Prev: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BACILLUS SUBTILIS ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Next: Vietnam Hotel & Resort, Vietnam Hotel information
From: Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously) on 31 Dec 2009 11:20


Donna Evleth wrote:
>
> > From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
> > <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
> > Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave to
> > those who come after us.
> > Newsgroups:
> > alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,re
> > c.travel.europe
> > Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:43:40 +0000
> > Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shownbyourMSM
> > anywhere: American interstate billboard
> >
> >
> >
> > Donna Evleth wrote:
> >>
> >>> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
> >>> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
> >>> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave to
> >>> those who come after us.
> >>> Newsgroups:
> >>> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,
> >>> re
> >>> c.travel.europe
> >>> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:03:32 +0000
> >>> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shown byourMSM
> >>> anywhere: American interstate billboard
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Donna Evleth wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
> >>>>> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
> >>>>> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> those who come after us.
> >>>>> Newsgroups:
> >>>>> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politic
> >>>>> s,
> >>>>> re
> >>>>> c.travel.europe
> >>>>> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 06:16:08 +0000
> >>>>> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shown by
> >>>>> ourMSM
> >>>>> anywhere: American interstate billboard
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Wikking wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> One thing to note. Despite the Red State apparent domination of the
> >>>>>> landscape, they have a far lesser population than the Blues. Hence,
> >>>>>> fewer elected representatives in the House. However, what they do
> >>>>>> have, which makes the US not as Democratic as you would think, is two
> >>>>>> senators for each red state. In effect this means that the senate is
> >>>>>> the ultimate arbitrator of any legislation and, in effect, senators
> >>>>>> representing minorities can overturn the will of the majority.
> >>>>>> The senate really needs to go...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Kook Alert.
> >>>>
> >>>> Kook alert, the definition: Bill Bonde's response to posters who have said
> >>>> something he disagrees with.
> >>>>
> >>> No, it is used to alert the public that kooky materials are being
> >>> posted that aren't worth responding directly to, either because
> >>> they have been refuted time and again or because they are just nuts
> >>> from first blush.
> >>
> >> I stand by my original definition.
> >>
> > You've attempted that before and yet it's exactly wrong still. If
> > there's something to comment on, I'll comment on it. I use Kook
> > Alerts to show that there's nothing worth commenting on
> > specifically usually because it's been refuted time and again or
> > because it's just too kooky to bother with. You know, Kook Alerts
> > go out when idiots claim that 9/11 was a Bush inside job with
> > explosives.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>>> Wikking has in fact given a good description of the actual Red State/Blue
> >>>> State situation.
> >>>>
> >>> The Kook Alert is for what is right before the Kook Alert: "The
> >>> senate really needs to go..."
> >>
> >> I don't think it necessarily needs to go, but it does need a major overhaul.
> >>
> > In what way?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>> But regarding the idea that a minority might be able to stop a
> >>> majority, that's the point of having a constitution. Earl has
> >>> complained repeatedly that minorities might not be stripped of
> >>> their power, as if stripping minorities of power is a good thing.
> >>
> >> I don't quite understand the part "Earl has complained repeatedly that
> >> minorities might not be stripped of their power...". Have you added a "not"
> >> where it doesn't belong?
> >>
> > Earl *wants* to strip minorities of power. The other poster seems
> > to think similarly.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>> The house and senate are populated in different ways. This is a
> >>> good thing because it means that the mix is different giving there
> >>> a point in having two houses. If the mix was the same, why have two
> >>> houses? Depending on the number of people in a state, there could
> >>> easily be a great difference in representation with each house
> >>> member, since all states get at least one even if they have a tiny
> >>> population. The complaint seems to be that the United States isn't
> >>> a country made up of one giant state.
> >>
> >> The complaint is that what was workable in the time of the Founding Fathers
> >> is not necessarily workable now. What did the Founding Fathers have to say
> >> about modern communications: telegraph, radio, telephone, television,
> >> computers?
> >>
> > Do you support the single state model? Because I think that the US
> > is big enough that people in different states should have their own
> > local control. And without both a house and senate, I suspect that
> > the rights of sparsely populated states would be swallowed up by a
> > few large population ones. Basically everything in the US would be
> > decided by New York, Florida and California.
>
> I, too, believe in a certain amount of local control, particularly for local
> issues like agriculture which depends on local climate. You don't grow
> oranges in Maine. On the other hand, with the way the Senate is now, you
> can have local issues clogging national ones. There was a time when the
> Senator from Washington State was nicknamed "the Senator from Boeing".
>
Is that now? And one thing that representatives represent is local
business.





