something is anti-Semitic or racist. "

And it is our right to say that you are full of shit. Even you admitted that you were mistaken. You STILL have failed to show what was so bigoted over the statement. Furthermore, YOU have bene the one engaging in stereotypes, NOT us.

" Do you think someone who believes a statement is anti-Semitic or racist just has to keep their mouth shut?"

I think someone who likes to slap labels on people, the way you do, needs to at the very least, back it up with facts. You have failed to do so. Get this through your head: just because someone makes disparaging remarks about someone who HAPPENS TO BE JEWISH, doesn't mean they are anti-Semites.

"Then you are bigots and I don't apologise for saying it because I'm right."

See above.

"How about taking responsibility for yourselves as Conservatives believe in?"

How about taking responsibility for your admitted mistake? Oh wait I forgot, liberals don't take responsibility. They just shift blame.
Aaron
CO USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 19:55:26 (EST) from dialup-64.156.35.13.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Monica, I can't even fathom what goes through your mind. I expressed a preference, that he leave and not post here anymore. An opinion only...I don't have the power or wherewithal to make that happen. I never told him to do anything. Secondly, you are most definitely free to think anything you want, and yes, if due to your stereotypical attitudes and small-mindedness your thought Vlad's statements were bigoted, you felt the compunction to speak up, fine, but the part you are missing is that YOU WERE WRONG, I and others proved you wrong, and instead of apologizing you continued to bleat that if you 'think it's racist' then it's OK to accuse. Not true. You have the right to be mistaken, but not the right to falsely accuse. If you would just climb off your imaginary ethical high horse and realize that, then you will also realize that when you wrongly accuse someone, you are no different than the bigots you were defending.
Ted
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 19:17:16 (EST) from pm09-s35.donet.com
Allow me, friends:

You, Aaron, Vlad, Joy and Ted have personally attacked me on a number of occasions just because you don't agree with my opinions.
Sounds like someone has a thin skin. If you really want to see an attack, watch a presidential debate. And watch none of the debaters wilt.

And again, it is my right to say if I think something is anti-Semitic or racist. Do you think someone who believes a statement is anti-Semitic or racist just has to keep their mouth shut?
So it follows that we have the right to rebut your statements when we believe they're wrong. I can recall one time when you were the one to call a poster racist because he brought up Al Sharpton and Maxine Waters because he disagreed with their politics.

Then you are bigots and I don't apologise for saying it because I'm right. How about taking responsibility for yourselves as Conservatives believe in?
How is defending our beliefs not taking responsibility for ourselves? And are you going to call me, Aaron, Vlad, Joy, Ted, etc. bigots every time we question what you write? Are you going to keep getting personal when people disagree with your stand on issues?

And I, for one, am not going to tell Michael to leave. He should know, though, that he makes himself look like an idiot whenever he posts his raves against women and people on this board. He has the right to do this, and if he wants to, more power to him.
Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 19:13:59 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com


"So, rather than try to fool newcomers with your complaints of petty attacks by the 'clique' and all the woe-is-me victimhood, why not take responsibility for your actions, and leave? Just because Carolyn hasn't banned you does not necessarily mean that she doesn't want you to get lost, as you put it. I don't speak for her or anyone, but to make that assumption is a little presumptious to say the least."

THis isn't telling Michael to leave or not post?

You, Aaron, Vlad, Joy and Ted have personally attacked me on a number of occasions just because you don't agree with my opinions. And again, it is my right to say if I think something is anti-Semitic or racist. Do you think someone who believes a statement is anti-Semitic or racist just has to keep their mouth shut? Then you are bigots and I don't apologise for saying it because I'm right. How about taking responsibility for yourselves as Conservatives believe in?
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 18:49:29 (EST) from dialup-63.208.130.166.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Kmart's bankrupt now, eh? Doesn't mean they're going out of business in a month, but apparently their attempt at doing business doesn't work anymore. There's a Kmart 3 miles from my home, and I rarely go in there, or in any Kmart for decades, because they have crummy products at not-so-low prices. I didn't know about any boycotts regarding guns or abortion. I just know that Wal-Mart and Target are usually full of people when I go in, and Kmart never has more than a few cars in its parking lot.
Ron
Left Coast, CA USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 16:30:17 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
KB,

Some business gurus are blaming K-Mart's failure on aggressive competition by Wal-Mart. Does Wal-Mart's pharmacy have the same birth control dispensing policies for their pharmacists? Just wondering.

Sue
CA USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 15:17:08 (EST) from dial-007.arc-01.lodinet.com
“Ted, who died and made you king? What gives you the right to tell people who can post are not.”

Where did he ever tell Femecide where to post?? I don’t see that anywhere. You need to learn to read. This is on par with you accusing me of calling you stupid.

“In practice he has shown far more courtesy and respect than many of you who talk about how much you love and respect women but insult and ridicule those who don't toe your line what is "politically correct".”

I don’t think you have ever said anything as wrong as this. He has insulted, twisted words, declared that all women are evil. Proudly admitted he was a misogynist, then denied it, then admitted it again, taken people’s words out of context, made up definitions to words, refused to admit when wrong (except in rare cases when evidence is shoved in his virtual face 3 or 4 times) and pigeonholed people in order to further an argument that he was trying to make. But you know what? He is still one up on you because he at least can admit that he is wrong (as rare as he’s admitted it). You have refused to even acknowledge basic things that you have aid that we have contradicted with FACT (not opinion, but fact). You have called us names and insulted us because we didn’t agree with you. Not even Femecide has done this (not that I have seen, although I have ignored a great percentage of his posts so please correct me if I am wrong). You have slandered us, called us racists on no grounds whatsoever, and refused to apologize for a knowingly false accusation. On top of that, if any of us have fought back you climb up on your high horse and claim that you have been (gasp!) insulted. These facts, along with almost everyone of your posts, reveal you to be the biggest hypocrite I have ever had the displeasure of running across. I didn’t ridicule you because you didn’t “toe my line” (which is FAR from politically correct). I exposed you for the slandering, malicious, ignorant boob that you are. I kept things nice and courteous until you slapped that “Fascist” label on me. You just remember that. Remember that before you get back on your high horse.

“I don't think you, Vlad, Aaron or Joy are any better than Michael or in a position to condemn him. “

Given the number of times you have been wrong, the number of times your hypocrisy has been exposed, and the number of times you have demonstrated your complete ignorance on a number of topics, I don’t think you are in a position to condemn ANYONE, even Femecide.
Aaron
CO USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 15:15:28 (EST) from 208.9.202.224


"Ted, who died and made you king?"

Yeah, that's right. How could you be king, when I am?

Vlad
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 14:22:58 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
OK, Ted, thanks for your input. Doesn't change anything. You are still responsible for what you post just as I am responsible for what I post. I don't make you do anything. I may influence you, but that's about it. I'm not going to address all of your points, they have been rehashed to death. But, on a couple of points.

I expect people to be prejudiced towards me. That's fine. If they can't get over it, that's fine too. BUT ... there is NO reason my mere presence or posting should stifle anyone here from posting. To say I am the reason is just plain petty. If everything I posted was an endless tirade against women, I would agree, but that's not the case. If my mere presence is such a hindrance to them, I have to wonder how they handle REAL problems in their lives.

Also, that "Casey Kasem " thing was not me. I have never tried to change my persona. Just as anyone who wants to can go back to see my posts on women, so too can they go back and read the endless, juvenile posts directed to me or about me. I'm not trying to "fool" anyone. They can read past posts and make up their own minds. When they do they will also see just how petty and childish certain posters in here can be. That will, likewise, prejudice their views of them. Rationalize it as much as you wish, their hundreds of posts were hateful, childish and without merit. THEY, and they alone, are responsible for their posts. To blame me is simply shifting responsibility.
Michael
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 14:06:10 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net


Where did I say that he can't post here, Monica? Of course, nowhere. Why not read it again, and make sure you don't skip any words.

And, I don't defend anything that's politically correct, which is why you and I don't agree, dear. And, you wouldn't know the first thing about courtesy or respect.
Mahamid (formerly kept down as Ted)
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 13:46:47 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


Ted, who died and made you king? What gives you the right to tell people who can post are not.

You're right that Michael coming here with the name "Femecide" and saying how he "loathed" women was not the way to make friends and make himself welcome. In practice he has shown far more courtesy and respect than many of you who talk about how much you love and respect women but insult and ridicule those who don't toe your line what is "politically correct". I don't think you, Vlad, Aaron or Joy are any better than Michael or in a position to condemn him.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 13:21:18 (EST) from dialup-206.15.0.205.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


KB: will this affect your case? Can you continue a suit against a bankrupt entity?

I started boycotting k-mart because of the rosie/gun issue, but, when I learned of your situation, I had another reason to spread the word!

are you ever getting your website back up?
Chuck <warhost@prodigy.net>
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 13:09:41 (EST) from A010-0059.CLMB.splitrock.net


Wow! KMart represents the largest retail bankruptcy job in history. So said ABC news yesterday.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/business/DailyNews/kmart_020122.html

I didn't know that the prolifers and the P-Oed gun enthusiasts :-) could do so much with a boycott. Did you?

Anyway, boycotts are a two edged sword. I'm praying for the employees of KMart who might be adversely affected by various bad management decisions. You too?

Thanks PLers!

KB
Hoosier Pharmer
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 12:47:36 (EST) from dialup-64.154.100.52.Dial1.Cincinnati1.Level3.net


Ted - Good form. :)
Aaron
CO USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 10:30:55 (EST) from 208.9.202.224
Femecide-Michael, I'm going to momentarily change my ignore setting in order to set a few things straight.

Since you've changed your nickname in 'deference', this whole woe-is-me-wounded-party routine has worn itself out. You say "debate the issue, not the person"...normally I would agree with that. However, your first posts here established that you as a person was how you were going to present yourself. Don't bother denying it, in the guise of Casey Kasem (mild-mannered yada yada...it was a good joke at the time) I read through your posts to find your references to women and your hatred of them. Wasn't hard to find. So, when you say people are prejudiced towards you or 'can't get over it', that's not going to happen, and you have yourself to blame.

You see, the thing you're up against is that this guestbook and the other is on a woman's website, for women, by women, and those of us who support Carolyn support women and issues that are important to them and us, among the other things we discuss. That's what brought us here. You, being a hater of women, came here to incite, instigate, and just generally be a pain in the ass...why else come to this site? Don't try to answer that, your earlier posts back me up.

