[lit-ideas] Re: Least qualified presidential nominee
- From: Andy <mimi.erva@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 08:55:21 -0700 (PDT)
Methinks you're mad and are projecting it on to me. If you were interested in
a discussion, you'd ask a question, not 'nominate' me for anything. Instead of
answering the questions regarding what McCain, et al. were going to change, you
resorted to 'nominating'. I gotta go. Bye.
--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Least qualified presidential nominee
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 3:21 PM
What, you’re mad because John took on the job of finding the least qualified
president in the past 100 years instead of you? Heck, I nominated you, Irene.
How is that bad behavior?
Oh, you’re thinking since I “nominated” you to find the least qualified nominee
in the past 100 years that I might be saying you were the least qualified
here? Heck, that never occurred to me.
Lawrence
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Andy
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 7:33 AM
To: lit-ideas
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Least qualified presidential nominee
Lawrence, you really can sink to the occasion given half a chance. Being a
Marine is no guarantee against bad behavior obviously.
I said before that I'm not voting in this election, not because I don't think
Obama will do a good job, but because this country is so far gone that it
doesn't matter who's in the WH. My intuition tells me that Obama will do
a better job mostly because he's not a war monger, and most if not all of our
problems are caused by war mongering. Specifically, in addition to losing our
standing in the world, war generates debt which generates massive interest,
meaning a few making a lot of money. It's short term gain for long term loss,
like Britain and her navy/empire. Someone against war may stand a chance at
reversing things but we're so far gone that it's probably not possible, plus
the PTB won't allow it because it's their livelihood.
Also, Obama seems to genuinely unite people, but since people love enemies,
McCain it probably will be. Race is such a ridiculous construct, based on
melanin in skin and nothing more, yet it rules along with superstition. Are we
*really* debating that Palin is or isn't a snake handler? Is this not a
stunning discussion in the 21st century? But no, it's a serious discussion. I
will be very surprised if Obama wins.. Biden was a bit of a disappointment,
but he's still better than a one-person baby factory in a time of massive
population overgrowth.
Well, anyway, Lawrence, I'm sorry you couldn't address the issues but instead
had to get nasty. Whatever. Talk to you later.
--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [lit-ideas] Least qualified presidential nominee
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 7:07 AM
But enough about Palin. I have another question I think we should address. I
have heard a number of people say that Obama is the least qualified nominee for
president in about 100 years. Now that’s just too vague for me. Is it 100
years? And exactly who was the presidential nominee who was less qualified? I
just wonder if the people who say this have done the proper investigation. I
think Lit-Ideas should form a committee to find out exactly how long ago there
was a nominee that was less qualified than Obama. And exactly who he was, and,
of course, whether he was elected.
I nominate Irene/Andy/Mimi to head the committee.
Lawrence Helm
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Lawrence Helm
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:09 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Sarah Palin gets the spiteful Margaret Thatcher
treatment
And specifically those changes are...? For all to see! – all who don’t have
their heads in the sand.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.16/1653 - Release Date: 9/5/2008 6:57
AM
Other related posts:
