Charlie Nudo, get your facts straight.

On 7 Jun 2005 14:58:39 -0700, "tripping28track"
wrote:

You must be describing John Kerry, his college grades were exposed
today- lower than George W.'s ! Kerry only got a bachelors degree,
while Bush went on to get his masters. snip

Another lie. And Bushie's "Master's" was an MBA...as low as you can
go and still call your sheepskin a "Master's." Many schools even have
abandoned the degree, as it's mostly a sham.

but Kerry only got a bachelors.

wow, good thing we didn't elect Kerry !

he's kind of dumb !

On 7 Jun 2005 19:29:17 -0700, "trippingtoo8track"
wrote:

snipping Noodles' delusional babbling

Wow...7:30 PM! Noodles is on a manic bender! Spewing on "goo goo
groopz" 3 times a day now! TELL me he's not "disturbed...."

Bob, look at your post- you just answered at 1:33 in the morning last
night...

you must be really upset over that 8TH fiasco !

get off the net buddy, you're spending way too much time on here

trippingtoo8track wrote:
Bob, look at your post- you just answered at 1:33 in the morning last
night...

you must be really upset over that 8TH fiasco !

get off the net buddy, you're spending way too much time on here

Something you don't have to worry about since your posting is limited
by being BANNED!

On 8 Jun 2005 03:45:41 -0700, "trippingtoo8track"
wrote:

Bob, look at your post- you just answered at 1:33 in the morning last
night... snip

You obviously don't understand time zones, do you?

Senate Gives FBI More Patriot Act Power


Jun 7, 10:59 PM (ET)


By LAURIE KELLMAN


WASHINGTON (AP) - The FBI would get expanded powers to subpoena records

without the approval of a judge or grand jury in terrorism
investigations under Patriot Act revisions approved Tuesday by the
Senate Intelligence Committee.


Some senators who voted 11-4 to move the bill forward said they would
push for limits on the new powers the measure would grant to law
enforcement agencies.


"This bill must be amended on the floor to protect national security
while protecting Constitutional rights," said Sen. Barbara Mikulski,
D-Md.


Ranking Democrat Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., supported the bill overall
but said he would push for limits that would allow such administrative
subpoenas "only if immediacy dictates."


Rockefeller and other committee members, such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein,

D-Calif., also are concerned that the bill would grant powers to
federal law enforcement agencies that could be used in criminal
inquiries rather than intelligence-gathering ones.


Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said the bill places new checks

and balances on the powers it would grant, such as new procedures that
would allow people to challenge such administrative orders. He called
the Patriot Act "a vital tool in the war on terror" and lauded the
Democrats who voted for it in spite of misgivings.


Portions of the Patriot Act - signed into law six weeks after the Sept.

11 attacks - are set to expire at the end of 2005. The bill would renew

and expand the act.


The bill also must be considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee,
where Feinstein and other Democrats planned to again offer amendments.


Overall, Rockefeller said, the committee gave a nod to most of the
Patriot Act in its first few years fighting the nation's new enemies.


"We concluded that these tools have helped keep America safe ... and
should be made permanent," Rockefeller said in a statement.


Still, civil libertarians panned the bill and the closed-door meetings
in which it was written.


"When lawmakers seek to rewrite our Fourth Amendment rights, they
should at least have the gumption to do so in public," said Lisa
Graves, the ACLU's senior counsel for legislative strategy. "Americans
have a reasonable expectation that their federal government will not
gather records about their health, their wealth and the transactions of

their daily life without probable cause of a crime and without a court
order."


Reply




Sid9 Jun 8, 7:47 pm show options

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.impeach.bush, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.liberalism
From: "Sid9" - Find messages by this author
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 19:47:10 -0400
Local: Wed,Jun 8 2005 7:47 pm
Subject: More Good News From The Bush Administration
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse

AND...bad news for Americans:


"


When lawmakers seek to rewrite our Fourth Amendment rights, they
should at least have the gumption to do so in public," said Lisa
Graves, the ACLU's senior counsel for legislative strategy. "Americans
have a reasonable expectation that their federal government will not
gather records about their health, their wealth and the transactions of

their daily life without probable cause of a crime and without a court
order

yeh, that means 1:33 AM at your house, was actually 4:33 at my house...

pathetic on your part !