So, when people called you on your posts, what did you do? You tried to parse your words by saying that hate and loathe were not the same thing, claimed that you weren't a misogynist (the hate thing again) yet now proudly wear the badge, and your switchblade post really summed up your mission. You may not be a rapist, you may be one, you may have never been laid, you may use women for sex, you may not be anything that you portray, or you may be all of them and more. In this semi-anonymous forum, your words define you. I could sit next to you on a bus and we would not know who the other was. Everything you say could be a lie or the truth, no way to prove it. Given that, the fact that you came here and posted the things you did about women and your attitude towards them gave most of us our attitude towards you. I don't pretend to know everyone's mind or heart on this, but I can say that there are those of us who either are women, are married to or are related to women, and/or respect women, and the things you have posted in the past are not acceptable (an understatement, to be sure), nor should they be 'gotten over'. If you truly wanted to come here and engage people in debates on issues and the like, then you wouldn't have chosen Femecide as your nom de guerre and hung your hat on it, and then used a variety of excuses and silly semantical arguments to talk your way out of it. You have branded yourself as a women hater, and anything associated with that is going to be attributed to you, by your own deeds and the fact that you are your words, when that's all there is here.

The only reason that I am attempting this is because I would like you to go away. Not because I disagree with your take on some other issues (our death penalty debate had potential, till you took me and Nick and others out of context and dissolved into silliness), and frankly, since you say you can't speak, you have a nice grasp of the written word (dictionary missteps notwithstanding), but I and probably others can't get past your first impression, which will be lasting. So, rather than try to fool newcomers with your complaints of petty attacks by the 'clique' and all the woe-is-me victimhood, why not take responsibility for your actions, and leave? Just because Carolyn hasn't banned you does not necessarily mean that she doesn't want you to get lost, as you put it. I don't speak for her or anyone, but to make that assumption is a little presumptious to say the least.

You accused me of hating you or being full of hate or something of that sort, and it was funny coming from a person who has made hatred their identifying trait. I don't hate anyone...and I will do whatever I can to combat hatred and bigotry when I find it. That's why I get so contentious with Monica (she is so full of stereotypes and left wing propaganda that her watch probably turns counter-clockwise) and with you...there is nothing about a person that you don't know that is worthy of such a final and destructive emotion as hate. The comparisons to a Jewish Issue or Black Issue site are valid; they go towards establishing your intent...again, why come to a pro-woman site and spread anti-woman sentiments and statements, and act all befuddled by the reaction? I don't care why you hate women, I don't care if your reasons are valid or reasonable, I don't care period. I do truly hope that you can figure out why and come to grips with yourself and maybe use your intellect for positive outcomes, and I sincerely hope that whatever you do, I hope you do it elsewhere.

Ignore setting restored.

Ted
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 08:17:50 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


eeeg - sounded like i was passing the buck.

i mentioned what i did, because my name came up as someone who controls the guestbooks. i just wanted to point out that my control is limited to archives and corrections.
mike
canada - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 02:14:56 (EST) from HSE-London-ppp207201.sympatico.ca


Rad-don't let one or two assholes spoil it for you.
Aaron
CO USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 01:26:41 (EST) from dialup-63.211.241.200.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Due to a couple of people in this guestbook I will no longer be posting here or in carolyn's personal guestbook
Rad
USA - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 01:24:56 (EST) from 209-145-163-10.dsl.accessus.net
just to clear something up: this, and gargaro.com, belong entirely to carolyn. my only part in this whole deal is that i told her i'd watch over the guestbooks and archive them as needed. carolyn has ultimate control over the entire procedings.
mike <mike@akacooties.com>
hamilton, on canada - Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 01:12:00 (EST) from HSE-London-ppp207201.sympatico.ca
Hey ted, check out that website you showed me. www.fadetoblack.com. It has a "Hottest Feminist" Contest. It's hilarious. Click on "Main Features" and scroll down to it.
Aaron
CO USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 22:40:43 (EST) from dialup-63.211.241.200.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
You know, Nick, one of the first pieces of "advice" I got in here after I initially posted was "Get over it." Perhaps that could apply in your case as well. Yes, I am a misogynist. I freely admitted that from the get go. I keep getting this "What if it were Blacks or Jews" comparison. Know what? I didn't say anything of the sort about either group. There is no "what if" here. Those who do also tend to advocate "putting them in their place" right after such pronouncements. I, on the other hand am careful not to advocate any such thing towards women. These comparisons just cloud the issue. I think Vic WOULD come to the conclusion I am misogynistic on her own. So? What of it? She would not be prejudiced, she would be correct. If she were to then say I was a rapist, because of my stance on women, she would be pulling stuff from thin air and prejudicial in THAT regard. You want me to get lost, fine. I've no problem with that. Mike (and I guess Carolyn) don't. It's their board. I told you why I changed my nickname. It was not to make me more presentable, it was in deference to some in here. If you can't get past the misogynist issue, no problem. Some can.

Ignore is fine. If you can't ignore, well, there is nothing I can do about that. Regardless of what you may say, it is YOUR problem. I hardly think I am your worst enemy, nor am I a vile person. Put it in perspective. I'm just me. I'm not going to change the world, nor is it going to change to suit me, or you. You won't change me and I'm not going away any time soon. You can't solve my problems and I can't solve yours. Only you can solve yours. Only you can get over it.
Michael
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 21:00:58 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net


PLM: I agree with you totally,,
Hi Vic!

Chuck
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 19:28:26 (EST) from A020-0099.CLMB.splitrock.net
America before September 11: abortion, drugs, violent crime. America after September 11: abortion, drugs, violent crime. America today: abortion, drugs, violent crime. So what if Osama Bin Laden is captured or killed tomorrow? Big deal. What would it change? We'd still have abortion, we'd still have drugs, we'd still have kids killing kids, we'd still have domestic violence, we'd still have the same old problems.
-
- Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 18:57:30 (EST) from 168.143.112.105
“I think that the supreme court, whether in the USA or through our system does serve a purpose. To interpret laws and ensure they adhere to principles outlined in the constitution (as well as charter of rights). When a law is created in a political arena it does face debate.. however I would think that, as in many things, politicians can be more biased. Allowing the very best judges to evaluate the legal effects of a law (not create)... just seems like a good idea to me.”

well said, and I concur with the theory behind this statement. The problem lies in this: Many judges do NOT adhere to principles of the US Constitution. They ignore the law in the name of doing “what is right”. The Florida Supreme Court case in Bush v. Gore is a great example. The FLSC, composed entirely of Democrats, 4 of which contributed to Al Gore’s campaign, made a decision that flawed that even it’s Chief Justice, Charles Wells, declared in his dissent that it had no basis in law and would not hold up to further judicial scrutiny. Judges do this all the time. In many ways they are more biased than the politicians. The legislate from the bench and get through precedents that would never pass through a legislature or referendum. There are no words in the English language that can capture how harmful this is to the Constitutional Republic that we have formed. If we can “forget the law” every time we want to pass through something that we think is right, then where does it end?? The slope is slippery indeed and where it will finally stop nobody really knows. Is this what the Founding Fathers intended?? Well take a look at this quote from George Washington.

” If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield. --George Washington, Farewell Address (1796).”

How should abuse of the Judicial system change? Well, at the federal level, judges are appointed by the Executive Branch (President) and confirmed by the top house of the Legislative Branch (Senate). So you obviously want to pick a President who believes in judges that won’t try to find a penumbra emanating from the Constitution. George Bush has stated several times that he will seek strict constructionists to fill the federal vacancies. These are people who will read the Constitution as is, not as they would like it to be. Second, vote for Senators that also favor Constructionists. If you have a Senator like Chuck Schumer, who has openly admitted that he will do everything in his power to stop the nomination of a judge whose ideology disagrees with his, then VOTE HIS ASS OUT!! Do not tolerate this ideological fascism from our legislators. Make them adhere to the highest law of the land, even if it isn’t politically convenient for them.
Aaron
CO USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 18:57:12 (EST) from user-119a752.biz.mindspring.com


The judicial system is meant to be a check and balance...if Congress had a clear majority in both Houses and a sympathetic President, then public opinion is really irrelevant, which is why many things go to the Supreme Court. The problem with the judicial system is that there is too much interpretation of the Constitution (finding things that aren't there, etc.) that the court in essence contributes to the law making process. Also, activist judges strike down laws or refuse to enforce them, and as a result end up almost as lawmakers too. Judges are there to enforce laws, and to also determine if the intent of the law and the carrying out of such agrees with the Constitution, not just with their political bent.

The presidential election is a perfect example. The Florida Supreme Court ignored FL law and allowed recounts, where they were not permitted. The US Supreme Court read the law, read the Constitution, and the majority did both correctly.

Mahamid (keeping my dinner down)
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 18:33:34 (EST) from pm03-s30.donet.com


Aaron, I did too, for a couple of days. He does not understand why we are on his case!! He unfortunately came back. I then reponded a little to something he posted a couple of days ago like I wanted to but was in the "ignore" mode. Sorry, in these recent hours of forgive and forget, I may forgive, but I won't forget. I guess I panicked when Ron called him "Michael". Then it's "let's debate the judicial system with him" then....
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 17:50:44 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
By the way, great discussion on judicial activism. I'm swamped at work but I will weigh in when I get a sec.
Aaron
CO USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 17:47:52 (EST) from 208.9.202.224
Nick, we all have kind of adopted an "ignore Femecide" policy. Just FYI. Obviously you can do what you want but it seems to be the most effective way of eliminating the menace.
Aaron
CO USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 17:40:47 (EST) from 208.9.202.224
"Nothing in my last post was either misogynistic or hateful". No, Feme, but you ARE misogynistic. I am not being prejudicial, you are misogynistic. If Vic were to go to old posts of yours and read them and came to the same conclusion, you would still call her prejudicial.

If I were to come in here the same way you did but only speaking of blacks or Jews, I would have been kicked out of here a long time ago. I frankly don't get it. You hate women on a woman's site. If I were to come in here with anti-semetic rhetoric, then turned around and changed my name from "AdolfLover" to "Nicholas", I would EXPECT to still be the issue. I would understand why people would want me to get lost. AND, I would expect that people would not be able to separate me from my past issues that I have posted.