> >> All of these things have made politics a whole new ball game. I
> >> can personally remember a time when neither television nor computers existed
> >> for the average person. Modern means of communication have done a great
> >> deal to eradicate many regional differences. For example, Walmart is
> >> everywhere, and a shopping mall in one state looks just like a shopping mall
> >> in another,
> >>
> > There seem to be very different actual views, however, between
> > those who support Republicans and those who support Democrats.
> > These has translated into states for purposes of elections.
> >
> >
> >> and people all over the world communicate by Internet. Market
> >> forces have changed regional landscapes in a good many ways. But the Senate
> >> remains what it was in the late 18th century, when the Founding Fathers
> >> invented it.
> >>
> > I'm not following you, I don't think that they intended to have it
> > change with time. You seem to be making an argument for one world
> > government, actually.
>
> Actually I'm not. I am merely saying that account has to be taken of all
> these changes, and the way they have changed regions.
>
Why should California get to choose all the people who run the
government? That seems silly.




--
Tiger tells eleven mistresses, "I will leave my wife for you."
From: Donna Evleth on 31 Dec 2009 13:42


> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave to
> those who come after us.
> Newsgroups:
> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,re
> c.travel.europe
> Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:20:14 +0000
> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not
> shownbyourMSManywhere: American interstate billboard
>
>
>
> Donna Evleth wrote:
>>
>>> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
>>> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
>>> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave to
>>> those who come after us.
>>> Newsgroups:
>>> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,
>>> re
>>> c.travel.europe
>>> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:43:40 +0000
>>> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shownbyourMSM
>>> anywhere: American interstate billboard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Donna Evleth wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
>>>>> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
>>>>> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave
>>>>> to
>>>>> those who come after us.
>>>>> Newsgroups:
>>>>> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politic
>>>>> s,
>>>>> re
>>>>> c.travel.europe
>>>>> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:03:32 +0000
>>>>> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shown
>>>>> byourMSM
>>>>> anywhere: American interstate billboard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Donna Evleth wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
>>>>>>> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
>>>>>>> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we
>>>>>>> leave
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> those who come after us.
>>>>>>> Newsgroups:
>>>>>>> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.polit
>>>>>>> ic
>>>>>>> s,
>>>>>>> re
>>>>>>> c.travel.europe
>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 06:16:08 +0000
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shown by
>>>>>>> ourMSM
>>>>>>> anywhere: American interstate billboard
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wikking wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One thing to note. Despite the Red State apparent domination of the
>>>>>>>> landscape, they have a far lesser population than the Blues. Hence,
>>>>>>>> fewer elected representatives in the House. However, what they do
>>>>>>>> have, which makes the US not as Democratic as you would think, is two
>>>>>>>> senators for each red state. In effect this means that the senate is
>>>>>>>> the ultimate arbitrator of any legislation and, in effect, senators
>>>>>>>> representing minorities can overturn the will of the majority.
>>>>>>>> The senate really needs to go...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kook Alert.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kook alert, the definition: Bill Bonde's response to posters who have
>>>>>> said
>>>>>> something he disagrees with.
>>>>>>
>>>>> No, it is used to alert the public that kooky materials are being
>>>>> posted that aren't worth responding directly to, either because
>>>>> they have been refuted time and again or because they are just nuts
>>>>> from first blush.
>>>>
>>>> I stand by my original definition.
>>>>
>>> You've attempted that before and yet it's exactly wrong still. If
>>> there's something to comment on, I'll comment on it. I use Kook
>>> Alerts to show that there's nothing worth commenting on
>>> specifically usually because it's been refuted time and again or