On 8 Jun 2005 17:31:22 -0700, "8 track that smells-heil Hitler foreign
scumbag" wrote:

yeh, that means 1:33 AM at your house, was actually 4:33 at my house... snip

No...MORON...timestamps on these postings are all EDT. I was in bed
by midnight.

dB

Seawolf.CC (http://forums.seawolf.cc/index.php)
- Political Debate (http://forums.seawolf.cc/forumdisplay.php?f=3D3)
- - 'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals
(http://forums.seawolf.cc/showthread.php?t=3D4922)

Wrath 11th April 2005 12:16

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

Mon April 11, 2005 9:42 AM GMT-04:00
By Randall Palme

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's minority Liberal government is heading for
defeat at the hands of the Conservatives after more than 11 years in
power, a dramatic new poll predicted on Monday.

The EKOS poll, commissioned by the Toronto Star newspaper, was taken
after an advertising executive raised the stakes in a scandal about
misuse of government cash with testimony of large kickbacks to the
Liberal Party.

The poll, conducted after the executive's testimony was released last
Thursday, showed voter support for the Conservatives rose seven points
to 36.2 percent while the Liberals fell by nine points to just 25
percent.

It was the lowest showing for the Liberals since they took office in
November 1993. Public support for the party dipped as low as 29 percent
in the run-up to last June's election, but the party recovered to poll
36.7 percent on election day.

The newspaper said the figures suggested a late June election, and EKOS
predicted that Conservative leader Stephen Harper would win a minority
government.

"There is little immediately apparent in the political environment ...
to suggest a way back for the Liberals," the paper quoted EKOS pollster
Frank Graves as saying.

The Liberals lost their majority in Parliament in the last election, in
June 2004, in part because of public concern about the cash-for-favors
scandal. They need support from at least one other party in Parliament
to stay in power.

The latest figures point to a far deeper erosion in Liberal support
than was the case so far, especially in the populous province of
Ontario, where there are 106 seats in Parliament.

In a long-awaited breakthrough, the Conservatives were leading the
Liberals by 40 percent to 33 percent in Ontario, probably enough to
take the majority of Ontario's 106 seats.

Graves said the poll pointed to "a breathtaking shift in what had been
a stagnant and listless political landscape."

Hints of polling troubles for the Liberals came come on Saturday when
an Ipsos-Reid poll showed a much-reduced Liberal lead of 34 percent to
30 percent.

But most of that survey was taken before testimony from adman Jean
Brault was released on Thursday.

EKOS polled 1,125 Canadians between Thursday and Saturday, and its
survey is considered accurate to within 2.9 percentage points 19 times
out of 20. The survey gave 20.5 percent support to the leftist New
Democratic Party and 12.6 percent to the separatist Bloc Quebecois,
which runs only in Quebec.

The Liberals currently have 133 of the House of Commons' 308 seats; the
Conservatives 99; the Bloc 54; the NDP 19. There are two independents
and one vacancy.

Harper said last week he wanted to hear more testimony from the inquiry
investigating the spending scandal before triggering an election. The
inquiry is scheduled to finish hearing testimony on May 6.

Harper wants to lower taxes, limit government spending, boost the
military, improve relations with the United States, get tough on crime,
and end gay marriage that is now available, through court decisions, in
most of Canada.

The Liberals say they will invest billions of dollars in health care
and a proposed new national day-care network.

To add to the woes of Prime Minister Paul Martin, backbench Liberal
legislator David Kilgour is making noises that he might defect to the
Conservatives.