Could you imagine trying to debate your worst enemy? How about bin Laden (I am NOT comparing him to you)? Then tell my that I have a problem when I cannot separate you from your woman-hating point of view.
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 17:36:45 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


Vic - What would I like to see changed? Well, the system is great the way it is. I just want these activist judges to resign, retire, or move to Berkeley - just as long as they get off the bench!

Michael - "tyranny of the minority" - problem is, the minority (i.e., far leftists) think they are the majority, and know no one who lives between the coasts. So to them, the hard-working, God-fearing, compassionate conservative masses (i.e., Nixon's Silent Majority) ARE the minority.
Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 17:05:11 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com


Seems to me, the judicial system, besides "judging" individual cases, was set up to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority as well. Thing is, that situation seems to have been reversed in the last decades. Who will protect us from the tyranny of the minority?
Michael
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 16:52:00 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net
No, Vic, it wasn't meant to be witty, it was meant to be to the point. As some in here I have come to respect were offended by it, I changed my nickname out of deference to them.

"I haven't be following the discussions really... so commenting on his personality, would be purely prejudicial :)" Being purely prejudicial hasn't stopped certain individuals in here from commenting. Good to see someone has restraint.
Michael
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 16:47:15 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net


ok.. now for this wwhole supreme court stuff. Judges have many times reversed precedence, so I don't think it is totally impossible. I think that the supreme court, whether in the USA or through our system does serve a purpose. To interpret laws and ensure they adhere to principles outlined in the constitution (as well as charter of rights). When a law is created in a political arena it does face debate.. however I would think that, as in many things, politicians can be more biased. Allowing the very best judges to evaluate the legal effects of a law (not create)... just seems like a good idea to me. If the law was not publicly opposed or found to be in error.. it would never make it to the supreme court in the first place. Now... if you don't think this system is any way satifactory, what changes would you like to see? the whole system completely overhauled? or just a few components changed and in what way? where laws may interfere with individual rights and freedoms, should politicians be the ones to decide?
Victoria
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 16:45:29 (EST) from Toronto-ppp217042.sympatico.ca

Many young UC Berkeley students are conservative or right wing. I thing most of the current young UC Berkeley students are more concerned with preparing themselves to succeed economically than with protesting (although I imagine a few might do both)." (Monica)

I can attest to that. Most students were in agreement with the University when it voted to admit students based on academic achievement without regard to ethnicity. People with a 4.0+ GPA in high school resented sitting next to someone who had a 2.9 GPA, but was accepted to this world-class university only because of his/her race.

Most of the protests at Berzerkeley are from the hangers-on and residents of this enclave of Socialism, who are notoriously intolerant of anything that doesn't toe the Peace & Freedom Party line. They'd probably call Al Sharpton conservative, therefore they can say that their city council is conservative and mean it. And remain so far to the left that they can't see anything right.
Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 16:37:15 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com


Well, Nick, not being able to differentiate is your problem (and perhaps a few others). It's not the boards problem, so I see no reason to afflict everyone with it. If you cannot restrain yourself from dredging up old news, then I suggest, as did Mike, you not respond at all. Nothing in my last post was either misogynistic or hateful. Respond to the issue itself, or not at all would be my best advice.

I see, "it's been a couple of nice days." Still, I notice the clique has found another person to dump on in my absence. No slack in the useless ridicule. I guess that's "nice" days in here.
Michael
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 16:36:15 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net


Nick.. Michael? I take it he is the same individual who thought 'femecide' was a witty name? I haven't be following the discussions really... so commenting on his personality, would be purely prejudicial :)
Victoria
Canada - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 16:36:06 (EST) from Toronto-ppp217042.sympatico.ca
Vic - EXACTLY. Which is why we of the vast right-wing conspiracy lobby and hope for judges to be appointed who do not have an agenda to push and use their bench to do so. Such as a majority of the Supreme Court justices in early 1973. Aren't you glad you live in the Great White North?
Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 16:24:22 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
We allow one infinitive per customer per day, here, Vic. So no worries. Hey, Vic, what's your take on this "Michael" character we've been...uh...blessed with.

Feme, you mentioned on the other guestbook to debate the issues, not the people. I am sorry, with you I cannot differenciate...you ARE the issue. I kept back from saying that until you posted again. It' been a couple of, uh, nice days.
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 15:55:16 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


This is why our laws are a house of cards. They build mistake upon mistake. They call these mistakes "precedence." Because one judge rules a certain way, the next uses this ruling as justification for a further ruling, and so on. If many of these laws were taken back to their root error, the whole concoction would fall apart. Like it or not, many of the laws of the land are being made by the courts, not the legislature.
Michael
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 15:30:56 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net
blah! teaching French was more important then English I think! C'est la vie! :)
Victoria
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 15:28:26 (EST) from Toronto-ppp217042.sympatico.ca
"to simply have".

I can't believe it. Vic's first post here in a very long time and she has to go and split an infinitive. What's gotten into you, Vic?

You are right, judges are not supposed to make law, but interpret the law. That's the problem. When they change their interpretation from original intent to an ever-changing one, they are in essence "making laws".
Nick
USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 15:18:09 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


PLM: are laws not created by your elected representatives? doesn't the supreme court only decide if violating the constitution is in question? how could they 'create' a law? it seems beyond their powers... would it be more ideal to simply have politicians create, define & implement all laws? with no questioins asked?
Victoria Kerr-Dorval
Mississucka, Canada - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 14:41:37 (EST) from Toronto-ppp217042.sympatico.ca
We are the ones who believe in the Constitution as written, liberals like you always interpret it to find the things you want to see there (right to abortion, right to privacy, separation of church and state, etc.)

This fact is one of the biggest reasons the USA got off track. The Constitution is a SPECIFIC document aimed at limiting and defining the scope and nature of gov power among branches, each one having predefined legitimate functions. The USA got killed because the JUDICIARY, at the Federal level and even lower, took more power than intended and was allowed to, thus upsetting the balance and separation of powers, which keep government honest. Courts arent lawmaking bodies, they can evaulate INDIVIDUAL CASES and the law's APPLICATION to a case party, and not much else. Today, through fiat, courts twist, mangle and rape the rule of law and pre-agreed proceedures, like the Florida Supremes did in Nov. 2000 over their beloved Algore.

There is *no* separation of church and state in the MANNER tried by liberals regards the Constitution, because it describes the federal congress, and not likely state gov authorities. Extrapolating that allowing prayer in schools, if tax dollars are used to pay for the schools, is establishing a religion is too unspecific. Worse, the gov. NOW is unconstitutional because the 10th ammendment prohibits federal control and dollars to schools except by states individually, so Bush's "education bill" is part of the problem we have in obeying the Constitution and respecting it.

Also, the founders aimed at preventing religious freedom abridgement, as in the Church of England ruliing over here, they did NOT wish to see such a concept perverted as used by the modern liberal who preaches and doesnt understand their own rant on "church and state separation" while twisting the meaning of the congress making no law respecting an establishment of a religion in the Constitution. How liberals get from intended religious freedom to their position is a fascinating study in human nature foibles, for even if you agree with the IDEAS they wish to push, you have to abandon any logic and accuracy on the Constitution and rape and warp it beyond comprehension to arrive at their claimed version of the document!
Prolifeman
Austin, TX USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 10:46:25 (EST) from 0-1pool115-54.nas1.austin1.tx.us.da.qwest.net


"We are the ones who believe in the Constitution as written, liberals like you always interpret it to find the things you want to see there (right to abortion, right to privacy, separation of church and state, etc.). " We don't have a right to privacy? Michael

Actually, well, *NO*. No privacy is even mentioned in the Constitution, IIRC. Really, the tendency to warp and rape the document is what destroyed Constitutional America, leaving the rule of law in shambles in the USA. To suggest, as Roe v Wade tries, that "penumbras" exist in various ammendments that vindicate abortion rights is legal fiction, and every serious scholar, even if he is in favor of Roe in CONCEPT must agree if honest. To suggest the previous courts, from Taney on down, never mentioned abortion as a right were all wrong and uninformed, is pure self delusion. Again, the argument of whether you think abortion should be legal, etc. or not is *not* material here.

Thanks to liberal American media and brainwashing, Americans now go around assuming there's a "right to privacy" covering abortion. There's no more right to privacy on abortion in the Constitution than there's a right to men refusing DNA paterniy tests, and claiming default judgements against them for child support are Unconstitutional for much the same reasons and logic used over women & abortion. All it is is judicial fiat and social order tampering. It succeeds when Americans dont read the Constitution enough to understand it, and when they OBEY these fools ignoring state's rights and separation of powers, fearing another Civil War, ignoring that when lawless Supreme Courts can and do rule like in Roe, there's NOTHING restraining them from claiming ANY new power or taking away anyone's rights and freedoms!
Prolifeman
Austin, TX USA - Tuesday, January 22, 2002 at 10:25:32 (EST) from 0-1pool115-54.nas1.austin1.tx.us.da.qwest.net


Actually make that www.chronwatch.com
Aaron
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 18:00:32 (EST) from dialup-64.156.33.141.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
www.chronwatch.org

A great site documenting liberal bias in the San Fran Chronicle.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 17:57:22 (EST) from dialup-64.156.33.141.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


I just got a chance to look at the SF Chronicle's Letters to the Editor page. There are a couple of idiotic letters defending Kathleen Soliah and the SLA. Unreal, but nothing one wouldn't expect for that area, either.
Sue
CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 17:54:09 (EST) from dial-118.arc-01.lodinet.com
Just because I have been wrong about absolutely everything and see bigots under every Bush because of my own stereotypes. And just because I excuse and ignore the extreme left bigots... er... PC Americans... doesn't mean I will apologize. Never!


Joynica <justplainwrong@berserkley.calif>
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 16:50:16 (EST) from dialup-67.25.56.157.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net


Isn't it funny how only the liberals can make false accusations with no repercussions?? Remember Al Sharpton's slandering of that DA in Chicago in the Tawana Brawley case? I never hear anyone who claims to be for "racial equality" (aka, race baiters) condemn that action.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 16:33:26 (EST) from dialup-63.211.243.77.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
So, Monica, if you're wrong and make a false accusation, then you don't need to apologize? How tolerant. And, you also said that those who were upset by your false accusations were bigots...I suppose you have a right to say that too? It would be laughable if it weren't so sad.