>>> because it's just too kooky to bother with. You know, Kook Alerts
>>> go out when idiots claim that 9/11 was a Bush inside job with
>>> explosives.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wikking has in fact given a good description of the actual Red State/Blue
>>>>>> State situation.
>>>>>>
>>>>> The Kook Alert is for what is right before the Kook Alert: "The
>>>>> senate really needs to go..."
>>>>
>>>> I don't think it necessarily needs to go, but it does need a major
>>>> overhaul.
>>>>
>>> In what way?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> But regarding the idea that a minority might be able to stop a
>>>>> majority, that's the point of having a constitution. Earl has
>>>>> complained repeatedly that minorities might not be stripped of
>>>>> their power, as if stripping minorities of power is a good thing.
>>>>
>>>> I don't quite understand the part "Earl has complained repeatedly that
>>>> minorities might not be stripped of their power...". Have you added a
>>>> "not"
>>>> where it doesn't belong?
>>>>
>>> Earl *wants* to strip minorities of power. The other poster seems
>>> to think similarly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> The house and senate are populated in different ways. This is a
>>>>> good thing because it means that the mix is different giving there
>>>>> a point in having two houses. If the mix was the same, why have two
>>>>> houses? Depending on the number of people in a state, there could
>>>>> easily be a great difference in representation with each house
>>>>> member, since all states get at least one even if they have a tiny
>>>>> population. The complaint seems to be that the United States isn't
>>>>> a country made up of one giant state.
>>>>
>>>> The complaint is that what was workable in the time of the Founding Fathers
>>>> is not necessarily workable now. What did the Founding Fathers have to say
>>>> about modern communications: telegraph, radio, telephone, television,
>>>> computers?
>>>>
>>> Do you support the single state model? Because I think that the US
>>> is big enough that people in different states should have their own
>>> local control. And without both a house and senate, I suspect that
>>> the rights of sparsely populated states would be swallowed up by a
>>> few large population ones. Basically everything in the US would be
>>> decided by New York, Florida and California.
>>
>> I, too, believe in a certain amount of local control, particularly for local
>> issues like agriculture which depends on local climate. You don't grow
>> oranges in Maine. On the other hand, with the way the Senate is now, you
>> can have local issues clogging national ones. There was a time when the
>> Senator from Washington State was nicknamed "the Senator from Boeing".
>>
> Is that now? And one thing that representatives represent is local
> business.
>
>
>
>
>
>>>> All of these things have made politics a whole new ball game. I
>>>> can personally remember a time when neither television nor computers
>>>> existed
>>>> for the average person. Modern means of communication have done a great
>>>> deal to eradicate many regional differences. For example, Walmart is
>>>> everywhere, and a shopping mall in one state looks just like a shopping
>>>> mall
>>>> in another,
>>>>
>>> There seem to be very different actual views, however, between
>>> those who support Republicans and those who support Democrats.
>>> These has translated into states for purposes of elections.
>>>
>>>
>>>> and people all over the world communicate by Internet. Market
>>>> forces have changed regional landscapes in a good many ways. But the
>>>> Senate
>>>> remains what it was in the late 18th century, when the Founding Fathers
>>>> invented it.
>>>>
>>> I'm not following you, I don't think that they intended to have it
>>> change with time. You seem to be making an argument for one world
>>> government, actually.
>>
>> Actually I'm not. I am merely saying that account has to be taken of all
>> these changes, and the way they have changed regions.
>>
> Why should California get to choose all the people who run the
> government? That seems silly.

My first reaction to this comment was: what a troll! However, I am patient,
and I will explain in more detail what I meant. I was thinking of certain
things like interstate commerce, communication, air pollution, safe foods
and drugs which have to be decided by all because they do not remain limited
to a single area. There has to be harmonization of traffic laws because
people drive from one state to another. On the other hand, water use
policies in individual states or groups of states, coastal fishing policies,
problems such as wildfires and tourism regulation need to be dealt with on a
regional or state basis.

When did I ever say that California should get to choose all the people who
run the government? I would never consider such a thing. You are the silly
one.

Donna Evleth
>
>
>
>
> --
> Tiger tells eleven mistresses, "I will leave my wife for you."