Canadian election campaigns must be at least 36 days long, leaving the
possibility of a vote of no-confidence sometime in May and an election
in mid- to late June.

http://www.reuters.ca/locales/c_new...storyID=3D8143460

This is all a result of the Gomery Inquiry. When the Liberals were in
power before the last election and Chretien was the leader, they had a
Sponsorship program running which was designed to promote Canadian
unity and keep Quebec in Canada.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libera...sorship_scandal
This tells about it but the short version is that during the inquiry
the big bombshell is that the Liberals got over a million dollars in
kickbacks. This is enough to bring down the government I think. It will
play itself out over the next few weeks or months. The liberals have a
minority government right now so the conservatives can topple to
government and force an election over this.

jeSilencer 11th April 2005 13:04

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

That's what happens when a party has no real material base.
Conservatives take a stance on something and keep it. Liberals are all
about trying to stand wherever popularity is, and that false core of
beliefs just doesn't cut it.

White Out 11th April 2005 13:06

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeSilencer
That's what happens when a party has no real material base.
Conservatives take a stance on something and keep it. Liberals are all
about trying to stand wherever popularity is, and that false core of
beliefs just doesn't cut it.


Obviously you weren't around or know much about 80's Canadian politics
with Brian Mulrooney and the Conservatives in power then. They may go
down as the worst government in Canadian histoyr, and most hated.

jeSilencer 11th April 2005 13:10

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

I'm basing this on historical record that goes back beyond the 80's...
not just from 1 particular government or administration

White Out 11th April 2005 13:15

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

What a load of poppycock

jeSilencer 11th April 2005 13:24

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

you're right... wait who was it that tried to defend slavery in
America? Oh yeah and what party came along to stop it? :blah:

It's also funny how Clinton only made military strikes on the bad guys
when the spotlight was on him for something he'd done wrong. And the
second a citizen stood up and said they didn't like our soldiers being
in harms way, he pulled out. Guess that wasn't for popularity..

Wrath 11th April 2005 13:32

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

Canadian Liberals and Conservatives are different than American
liberals and conservatives. Even in Canada between federal and
provincial parties the Liberals are liberal in federal politics but in
BC provincial politics the Liberals would be considered the
conservative party. Confusing I know.

White Out 11th April 2005 13:37

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

O please. back when they had slaves in America the Republican party was
more left and liberal then the democrats. Pfft.

Wrath 11th April 2005 13:46

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

My problem here is if they force an election then we are pretty much
stuck with the Conservative party and Harper scares me. I know Sandbox
likes him but some of the key issues worry me. Such as the gay marriage
and marijuana reform for starters. The Conservatives will kill both of
those and I want both of those to go through.

jeSilencer 11th April 2005 14:12

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

lol that's bs dave

i might not know a lot of Canadian politics, but I do know American

Dogg 11th April 2005 14:28

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

I'm still trying to get Canadian elections...I think I grasp it now...

Is what happened in Iraq the same or modelled after Canadas? People
elect the body, and the body picks it's leader with the obvious leading
party voting it's own as a leader?

Kestrel 11th April 2005 15:04

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

gogogo red states

Wrath 11th April 2005 16:14

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

Hmmm Dogg, Each party picks it's leader and that guy/gal becomes the
leader of the party. Then when an election is called each riding has
(for example) a liberal, a conservative, an NDPer, etc etc. running.
When the country goes to vote, you only vote for whoever is running in
your riding. At the end they add up all the votes and the party that
took the most ridings wins. The leader of that party becomes the Prime
Minister of Canada.

When we vote up here and we have those people in our riding to vote
for, some people don't care who is running in their riding, they just
vote for the party they like no matter who it is in their riding.
Others vote for who will represent them best no matter what party they
represent. I generally vote for the party and hold my nose and vote for
whoever it is that represents that party whether I like that person or
not OR in the case of where I am living now I basically throw away my
vote because it is a conservative riding and it matters not how I vote
so I vote for the Marijuana Party.

Dogg 11th April 2005 18:17

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

So, to relate it here..the leader of the DNC...screamer boy...I forget
his name...if the Dems won...he'd be the Prime Miister...correct?

Wrath 11th April 2005 18:51

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

Dean and correct

Dogg 11th April 2005 21:53

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

Thats him!!! tyvm

SandBox 17th April 2005 23:56

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

'Breathtaking' Poll Sees Defeat for Liberals

Hi Anne,

Ya,i still like Harper,and i still consider him Canadian Alliance, we
all know the real reason they merged with the conservatives.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:54.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright =A92000 - 2005, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.