I am not intimidating you (I just love how pointing out your error is now intimidating), just demanding the respect that you were so forlorn about the other day.
Mahamid (formerly kept down as Ted)
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 16:29:17 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


Vlad, it is a common practice for these people to make their own definitions of racism. Imagine the firestorm that would start if we said "Ethnic Studies was composed of fluff courses that push an ideological agenda and hurt people of all races by dumbing them down and if you disageed with me YOU are racist"? The funny thing is that statement is actually closer to the truth.

"is my right to say if I think something is racist."

And it is our right to point out that you are dead wrong and that this accusation is based on no substantive fact whatsoever, just your extreme leftist opinion.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 16:19:13 (EST) from dialup-63.211.243.77.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"You should apologize immediately for calling anyone who disagrees with you anti-American, and I will continue to demand that from you."

I'm not the one who did that. Will you demand an apology from those who really did? "And, Monica, you definitely need to apologize for calling Vlad racist, because you are DEAD WRONG."

I don't apologize for saying I though a certain statement sounded racist, or for saying putting down on Ethnic Studies is racist. It is my right to say if I think something is racist. I won't let you intimidate me from doing that, even if you are a great proponent of freedom.
Monica Luz <Moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 16:13:09 (EST) from dialup-64.156.224.10.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Ah salam a leikum
Raheem
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:49:29 (EST) from dialup-64.156.32.5.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Here is that site, my brother.
Mahamid (formerly kept down as Ted)
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:46:46 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
Hey, who found that webpage where you get the new name? I forgot the link and cleared out my history. Anyone have the address?? There was some other stuff there I wanted to check out.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:44:15 (EST) from dialup-64.156.32.5.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
I see the same old crap has broken out in this Guestbook as well. Why is it necessary to constantly belittle someone for their posts? Doesn't matter how wrong they may be, this constant barrage of slurs and personal innuendoes is totally unnecessary. As are these posts filled with silly psudo-facts. Debate the issue, not the person, for a change.
Michael
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:42:26 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net
no mo shackles
Mahamid (formerly kept down as Ted)
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:37:13 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
"We are the ones who believe in the Constitution as written, liberals like you always interpret it to find the things you want to see there (right to abortion, right to privacy, separation of church and state, etc.). "

We don't have a right to privacy?
Michael
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:31:42 (EST) from adsl-20-146-29.gsp.bellsouth.net


DOH! I forgot about that!
Raheem (The Artist formerly known as Huggy Bear)
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:30:25 (EST) from dialup-64.156.32.5.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Raheem! I thought we traded!!!! :op

The REAL Huggybear
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:29:38 (EST) from dialup-67.25.56.157.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
nekcihc erom tae
Hownowbrowncow
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:26:24 (EST) from 66-196-8-104.vvm.com
That's better! Fight the Power!
Huggy Bear (formerly enslaved as Aaron)
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:12:38 (EST) from dialup-64.156.32.5.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Aaron, thank you for bringing me back. I almost fell into that spell again...I ain't gonna be kept down no mo
Mahamid (not gonna wear the whitey shackle called Ted anymore)
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:09:25 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com
Ted, what happened to Mahamid?? Did you let "Whitey" shackle you down again?
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:06:56 (EST) from dialup-64.156.32.5.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
Here I am, to right more lefts!

I called Vlad's entry prejudiced because it assumed Lieberman would let Maxine Waters and Al Sharpton dictate his positions, not because it criticised him or Black leaders. There is one major flaw with this post, Monica. Vlad didn't assume, because it ACTUALLY HAPPENED. During the 2000 campaign, Lieberman made a huge about-face when Maxie especially and Sharpie by extension called him on it. That is a fact, which cannot be an assumption, and by extension, cannot be considered racist. YOU are the one who can be considered that, because of all the points that you could have challenged, you took the one that wasn't even there...and used your own stereotypes to do it.

Not to mention how you stereotype we who call ourselves conservative. We are the ones who believe in the Constitution as written, liberals like you always interpret it to find the things you want to see there (right to abortion, right to privacy, separation of church and state, etc.). If you knew anything about history, you would know that dissent gave us the Constitution, and those Founding Fathers are the ones that gave us the building blocks of this country, founded on Judeo-Christian values, that the left are constantly trying to erode, whether it's the ACLU trying to remove 'under God' from the Pledge to those in Berkeley who refused to let firefighters fly the American Flag. It's funny that liberals thinks that conservatives want to kill debate, but it's the left who has to take their issues to the court and have them mandated, because they can't stand up to public scrutiny and to logical debate. You should apologize immediately for calling anyone who disagrees with you anti-American, and I will continue to demand that from you. And, Monica, you definitely need to apologize for calling Vlad racist, because you are DEAD WRONG.
Ted
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 14:00:35 (EST) from gw.reyrey.com


I see that the students at Berkeley are into studying when they cause violent sit-ins and riots. I wanted to make sure Monica was right on this so I checked out Berkeley's catalog for Spring Semester 2002. Here were some of the course's:

Kill Whitey 101
The American Establishment: How can we bring it down and at the same time label anyone who isn't with us "Anti_American" 135
Fascism: Adopting it's Policies and slandering anyone who won't fall in line with your thinking as such 215

And here is the Masterpiece, in substitute of your Senior Thesis:

Protesting 490: How to wreck the hell out of a place, cause a riot under the guise of "non-vioent protest"

Well my goodness!!! Seems I was wrong!! I guess they were studying this whole time. Well I certainly have egg on my face! :P
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 13:59:24 (EST) from dialup-64.156.32.5.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


By the way, nice stereotyping of conservatives. I consider that to be an anti-conservative bigoted statement.

Oh and doyou have any examples on my Anti-American-ness?? I have given you some. Seems like you just want to pigeonhole people you disagree with. How Anti-American.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 13:49:49 (EST) from dialup-64.156.32.5.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"Conservatives don't protest that way. They may write letters or work for political candidates, or attend meetings of the Democratic, Republican or Libertarian Party, or church, synagogue or religious club."

Oh really? Are you forgetting the post election demonstrations at Miami in November of 2000? COme on, break out of your lame excuses and give me an example of extreme right wing fanaticism at Berkeley. I have given you over a half dozen examples of extreme left wing fanaticism. Put your money where your mouth is.

"At Berkeley they concentrate on studying, working and partying. Check out the UC Berkeley paper and you'll see a range of opinions."

So what were they studying when they fired shots through Pacifica's windows, getting arrested and being dragged away, criminal justice??

"We don't know who shot into the Pacifica Offices but KPFA staff and listeners condemned the act."

When did they do this?

"Aaron, if calling someone "stupid" isn't name calling, what is?"

When did I call you stupid? Please point that out.

"If criticising Bush is anti-American, was criticising Clinton and Gore Anti-American when they were president?"

You said we should be friendly. I stated that calling our president a 4th grader isn't friendly. You still have avoided that question, for obvious reasons.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 13:48:13 (EST) from dialup-64.156.32.5.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"You are the most Anti-American people this country has ever seen. You care NOTHING about political debate and are very hypocritical."

That is true for you Aaron, also for Joy and Vlad.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 13:39:27 (EST) from dialup-209.244.96.36.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


"Can you provide me with any examples of right wing fanaticism?? Any mass protests against affrimative action, taxes, or gender preferences?? Any riots because Rush Limbaugh was taken off the air?? That sort of thing. You'd think in such a "conservative" town you'd have no problem thinking of some."

Conservatives don't protest that way. They may write letters or work for political candidates, or attend meetings of the Democratic, Republican or Libertarian Party, or church, synagogue or religious club. At Berkeley they concentrate on studying, working and partying. Check out the UC Berkeley paper and you'll see a range of opinions.

I called Vlad's entry prejudiced because it assumed Lieberman would let Maxine Waters and Al Sharpton dictate his positions, not because it criticised him or Black leaders.

I stand by my right to say when I see prejudice. Ethnic Studies covers the history and culture of Americans of African, Asian, Latin-American and Indigenous descent which should really be integrated into history and other courses dealing with these topics. Vlad, you're put-down of it shows racism, whatever your own background. People will have racist and sexist attitudes because they're not perfect, and I will criticise them but I'm not saying they're not still good people despite their faults. We don't know who shot into the Pacifica Offices but KPFA staff and listeners condemned the act.

Aaron, if calling someone "stupid" isn't name calling, what is? If criticising Bush is anti-American, was criticising Clinton and Gore Anti-American when they were president? I think the people who deny the possibility of dissent are the ones who are "Anti-American".
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 13:31:46 (EST) from dialup-209.244.96.36.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


But you don't want them killing the pretty trees and polluting the air just to keep warm, do you? They can follow Jimmah Cahter's example and just put on a sweater.
Vlad
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 12:54:32 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,32488,00.html

Scroll about half way down to find more zany antics from that "Conservative" Berkeley City Council.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 12:42:10 (EST) from dialup-209.245.13.9.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


Re: Woodburning stoves and fireplaces in Berzerkeley -- those hippys can keep their p.c. rules within the confines of their city limits, but they'd better not go any farther! It's going to snow in the Sierra Foothills tonight, and those people rely on their wood stoves. Heating bills would be insane (especially last year) without them!
Sue
CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 12:24:24 (EST) from dial-220.arc-01.lodinet.com
Ok I have provided many examples od leftist extremism at Berzerkeley. Can you provide me with any examples of right wing fanaticism?? Any mass protests against affrimative action, taxes, or gender preferences?? Any riots because Rush Limbaugh was taken off the air?? That sort of thing. You'd think in such a "conservative" town you'd have no problem thinking of some.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 11:52:03 (EST) from dialup-209.245.0.224.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
"I thought I was the only one who did name-calling. You would NEVER resort to insulting someone just because you disagree with them. Oh, No!"

Please show me exactly where I insulted you.

"By the way, I didn't say all people in Berkeley were conservative, I said some were, some liberal or leftist. They're not all alike"

You said that it spans the whole range, from and that MANY were conservative. I don't doubt that you have a smattering of conservative people there. But I don't think it qualifies as many. The problem is that it's about 95% screaming leftist and maybe 1% conservative, which I'm sure to you must look middle of the road.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 11:49:33 (EST) from dialup-209.245.0.224.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"The protesters are a minority of students on the UC campus."

Come on, this is the best you got? Lame excuse. Ever see any protests like this in a "conservative" town? Ever see any protests like this at Auburn, Ole Miss, Florida State or Texas A&M? These protesters are a sizeable portion of the student population.