From: Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously) on 31 Dec 2009 13:59


Donna Evleth wrote:
>
> > From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
> > <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
> > Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave to
> > those who come after us.
> > Newsgroups:
> > alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,re
> > c.travel.europe
> > Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:20:14 +0000
> > Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not
> > shownbyourMSManywhere: American interstate billboard
> >
> >
> >
> > Donna Evleth wrote:
> >>
> >>> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
> >>> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
> >>> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave to
> >>> those who come after us.
> >>> Newsgroups:
> >>> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,
> >>> re
> >>> c.travel.europe
> >>> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:43:40 +0000
> >>> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shownbyourMSM
> >>> anywhere: American interstate billboard
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Donna Evleth wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
> >>>>> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
> >>>>> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we leave
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> those who come after us.
> >>>>> Newsgroups:
> >>>>> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politic
> >>>>> s,
> >>>>> re
> >>>>> c.travel.europe
> >>>>> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:03:32 +0000
> >>>>> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shown
> >>>>> byourMSM
> >>>>> anywhere: American interstate billboard
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Donna Evleth wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From: "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep furiously)"
> >>>>>>> <tribuyltinafpant(a)yahoo.co.uk>
> >>>>>>> Organization: Our legacy is not the lives we lived but the lives we
> >>>>>>> leave
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> those who come after us.
> >>>>>>> Newsgroups:
> >>>>>>> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.polit
> >>>>>>> ic
> >>>>>>> s,
> >>>>>>> re
> >>>>>>> c.travel.europe
> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 06:16:08 +0000
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not shown by
> >>>>>>> ourMSM
> >>>>>>> anywhere: American interstate billboard
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Wikking wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> One thing to note. Despite the Red State apparent domination of the
> >>>>>>>> landscape, they have a far lesser population than the Blues. Hence,
> >>>>>>>> fewer elected representatives in the House. However, what they do
> >>>>>>>> have, which makes the US not as Democratic as you would think, is two
> >>>>>>>> senators for each red state. In effect this means that the senate is
> >>>>>>>> the ultimate arbitrator of any legislation and, in effect, senators
> >>>>>>>> representing minorities can overturn the will of the majority.
> >>>>>>>> The senate really needs to go...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Kook Alert.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Kook alert, the definition: Bill Bonde's response to posters who have
> >>>>>> said
> >>>>>> something he disagrees with.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> No, it is used to alert the public that kooky materials are being
> >>>>> posted that aren't worth responding directly to, either because
> >>>>> they have been refuted time and again or because they are just nuts
> >>>>> from first blush.
> >>>>
> >>>> I stand by my original definition.
> >>>>
> >>> You've attempted that before and yet it's exactly wrong still. If
> >>> there's something to comment on, I'll comment on it. I use Kook
> >>> Alerts to show that there's nothing worth commenting on
> >>> specifically usually because it's been refuted time and again or
> >>> because it's just too kooky to bother with. You know, Kook Alerts
> >>> go out when idiots claim that 9/11 was a Bush inside job with
> >>> explosives.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Wikking has in fact given a good description of the actual Red State/Blue
> >>>>>> State situation.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> The Kook Alert is for what is right before the Kook Alert: "The
> >>>>> senate really needs to go..."
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't think it necessarily needs to go, but it does need a major
> >>>> overhaul.
> >>>>
> >>> In what way?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>> But regarding the idea that a minority might be able to stop a
> >>>>> majority, that's the point of having a constitution. Earl has
> >>>>> complained repeatedly that minorities might not be stripped of
> >>>>> their power, as if stripping minorities of power is a good thing.
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't quite understand the part "Earl has complained repeatedly that
> >>>> minorities might not be stripped of their power...". Have you added a
> >>>> "not"
> >>>> where it doesn't belong?
> >>>>
> >>> Earl *wants* to strip minorities of power. The other poster seems
> >>> to think similarly.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>> The house and senate are populated in different ways. This is a
> >>>>> good thing because it means that the mix is different giving there
> >>>>> a point in having two houses. If the mix was the same, why have two
> >>>>> houses? Depending on the number of people in a state, there could
> >>>>> easily be a great difference in representation with each house
> >>>>> member, since all states get at least one even if they have a tiny
> >>>>> population. The complaint seems to be that the United States isn't
> >>>>> a country made up of one giant state.
> >>>>
> >>>> The complaint is that what was workable in the time of the Founding Fathers
> >>>> is not necessarily workable now. What did the Founding Fathers have to say
> >>>> about modern communications: telegraph, radio, telephone, television,
> >>>> computers?
> >>>>
> >>> Do you support the single state model? Because I think that the US
> >>> is big enough that people in different states should have their own
> >>> local control. And without both a house and senate, I suspect that
> >>> the rights of sparsely populated states would be swallowed up by a
> >>> few large population ones. Basically everything in the US would be
> >>> decided by New York, Florida and California.
> >>
> >> I, too, believe in a certain amount of local control, particularly for local
> >> issues like agriculture which depends on local climate. You don't grow
> >> oranges in Maine. On the other hand, with the way the Senate is now, you
> >> can have local issues clogging national ones. There was a time when the
> >> Senator from Washington State was nicknamed "the Senator from Boeing".
> >>
> > Is that now? And one thing that representatives represent is local
> > business.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>> All of these things have made politics a whole new ball game. I
> >>>> can personally remember a time when neither television nor computers
> >>>> existed
> >>>> for the average person. Modern means of communication have done a great
> >>>> deal to eradicate many regional differences. For example, Walmart is
> >>>> everywhere, and a shopping mall in one state looks just like a shopping
> >>>> mall
> >>>> in another,
> >>>>
> >>> There seem to be very different actual views, however, between
> >>> those who support Republicans and those who support Democrats.
> >>> These has translated into states for purposes of elections.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> and people all over the world communicate by Internet. Market
> >>>> forces have changed regional landscapes in a good many ways. But the
> >>>> Senate
> >>>> remains what it was in the late 18th century, when the Founding Fathers
> >>>> invented it.
> >>>>
> >>> I'm not following you, I don't think that they intended to have it
> >>> change with time. You seem to be making an argument for one world
> >>> government, actually.
> >>
> >> Actually I'm not. I am merely saying that account has to be taken of all
> >> these changes, and the way they have changed regions.
> >>
> > Why should California get to choose all the people who run the
> > government? That seems silly.
>
> My first reaction to this comment was: what a troll!
>
You don't seem to know what "troll" means.