"Thank you for putting the link to that great article on the KPFA events. I'm proud to have been part of the movement for KPFA, which was a non-violent movement."

Monica, you need to learn the definitin of violent. Arrests, death threats, shots fired at Pacifica headquarters, trespassing, people beig draged out of the station screaming. That isn't violence? What is?

"We're not "Anti-American". We are Americans." You are the most Anti-American people this country has ever seen. You care NOTHING about political debate and are very hypocritical.

"Politica debate and movements, including protest, have a history in America, going back to those "rioters" who took tea from a ship in Boston Harbor and threw it in the water to protest the tea tax."

Oh please don't insult those people by comparing yourselve sto them. They were protesting an oppressive English Empire. You guys are protesting NOTHING. The irony is that the people you are comparing yourselves to were protesting many of the ideas that are espoused by the Democrats today.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 11:46:21 (EST) from dialup-209.245.0.224.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


I assume that their next step will be to ban all unhappy thoughts and establish a City Department of Good Cheer. They can give out flowers and find homes for lost puppies.
Vlad
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 11:03:18 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
...and recently they have become a fireplace and woodburning stove free-zone. Their "conservative" city council passed a new law.
Vlad
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 10:58:22 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Berkeley is a nuclear-free zone. Many say it's a logic-free zone, too.
Sue
CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 10:21:22 (EST) from dial-220.arc-01.lodinet.com
OMG... what a RIOT! (pun intended)

Monica - How can you expect to be taken seriously when you clearly don't know history OR the definition of words such as 'bigot'? Keep digging, you'll be to China in no time!

Joy
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 10:14:24 (EST) from dialup-67.24.20.80.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net


"...going back to those "rioters" who took tea from a ship in Boston Harbor and threw it in the water to protest the tea tax."

So how many of the protests/riots in the Berkeley area were demonstrating against taxes? Any recently?

Vlad
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 09:54:38 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
So what do you do with an "Ethnic Studies" degree? Become a professional protestor?
Vlad
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 08:55:38 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
It's January 21...
HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO EMMA BUNTON!
- Monday, January 21, 2002 at 07:17:33 (EST) from 168.143.112.101
"So Monica, do you feel stupid enough or shall I keep going? What I have posted so far is just the tip of the iceberg."

I thought I was the only one who did name-calling. You would NEVER resort to insulting someone just because you disagree with them. Oh, No!

By the way, I didn't say all people in Berkeley were conservative, I said some were, some liberal or leftist. They're not all alike.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:55:34 (EST) from dialup-166.90.35.216.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


The protesters are a minority of students on the UC campus. Thank you for putting the link to that great article on the KPFA events. I'm proud to have been part of the movement for KPFA, which was a non-violent movement. We're not "Anti-American". We are Americans. Politica debate and movements, including protest, have a history in America, going back to those "rioters" who took tea from a ship in Boston Harbor and threw it in the water to protest the tea tax.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:47:42 (EST) from dialup-166.90.35.216.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
So Monica, do you feel stupid enough or shall I keep going? What I have posted so far is just the tip of the iceberg.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:36:25 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
"After Berkeley announced budget cuts for its famed ethnic-studies program, over 100 students occupied a building, leading to a ten-hour standoff with campus police, broken windows, and 46 arrests. The university offered a compromise. Six students responded by declaring a hunger strike, kicking off eight days of demonstrations and 83 more arrests. Berkeley responded by promising eight full-time ethnic-studies professorships, a "multicultural student center," $100,000 for a race-and-gender-studies research center, and an "ethnic-studies mural." Students say this is only the beginning. Those Berkeley kids sure have this college thing figured out."

Ahh yes that Democratic process in action. Man these guys are such flaming righties.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:34:53 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-kurtz030501.shtml

The Berkeley Censors. None dare call it Fascism.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:31:30 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


http://www.nationalreview.com/weekend/books/books-brake062301.shtml

Some analysis of Berkeley High, you know, that bastion of conservatism.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:30:03 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34669,00.html

Scroll to the bottom to find more example of those far right-wingers at Berkeley.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:20:18 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


http://www.frontpagemag.com/dh/archive/la_times.htm

Gosh look at these conservatives! Why didn't they welcome one of their own?? Will these pesky right-wingers never learn?!
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:13:58 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


http://frontpagemag.com/archives/leftism/curtis7-20-99.htm

Yeah, these people seem really concerned with succeeding economically.
Aaron
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:12:12 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


"Perhaps Joy, Aaron and Vlad would consider Berkeley conservatives left-wing because they still believe in the democratic process and the guarantees of the Bill of Rights, and don't want to make fundamentalist Christianity the state religion."

Ooh more pigeonholing. If the believe in the Democratic process than they wouldn't condemn actions that our Democratically elected officials are taking in order to make this world a safer place against terrorism. The neo-socialists in Berkeley aren't even remotely conservative. They are the ones condemning those who are fighting against the fundamentalists who want to make THEIR religion the mandate and kill all "infadels" who don't agree. The problem with Berkeley is that they are anti-American bastards who use the rights that they would NEVER have without America to bash America. There is nothing politically conservative about them. And by the way, what makes you think I am even a Christian? Sounds like you are engaging in some more stereotyping. Tsk Tsk.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:09:12 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net


The Berzerkely city council is middle of the road??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA That's the funniest thing I have ever heard! Is this the same council that voted to condemn the War on Terrorism?? There is nothing Middle of the road on that.
Aaron
CO USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 02:05:22 (EST) from dialup-209.245.7.32.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
The Berkeley City Council is middle-of-the-road. The present mayor, Shirley Dean, is a conservative. She's a nice person. I've met her.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 01:19:12 (EST) from dialup-166.90.35.216.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
The political spectrum in Berkeley actually spans the whole range, from left to right. I'd say Marxists are a tiny minority. There is a greater percentage of liberals in Berkeley than in most places in America, but there are also many conservatives. Perhaps Joy, Aaron and Vlad would consider Berkeley conservatives left-wing because they still believe in the democratic process and the guarantees of the Bill of Rights, and don't want to make fundamentalist Christianity the state religion.

Many young UC Berkeley students are conservative or right wing. I thing most of the current young UC Berkeley students are more concerned with preparing themselves to succeed economically than with protesting (although I imagine a few might do both).
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 01:14:44 (EST) from dialup-166.90.35.216.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


I think in general the Berkeley residents are Marxists. At least that's what some of the leftists from my area who went to U.C. Berkeley were.
Sue
CA USA - Monday, January 21, 2002 at 00:01:24 (EST) from dial-089.arc-01.lodinet.com
Could the Berkeley city council be considered "Maoists" or are they more classic "Trotskyites"?
Vlad
USA - Sunday, January 20, 2002 at 23:36:55 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Speaking of Maoists, they're thriving in our hemisphere. Peru has a group called Sendero Luminoso (sp?) or The Shining Path. They also cause much grief to the people of that nation, as a woman I met attested.
Sue
CA USA - Sunday, January 20, 2002 at 16:16:50 (EST) from dial-116.arc-01.lodinet.com
Don't get me started on Pol Pot. About 10 years ago, I taught English as a Second Language to some of his former victims. One woman had her kids marched off into the mountains by some soldiers never to see them again; one man wore glasses uneasily, another had a scar on his head and had learning difficulties because he'd been shot or hit by shrapnel (I can't remember which).

The plight of Cambodia was all but blacked out by American media until about '79, when some English musicians (including the Police) recorded a "Concert for the People of Kampuchea", and in '83, the lefties politely acknowleged their situation when they recognized the movie "The Killing Fields".

Sue
CA USA - Sunday, January 20, 2002 at 16:14:45 (EST) from dial-116.arc-01.lodinet.com
The Khmer Rouge were Maoist revolutionaries supported by Red China (who also armed the North Vietnamese). Their overthrow of Cambodia occurred following U.S. withdrawl from southeast Asia. Cambodia had been used as a supply route for rearming the communist forces that were fighting against South Vietnam. The U.S. did not support them. I read the same zmag article that you did.
I still have to ask, If Ho's intentions were so pure, why did so many Vietnamese abandon the country (at great risk) following the Communist take-over?
From your description, they should have stayed to enjoy the benefits of the new worker's paradise.

Vlad
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 22:09:00 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
How can McNamara say he knew that the Vietnam war was unwinnable when we managed to kill so many more Vietnamese than they killed us? If it wasn't for those damned liberal fellow travelers, we could have dropped a nuclear bomb and that would have won the war for us for sure.

By the way, I want to make abortion illegal again because I'm pro-life.
Lobo <cerdo@chacurak.com>
Pacifica, CA USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 21:49:09 (EST) from adsl-64-167-240-114.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net


Pol Pot and the Kmer Rouge were in Cambodia, not Viet Nam. (At one point they were supported by the US with the help of Kissinger) When Viet Nam invaded Cambodia, they drove the Kmer Rouge out of power and ended their reign of terror.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 19:01:55 (EST) from dialup-63.208.134.254.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
How many people are still being sent forwarded articles pathetically trying to convince them that sex with children is okay?

Some people don't realize that their lame attempts to convince others that their beliefs are okay, are really just attempts to convince THEMSELF that their beliefs are okay.
it's not Ted/avatar/an assortment of other aliases
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 16:55:28 (EST) from 168.143.112.104


Vlad, great post on Vietnam.
Aaron
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 16:43:45 (EST) from dialup-209.245.1.172.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net
rofl! Yup, we're just obsessed with you Poo. Kind of like being obsessed with a toilet that's backed-up.

Joy
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 16:17:37 (EST) from dialup-64.158.215.208.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
Yeah, right. Backpedal, backpedal, backpedal. Your obsession knows no bounds. Perform for me some more, little monkey.
Michael
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 16:12:58 (EST) from adsl-156-182-92.gsp.bellsouth.net
Everybody posts nuthin but lies, cept for me and my switchblade! da da da da da da DA! (Think beatles)

Joy
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 15:56:15 (EST) from dialup-64.158.215.208.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
Upset? Puleeeeeeeeeeze... you're annoying like a fly is annoying while you're trying to eat.

Joy
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 15:54:02 (EST) from dialup-64.158.215.208.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
Awww, have I upset BOTH you AND Hilary? Well, my day is complete.
Michael
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 15:51:30 (EST) from adsl-156-182-92.gsp.bellsouth.net
Poo - You are such an ASS.

Don't mind him Hilary, he's just upset that he's so easily seen through.

Joy
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 15:46:46 (EST) from dialup-64.158.215.208.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net


Yeah, but if they named it "Reasonable Facsimile of Hell on Earth" they'd loose the PR game...
Matt
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 15:40:41 (EST) from 199.38.133.55
You're right, Hilary, I don't understand. Further I no longer give a damn. Go to Teeny Bopper News to get your advice from now on. They will tell you what you WANT to hear, not what you need to hear. They specialize in spoiled little brats.
Michael
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 15:23:31 (EST) from adsl-156-181-42.gsp.bellsouth.net
Have you ever notices that when a country has "People's Democratic Republic" in their title, it is actually none of those things?
Vlad
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 15:09:43 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
So, I guess you believe that Ho Chi Minh was sort of like George Washington and their desire was to turn Vietnam into an Independent Repupblic? Hmmmm.
Too bad about all those tens of thousands of refugees who lost or risked their lives fleeing the Communist take-over. Did someone just forget to tell them about that? I suppose Pol Pot and the Khemer Rouge were just like the Continental Army and were fighting for freedom?
Beam back up to the mothership, Monica.

Vlad
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 15:08:09 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
"the boys really did need to come home from Veitnam, we were beaten soundly."

Glad you caught that one, Vlad!
Matt
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 14:21:32 (EST) from 199.38.133.55


In the early '70's my high school Social Studies teacher had been in the US military during WWII and helped plan the D-Day Invasion. (He showed us the rubber maps they used which had the elevations of the land actually raised.)

He said he was in Indochina right after WWII and that Ho Chi Minh and the other independence leaders were hoping the US would help them because of the American's history of fighting for independence from the British. They borrowed phrases from the US Declaration of Independence to write their own.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 14:00:20 (EST) from dialup-63.208.134.7.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Excellent post, Vlad
Chuck
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 12:04:26 (EST) from A020-0241.CLMB.splitrock.net
From a previous post:

"The real ones actually had a cause to fight for: the boys really did need to come home from veitnam, we were beaten soundly."(sic)

Nothing could be further from the truth.
During the entire 12-year conflict, U.S. Forces never lost a major land battle. Recently, the current Vietnamese government has admitted that their army sufferred approx 1.25 million combat deaths versus 55,000 U.S. KIAs and 250,000 South Vietnamese. That is hardly being "beaten soundly". The so-called "John Lennonites" or "peace" protestors actually prolonged the war and caused more deaths than if the American Military had been allowed to fight and attain victory without being encumbered by political and PR concerns(such as in WWI, WWII, and Korea). While the brainwashed followers of the "anti-war" movement might have had some pure intentions, their leaders such as Abbie Hoffman, Jane Fonda, Michael Lerner, and Tom Hayden were actually interested in Communist victory. They were Marxists who acted as a subversive fifth column within our country. Much of the press ignored this fact and concentrated on their opposition to U.S. involvement in the conflict. (The reason for their opposition was the desire for a communist victory)
Walter Cronkite's reporting during the TET offensive could charitibly be described as Enemy disinformation. From his small field of view, he declared that U.S. forces were beaten, when not one Provincial capital had fallen to the enemy and the VC communists suffered appalling casualties. If he had made such a treasonous news report during WWII, Roosavelt would have had him arrested and incarcerated, while the American public would have demanded his head (both of which he still deserves). In the aftermath of the TET offensive, U.S. Forces were not allowed to counter-attack. Any first-year WestPoint Plebe will admit, that anytime an enemy offensive is repulsed, the defending force should counter-attack to take advantage of the chaos and disorder. If U.S. forces had done so, the war would have been ended quickly, with a U.S. victory. The Vietnamese Generals who were in command at the time, have admitted that they could not have withstood an American counter-attack and believed that one was imminent. A political decision, designed to placate the "peace" protestors, prevented a counter-attack.
Vietnam was not lost on the battlefield, but was lost because of a biased American press whose reports might just as well have come from the Propaganda ministry of North Vietnam. (The WWII equivalent would be reports from Axix Sally, Lord Haw Haw, and Tokyo Rose being broadcast to the American public.) The so-called "peace" movement disappeared, once U.S. invovlement was ended, even though the war continued for years. U.S. withdrawl resulted in the communist killing fields of Cambodia/Laos as well as the conquest of South Vietnam. That is hardly "peace". The left-wingers were not interested in "peace", but wanted a Communist victory.

U.S. involvement in Vietnam was successful in preventing communist insurgencies in other parts of Southeast Asia. Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, the Phillipines remained free countries (no, they are not perfect, but compare them to what happened in Cambodia and Burma). This stability in the region contributed to the eventual winning of the Cold War.
I consider the soft over-indulged college brats of the 1960s protests to be just as myopic and self-centered as the uninformed pro-Taliban (wannabe) variety that currently populate college campus's.

Vlad
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 11:28:50 (EST) from cs24162100-65.hot.rr.com
Poo - But one can only die by the grammatical sword if the person doing the killing uses proper grammar himself. This excludes you. Ohhhhhh TED! Now there's a man who knows his grammar AND spelling.

Joy
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 10:53:32 (EST) from dialup-67.24.238.105.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
Good for you Hilary!!
Chuck
USA - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 10:04:09 (EST) from A020-0309.CLMB.splitrock.net
Thank you Monica what you said really helped, Micheal you are a Bastard you must have zillons of enemys you don't go to big on heartache, do you know how much effort it took my friend 2 tell me. i know 2 you this may sound v. accusitive but you just don't understand.
hilary
UK - Saturday, January 19, 2002 at 06:17:48 (EST) from host62-7-60-148.btinternet.com
What I get for posting in too much of a hurry. Still, I don't go around picking on someone's spelling or grammar out of the blue. I leave that to the those who can't restrain themselves from such pettiness. I merely point out the horrid grammar and misspellings in THEIR post as they decry my misspellings and grammar. Live by the grammatical sword, die by the grammatical sword. Of course since it's one of the clique caught in their own web of pettiness, it's OK to overlook. Gotta admit, though, It IS funny to misspell "Misspell."
Michael
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 23:54:53 (EST) from adsl-156-181-235.gsp.bellsouth.net
In regards to the "www.idespiseamerica.commie" article, I have to say that calling the new breed of pacifists "John Lennonites" is an insult to the real John Lennonites. The real ones actually had a cause to fight for: the boys really did need to come home from Veitnam, we were beaten soundly. But the new breeds (or half breeds, i should say) have not clue what they are doing. they just need something to whine about to make themselves feel self-righteous. If they took the time to observe, they would find that we are treating the people of Afghan much more fairly than the taliban is. We should send them to Osama Bin Ladin. Then he would surrender, and more than likely commit suicide.
rebecca <queenbohemian@hotmail.com>
winnipeg, mb canada - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 23:50:45 (EST) from 1Cust31.tnt4.winnipeg.mb.da.uu.net
Tori is my favorite Miss Spelling!
-
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 21:45:41 (EST) from 168.143.112.110
"Gee, good to see no one else uses long, strung toghether sentences. We won't even get into the mispellings."

Poo - You better not... there are two misspellings in just one sentence above... and you misspelled, 'mispellings.' lol

Vlad, you're forgiven. :o]

Joy
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 21:17:16 (EST) from dialup-64.158.215.109.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net


My posts go largely ignored? Apparently not by you, Nick.
-
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 18:35:19 (EST) from 168.143.112.106
So what does she win, a Kewpie Doll?
Nick
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 17:21:08 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
Are you people talking about me?
Oh, bother.

Winnie The Pooh <wtpooh@ChristopherRobin'shouse.com>
Hundred Acre Wood, - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 16:35:55 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
You have won a complete collection of Femepoo tea doilies that are handcrafted from earwax and navel lint.
Congratulations!

Ed McMahon (You too, could be a winner)
Hollywood, Ca USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 16:33:57 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
OOOOOoooooo goody! What do I win, what do I win??? Oh wait... I don't want any prize distributed by femepoo... It would be blecky...

Joy Jr.
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 16:08:21 (EST) from dialup-64.158.213.6.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
And we have a winner! I wondered who would be inane and childish enough to come up with that first.
Michael
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 15:49:40 (EST) from adsl-20-146-191.gsp.bellsouth.net
Is that what happened to you Poo?

Joy
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 15:45:45 (EST) from dialup-67.25.57.173.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
I just finished reading several of the articles on iFeminist. One of them mentioned the desire to maintain the "kinship" of the Muslim families. To do this many marry cousins. I think we now know why so many of them seem to be "strange." Centuries of inbreeding will do that to you, as European Royalty have proven for some time
Michael
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 15:35:44 (EST) from adsl-20-146-191.gsp.bellsouth.net
Vlad, I already did that this morning.
Nick
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 15:09:50 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
FLUSH THE POO. FLUSH THE POO. FLUSH THE POO. FLUSH THE POO. FLUSH THE POO. FLUSH THE POO. FLUSH THE POO. FLUSH THE POO. FLUSH THE POOOOOOOOOOOO!
Vlad
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 15:02:34 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
I am so sorry about that,
I humbly beg forgiveness of Queen Joyteefah....

Vlad
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 15:01:00 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
OK, Joy, just take credit for EVERYTHING that is posted in this GB. What was Vlad thinking, WAS he thinking?
Nick
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 14:56:17 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
"However, Nick pointed-out that Carlos the Insanorator could not have made such long repetitive posts without mentioning Miners even once." It wasn’t Nick, it was ME who pointed that out. Sheeeesh.. :op

“What will you do when Michael decided to find something better to do with his time?”

Throw a party. :oD Unlike you Monica, we don't like misogynists and can't wait to be free of him.

Joy
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 13:54:57 (EST) from dialup-67.25.57.173.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net


Did anyone else hear something?
Nick
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 13:47:48 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
"I think you guys really love having "MIchael" here, and liked it even better having "Femicide". It gives you a "villain" you can dump on and make you look better. "

Noticed that did you? Just continues to demonstrate what petty little people they really are. It's how they puff themselves up to feel better about whatever they do that is wrong and hateful. Same justification any lynch mob or bully usees. When they can't get their way, they whine and cry about it, hoping their tirades will get results, when, in actuality, all it does is make them out to be spoiled little kids.