> However, I am patient,
> and I will explain in more detail what I meant. I was thinking of certain
> things like interstate commerce, communication, air pollution, safe foods
> and drugs which have to be decided by all because they do not remain limited
> to a single area. There has to be harmonization of traffic laws because
> people drive from one state to another. On the other hand, water use
> policies in individual states or groups of states, coastal fishing policies,
> problems such as wildfires and tourism regulation need to be dealt with on a
> regional or state basis.
>
> When did I ever say that California should get to choose all the people who
> run the government? I would never consider such a thing. You are the silly
> one.
>
You said that you wanted everyone to elect all the senators and
house members. That would mean that the biggest state would elect
only people from the biggest state. This is why the small states
are given protections. The process exists to protect the minority.
From: editor on 31 Dec 2009 14:23
On Dec 31, 11:20 am, "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep
furiously)"
> Why should California get to choose all the people who run the
> government?

Let the illegal aliens and their ethnic kinsmen in Kalifornia take
Kalifornia as they dream of a new nation of "Aztlan" or making it an
additional state of Mexico - and we'll be freed of not only the
illegals, but Kalifornia. The Democrats never will dream of
controlling Congress - or winning the White House - again.

http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com - your source for hard-to-find stuff!
From: Donna Evleth on 1 Jan 2010 07:15


> From: "editor(a)netpath.net" <editor(a)netpath.net>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups:
> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,re
> c.travel.europe
> Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 11:23:06 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Internet and CB chatter exclusive of course not
> shownbyourMSManywhere: American interstate billboard
>
> On Dec 31, 11:20�am, "Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep
> furiously)"
>> Why should California get to choose all the people who run the
>> government?
>
> Let the illegal aliens and their ethnic kinsmen in Kalifornia take
> Kalifornia as they dream of a new nation of "Aztlan" or making it an
> additional state of Mexico - and we'll be freed of not only the
> illegals, but Kalifornia. The Democrats never will dream of
> controlling Congress - or winning the White House - again.

Why do you spell it "Kalifornia"? That is certainly not a Spanish spelling.
Words in Spanish almost never being with "K", and the few that do are
generally borrowed from another language.

Donna Evleth


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BACILLUS SUBTILIS ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Next: Vietnam Hotel & Resort, Vietnam Hotel information