"Vlad, does Poo's writing style remind you of Miner's style...I've always thought this for some reason...It seems to have the "world's picking on me" flavor we got with the Miner...the sentences ramble, they're long, strung together, tries to sound intellectual but the misspelling and bad grammer makes you forget the point...the desparation in his voice, the apparent lack of experience, he's not bitter yet, more like the youthfulness of a demented little puppy... dunno. ... John

Gee, good to see no one else uses long, strung toghether sentences. We won't even get into the mispellings.


Michael
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 13:40:14 (EST) from adsl-20-146-191.gsp.bellsouth.net


LOL, Vlad. Funny. Also, Carlos typed with broken English.
Nick
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 13:00:40 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
I must say I agree with John. Yes, that post was funny. Actually, about Monica. I disagree with about everything she says. But differing opinions are allowed here. There is nothing wrong with liberals being here...this is probably the best place for them. She reminds me a lot of pre-virus Victoria. I kinda miss PRE-VIRUS Victoria.

It's just woman haters that I have a problem with.
Nick
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 12:59:29 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com


That is quite correct, John. In fact, when he first arrived, I accused him of actually being Carlos and posting under a different name. I have always suspected it. However, Nick pointed-out that Carlos the Insanorator could not have made such long repetitive posts without mentioning Miners even once.
It could be him, but he must be exerting unimaginable self-control.
Carol's life revolved around miners trapped in coal mines.

Vlad
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 12:55:05 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Vlad, does Poo's writing style remind you of Miner's style...I've always thought this for some reason...It seems to have the "world's picking on me" flavor we got with the Miner...the sentences ramble, they're long, strung together, tries to sound intellectual but the misspelling and bad grammer makes you forget the point...the desparation in his voice, the apparent lack of experience, he's not bitter yet, more like the youthfulness of a demented little puppy... dunno.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 12:35:26 (EST) from 63.221.109.186
Hey, when Poo decides to run-off, we could just get Carlos to come back.
We haven't discussed Miners in quite a while.

Vlad
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 12:15:11 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
I for one will miss him dearly...nothing quite like having a woman-hater to poke at...you see, getting picked on in the playground is not the end of the world, the kid can move to another playground where he will be a better fit. I think Vlad should take Monica out of the cornfield, the cornfield is for the crazies only, Monica is not crazy..just bitter. Mon, I have always respected your opinions, but for the life of me I can't see why you are hating on men.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 11:56:24 (EST) from 63.221.109.186
I think you guys really love having "MIchael" here, and liked it even better having "Femicide". It gives you a "villain" you can dump on and make you look better.

What will you do when Michael decided to find something better to do with his time?
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 11:24:40 (EST) from dialup-64.156.230.13.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net


Femepoo, Feme-the-poo, or just "Poo" for short....Hey, I like that!

John, you are so right!
You are hereby awarded a free Lifetime membership in "The Little Cheering Section" AND free permanent membership in "The Little Clique".
Congratulations!


Vlad
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 10:52:11 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Yes, I believe it is rather fitting...sort of de-masculates him, don't you think.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 10:42:54 (EST) from 63.221.109.186
Can't you read, John?
You were supposed to ignore Poo's previous comment.
(I think that is a perfect name for him, thanks)

Vlad
USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 10:31:08 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Mike runs a test and goes "making sure I can post" and Nick goes, "sure you can", ahahahahaa...don't take offense Nick, that was funny :)....and did Poo just post his flamer stuff to the wrong board and then post it at Carolyns, heeheehhee, Poo is so lost..."do" take offense Poo.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Friday, January 18, 2002 at 09:59:42 (EST) from 63.221.109.186
Actually it's "Oops."
Michael
USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 22:09:24 (EST) from adsl-20-147-29.gsp.bellsouth.net
BTW, it's "ooops".
Sue
CA USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 19:24:13 (EST) from dial-017.arc-01.lodinet.com
Yeah, quit flaming.

< /snicker >

Sue
CA USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 19:23:09 (EST) from dial-017.arc-01.lodinet.com
Michael who?
Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 18:16:06 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Opps! Sorry, I posted that to the wrong board. Please ignore my previous comment.
Michael
USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 17:51:13 (EST) from adsl-20-147-29.gsp.bellsouth.net
Usual double standard from the usual group of flamers.
Michael
USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 17:50:08 (EST) from adsl-20-147-29.gsp.bellsouth.net
Sure you can, Mike, we like to hear from you!!
Nick
USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 16:33:46 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
making sure i can post.
mike
canada - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 16:24:24 (EST) from Ottawa-HSE-ppp244242.sympatico.ca
if you posted in the past 5 minutes, your post is missing because i have archived everything prior to the 15th. in uploading the edited page, the most recent posts will have been overwritten.
mike <mike@akacooties.com>
hamilton, on canada - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 15:54:24 (EST) from Ottawa-HSE-ppp244242.sympatico.ca
I hate to disappoint you football fans, but my money says it will be a Rams/Steelers Superbowl with the Rams winning. I can honestly say I'm impartial this year since my favorite team went 3-13.
Aaron
CO USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 14:50:58 (EST) from 208.9.202.224
Points to ponder as I eat my second for four fried chickens:
* If Britney Spears can call herself crazy, we can too.
* Compassionate does not automatically mean liberal. There's a famous statement that goes like this: Compassion is not shown by how many people are on welfare, but by how many people no longer need welfare.
* I'm shooting for the Raiders in the Super Bowl.

Ron <elwoodblues@rednecks.com>
Left Coast, CA USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 12:19:24 (EST) from 209-76-220-17.bankofthewest.com
Yeah, "-"...listen to Chuck! Have you ever notice your posts go largely ignored?
Nick
USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 12:08:49 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
No, we like Chuck....and we all want him to stay; While you use an anonymous IP and no name. Plus you never post anything that is worth reading. Leave and you will not be missed by anyone.
Vlad
USA - Thursday, January 17, 2002 at 10:44:13 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
You first, Chuck.
-
- Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 20:09:44 (EST) from 168.143.112.104
Go away, dash
Chuck
USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 19:46:54 (EST) from A010-0688.CLMB.splitrock.net
Sheesh, just fuhgetaboutit! How 'bout 'dem Raiders?
Sue
USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 19:01:56 (EST) from dial-102.arc-01.lodinet.com
Oh-oh, can't use words like "crazy" or "crazy people" anymore. Terms like this offend people, and they're just not politically correct. Are the right-wingers buying into that crap now?!
-
- Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 18:47:08 (EST) from 168.143.112.109
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...crow nuggets.
Homer Simpson
Springfield, USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 17:05:03 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Poor Guido.

So, Poultricide, can you find the nuggets on a crow?

Sue
CA USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 16:53:44 (EST) from dial-010.arc-01.lodinet.com
I thinka this "Compassionate Conservatism" is just a buncha sh!t.
Bush, he say; "We not gonna leave one child behind".
Why not? Some of them we SHOULD leave behind...like my cousin, Guido! He's stupid, he smell bad and nobody likes him.
(Especially me)

Crazy Luigi
Brooklyn, NY USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 16:44:15 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
**munch, munch**
Hey, Sue...pass the BBQ sauce!

Poultricide
USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 16:35:52 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
I'm not implying anyone else here isn't compassionate (at least most of you aren't), it's just that I never intend to hurt the feelings of good people.
Sue
CA USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 16:00:45 (EST) from dial-010.arc-01.lodinet.com
I am the last person anyone would call politically correct, guys, but I also have compassion for my fellow human beings. Compassion and conservatism go hand in hand.
Sue
CA USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 15:54:02 (EST) from dial-010.arc-01.lodinet.com
I think that there are NO categories of DV, Abortion consent, adoption, etc where 100% of all is reported. Therefore, the actual rates must be reported. This is human nature, someones always going to fall through the cracks.

Boy PLM, Did I blow that one!!
I ,meant to say say the actual rates must be UNDER reported.

Chuck
USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 14:44:05 (EST) from A010-0103.CLMB.splitrock.net


Gargaro: "Katie, you really believe that many years ago, domestic abuse was reported for men OR women??? It wasn't, and if it was it was seen as a "family matter." The same went for child abuse - the penalty for killing your own child wasn't even harsh."

Ironically, with legal abortion, THAT IS just the way it is now, at least for women. Seen as a "personal matter". Your point about males getting beat being ignored is typified by a cable channel I just saw from a university-the show was called "Domestic Violence" KEEPING WOMEN SAFE". IOW, DV was PREDEFINED as "violence against women" instead of the truth, which is that all such violence is wrong and dual perped by the genders. That show is EXACTLY what leads to people not viewing issues like DV and others logically, but with a "politically correct" slant, such as painting the DV issue as being ABOUT women PERIOD, OR abortion, as being de facto ABOUT *women* period, etc. Obviously, this political correctness in no way mitigates the abuse suffered by real women from batterers, nor should it be "backlash" ignored. The only way these issues will get real solving is thru honest portrayal and losing double standards in discussing it. I know YOU understand that, Carolyn, I just wish our MEDIA and such did! :(
Prolifeman
Austin, TX USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 14:13:59 (EST) from 0-1pool114-31.nas1.austin1.tx.us.da.qwest.net


Gargaro: "Katie, you really believe that many years ago, domestic abuse was reported for men OR women??? It wasn't, and if it was it was seen as a "family matter." The same went for child abuse - the penalty for killing your own child wasn't even harsh."

Ironically, with legal abortion, THAT IS just the way it is now, at least for women. Seen as a "personal matter". Your point about males getting beat being ignored is typified by a cable channel I just saw from a university-the show was called "Domestic Violence" KEEPING WOMEN SAFE". IOW, DV was PREDEFINED as "violence against women" instead of the truth, which is that all such violence is wrong and dual perped by the genders. That show is EXACTLY what leads to people not viewing issues like DV and others logically, but with a "politically correct" slant, such as painting the DV issue as being ABOUT women PERIOD, OR abortion, as being de facto ABOUT *women* period, etc. Obviously, this political correctness in no way mitigates the abuse suffered by real women from batterers, nor should it be "backlash" ignored. The only way these issues will get real solving is thru honest portrayal and losing double standards in discussing it. I know YOU understand that, Carolyn, I just wish our MEDIA and such did! :(
Prolifeman
Austin, TX USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 14:13:35 (EST) from 0-1pool114-31.nas1.austin1.tx.us.da.qwest.net


I think that there are NO categories of DV, Abortion consent, adoption, etc where 100% of all is reported. Therefore, the actual rates must be reported. This is human nature, someones always going to fall through the cracks.

Obviously. Point is SUSPECTED rates or possibilities. Consider Carolyn Gargaro's article on this site regarding abortion reasons related to "male pressure". If you have ANY experience in these matters, you know the simple legality and availability of abortion for women leads "trapped" male partners to try to push for an abortion. The women involved do have legal rights and abilities to say no, but the pressure occurs. I have known personally such women whose men tried it and they never thought it would occur. Do we have EXACT numbers to show the rates? Maybe not, but her quotes of the NARAL women leaders point to a common problem most likely. Now, would anyone say showing frustration over this phenomena is biased or false because they dont have absolute scientific data in front of them? Of course not. If somebody said "just as many women rape men as men rape women, statistically" we could surmise BEFORE study that likel;y the rates are higher for men raping women (even if it is possibly possible for women to rape males) due to biological construct, physical strength, etc. Even if we didnt have KNOWN criminal cases and stats in front of us we could be fairly confident...
Prolifeman
Austin, TX USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 14:04:58 (EST) from 0-1pool114-31.nas1.austin1.tx.us.da.qwest.net


No
I donna think "Mentally-Ill Luigi" or "Bi-Polar Luigi" sounds as good.
So, I gotta disagree.

Crazy Luigi
Brooklyn, NY USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 11:23:46 (EST) from hqfirepu2-ext.agedwards.com
Hey, Sue...we are supposed to be eating chicken, not crow!!
Poultricide
USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 10:24:24 (EST) from inetgate5.bp.com
P.S.,

Too often in our society we confuse mental illness with evil behavior. They are two entirely separate things. Just a little while ago, there was a reality-based show on cable that was on in my house. In one segment, a man driving an SUV plowed through a crowd of people at an accident scene, dragging a rescue worker with him. The announcer said that the driver was "mentally ill", as though to excuse his act.

But most mentally ill people don't behave this way. The public's perception, though, is that they do.

Sue
CA USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 01:54:09 (EST) from dial-245.arc-01.lodinet.com
Melissa,

I apologize for that remark. Mental illness is a misunderstood condition, and I allowed my negative opinion of my sil to color my view of bipolar disorder. I've read that there are millions who suffer from this ailment, yet the only judgement I made of it I based on the only person I knew who had it, my sil. She was a user, rude and obnoxious, and these qualities were certainly not symptoms of this disorder, yet people in my family sort of used the illness to explain it. The people in my family are dysfunctional, as well, and rather dealing with their own problems, they use remarks about mentally ill people they know to feel better about themselves. I have also worked in classes with children who have had mental disorders, but my focus was on behavior modification, and the disorders from which they suffered were secondary.

I've read excerpts from A Brilliant Madness by Patty Duke Astin, and she certainly seems like a stark contrast to my sil. I've also read posts on other message boards from people I admire very much who have struggled with mental disorders. I apologize for not keeping my impressions of these people in mind when I speak of mental illnesses, and instead only keeping the negative impressions in mind. For the record, I've also responded to people who behave in an insulting manner by calling them idiots, which is a commonly used insult, but actually is an old medical/psychological word to describe someone with a certain degree of mental retardation. However, I would never think of my child this way. I also wince when people call each other "retards" ( an even less sophisticated insult), but accept that it happens.
I again apologize, Melissa. You are 180 degrees away from my sil, who among other things, had a daughter (from a prev. relationship) that she decided to dump on some people in another state before she married my brother (the girl was four, and had already bonded to her), because the girl was "too much trouble", and interfered with her taking a couple of Junior College classes (I'm not kidding). As I explained about my brother, he needed counseling as well, so that he could understand what it was about him that made him attracted to such a shallow person. If I had your e-mail address, I'd talk to you even more. Feel free to e-mail me, if you'd like.

Sue <janzabo@lodinet.com>
CA USA - Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 00:48:53 (EST) from dial-060.arc-01.lodinet.com
Sue, I am upset and yes, offended by your use of the term "crazy people." I, too, suffer from bipolar disorder (also called manic depressive illness) and work full-time, am an honors student at one of the best universities in the country, and am a published author. I don't know your brother's situation, of course, but most people with mental disorders are NOT violent or destructive, and many live productive, happy lives -- 80 to 90 percent can be treated with medication or therapy or a combination of both. As for not marrying or dating "crazy" people, if I my husband had felt the same way, we would have never gotten married or had our two beautiful children. It's hard enough to a1.pa.us.da.qwest.net
I remember the movie, Carolyn, but I don't remember if it was based on a true story or not.
Chuck
USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 21:09:50 (EST) from A020-0345.CLMB.splitrock.net
Who cares?
Aaron
CO USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 20:22:37 (EST) from user-119a752.biz.mindspring.com
Rare Video Clips of JFK, Jr. Around NYC View rare video film clips of the late American Prince, JFK Jr., taken in public places in NYC. See JFK Jr. walking with his mother, wife Carolyn, playing sports in Central Park, and being followed by the photographers. Go to http://www.shop1.net/E-Culture/main.cfm link is on the right hand side of page.
Vegas Victoria <odg4045@aol.com>
Las Vegas, NV USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 18:34:48 (EST) from cm214.21.234.24.lvcm.com
Speaking of the penalties years ago for killing your child, this reminds me of a TV movie I saw called "A Promise to Carolyn" -- did anyone see it? (no, I am not making that up - it was really called that) It was about two sisters who, in the 1950's, saw their stepmother throw their youngest sister (name Carolyn) against the wall and kill her. One sister buried the memory, the other remembered but no one believed her. Finally, 40 years later the one sister went under hypnosis and remembered the event, and eventually they had enough evidence (medical records, testimony of one of the nurses who was still alive, evidence from the exumed body..) to bring their stepmother to trial for the killing. Two points:
1. The injuries indicated foul play - the doctors at the time knew this but let it go because it was a "family matter"
2. The stepmother was found guilty but had to be sentenced according to the law in the 1950's - her punishment? A suspended sentence (3 or 5 years, don't remember).

If people could kill a child, and the world knew but turned their backs, wouldn't it be likely that spousal abuse was also ignored?

Carolyn
USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 18:24:44 (EST) from carolyn.interstat.net
Katie: " no, I am not going to take either Carolyn or PLM for their word when they claim that more women are being abused than the numbers indicate."
Katie, you really believe that many years ago, domestic abuse was reported for men OR women??? It wasn't, and if it was it was seen as a "family matter." The same went for child abuse - the penalty for killing your own child wasn't even harsh.

Carolyn
USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 18:09:29 (EST) from carolyn.interstat.net
PLM & Katie" I think that there are NO categories of DV, Abortion consent, adoption, etc where 100% of all is reported. Therefore, the actual rates must be reported. This is human nature, someones always going to fall through the cracks.
Chuck
USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 18:02:45 (EST) from A010-0428.CLMB.splitrock.net
Katie: " no, I am not going to take either Carolyn or PLM for their word when they claim that more women are being abused than the numbers indicate."

Virtually any logical person can see that, given a common phenomena, unreporteded incidents cannot be likely be so rare. An example, sex sociologists say MOST persons masturbate, but few people fill out neon signs saying they do. In abortions, we see stats that, with existing laws, literally CANNOT be verified in either direction but are suggestive of abuse, like the lack of paternal vetoes or even notice, means some, and likely many abortions WILL occur with one "consent" and often one knowledge it is set to occur-the woman's, due to a combo of law, availability, and biology. "Men's rights" activists, for example, CLAIM that much of male DV incidents are unreported. If they are correct about male psychology of shame, vs women's conditioning to seek help and claim victimhood easier, they could be correct. Will we ever KNOW scientifically? Did I claim MORE women were abused than repoted? I dont recall saying that in eactly those terms, but I would not doubt it necessarily either.

"Just because they say so doesn't make it true..

No, but in fact dearths, general reasoning in SIMILIAR situations and logic must be applied. I cant tell you, for example, HOW many men in pregnancies that ended in abortions "consented" to the abortion, due to above factors, but I KNOW from *experience* personally that the number isnt like 1 guy per yer, its significant, because lil ole me has known too many such men face to face and if you extrapolate those numbers out to the general population vs the number of unplanned pregnancies (in the minds of the women) AND the 47% of women who think only women should have rights in abortion, well, uh, you do the math. Or, adoption law on a similiar vein: I heard prior to the Stanley case on unwed fathers consent for adoptions, the rate of agencies agreeing to look into obtaining his consent was LESS, and MORE compliance AFTER the ruling, according to a study. I could have guessed that without any such studies due to lawsuit possibilities, etc. State by state, the rates of this practice and less fraud dropped accross the board mostly. Big surprise...NOT!

Later PLM provided a link that backs up some of what I said: perhaps people would believe that

On DV, I found a site that challenged "conventional wisdom", probably what the poster refers to. I put it out to offer up diversity and to show how stats can be "massaged" to suit any agenda...

"or maybe they think I am still a liar."

I dont recall calling you such.

" They would be right ot think so and I am no better than Carolyn/PLM who make a baseless claim about domestic abuse rates being higher than is reported."

See above. Do you think the rate of males being "abused" is higher than is reported? Why so or why not? Dont know? If you have no science to back up any interpretation, like studies, etc. WHAT should you base a guess on? Again, alot of things arent hard to figure out without ten studies using charts and graphs, if you understand human nature and the effect of social conditions and conditioning and the law and its "teaching" effect on the masses in response to disparate treatment or rights of members of the populace...
Prolifeman
Austin, TX USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 16:08:38 (EST) from 0-1pool115-234.nas1.austin1.tx.us.da.qwest.net


Hilary, if you and the women were good friends before maybe you can still be friends. At your age people are just discovering themselves and who they are. There are people who are lesbian or homosexual male and while many people don't like the fact that this exists, it is a reality. You could still be a platonic friend of theirs. I realize part of the problem is how your other friends, family and other people you know will see you if some of your friends are lesbian. You have to decide yourself whether to continue the friendship based on what you're comfortable with as well as how it will affect the way other people treat you.
Monica Luz <moniqueluz@juno.com>
San Francisco, CA USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 03:41:05 (EST) from dialup-209.244.99.155.Dial1.SanFrancisco1.Level3.net
OK then Hilary, TALK to her. What's the problem?
Michael
USA - Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 00:03:40 (EST) from adsl-20-146-228.gsp.bellsouth.net