RC> Hello Bob!

 RC> 16 Jun 08 12:31, you wrote to me:

 RC>>> You resented your service 40 years ago, not because 40

 BK>>  Not only did you sip the stupid sauce, not only did you guzzle
 BK>>  the stupid sauce, you are taking it intravenously.

 RC> Drop this line of crap or leave the echo.

 I'm sorry, I do not understand. They get to lay all their shit
 on me constantly, yet I lay a few lines on you and you pop your
 cork?

 Just change the echo name to the right wing preserve.

 RC> You want to whine about someone not quoting something you
 RC> wrote, in this case an entire paragraph, yet you want to
 RC> call me stupid because I am not buying into your side of
 RC> this argument????

 No, because you offer the dumbest arguements to justify not
 enforcing the rule that has been clearly violated.

 Anyone who cannot see that deleting the last half of the line
 changes the meaning must be stupid. Or, perhaps not have English
 as his first language. That could be the reason.

 ...

 BK>>  Bill Clinton did not demean the service of those who did serve.
 BK>>  Remember, that was the whole point.

 RC> Ok, whose service has been demeaned?

 Mine, Wilson's and Ackley's.

 RC> The fact that you served a full commitment is something you
 RC> should be thanked for and I do thank you, nor do I recall
 RC> ever slighting your service, have I?

 I did not say *YOU* did. That original was addressed to Hulett.

 RC>>> There does appear to be a gap in your logic, if people
 RC>>> believe as you do, you had no regret over serving but if
 RC>>> they violate Klahns law by not sharing your idealogy, you
 RC>>> do resent it, that does not compute.

 BK>>  It doesn't compute because you seem to have some snake ancestry
 BK>>  and can't follow a straight line to save your life.

 RC> My ancestry reaches back into the old country, to Royalty
 RC> in Scotland and England.

 Everybody's ancestry reaches back to Royalty, if you can follow
 it throughly enough.

 OTOH, Royalty tended to be a bit self centered and dishonest...
 soooo...

 RC>>> Using my lifetime as a rain gauge, William Jefferson
 RC>>> Clinton is the only US President whom did not don the
 RC>>> uniform of our military.

 BK>>  And that is likely to change, within the rest of your lifetime.
 BK>>  And I have repeatedly expressed my support for universal
 BK>>  military service, which cannot be made retroactive, but would
 BK>>  keep that from happening again. And it is all moot to this
 BK>>  discussion.

 RC> An all voluntary military is the best way to insure we have
 RC> people there whom /want/ to be there, as opposed to people
 RC> there because the law mandated them being there. Many of

 *IF* that is defined as the good... yes. If it's not, then it
 should not be done. After the original training duty the
 military would become voluntary for regular military duty.

 RC> our foreign allies have compulsory service and I bet their
 RC> militaries arent worth a shit. Of course for us, if we have

 Which ones? I believe Turkey's military is very highly rated.

 RC> a really big war, we are likely going to have to have a
 RC> draft?

 And if we have universal military service, we will be prepared.

 RC>>> As above, do you resent his deferments?

 BK>>  When he becomes a chicken hawk I'll resent it. When he demeans
 BK>>  the honorable service of veterans I'll resent it. Until then,
 BK>>  it's yours and Hulett's chicken hawk status I resent.

 RC> What have I chicken hawked or are you like Sauer,
 RC> projecting?

 Are you eager for the war in Iraq? Do you fully support Bush's
 war in Iraq? If not, then I will apologize for that. If so, then
 I will have to ask why you think we should have sent our men and
 women to fight a war without just cause.

 RC>>> For your information, I registered for the draft on my 18th
 RC>>> birthday, the very day of it AAMOF, at the Merrified Va
 RC>>> Post Office.

 BK>>  Wow! I am impressed. I do not remember the exact day I
 BK>>  registered. I do remember the exact day I enlisted. That is the
 BK>>  one that matters.

 RC> You sir enlisted to avoid the draft, for had they drafted

 Yep. Which is why most people did then. Including some who
 joined the Army.

 RC> you, you may not have had much of a choice and might have
 RC> ended up in the Army as a grunt frontline soldier. This is

 The army promised me a job that would have sent me no further
 than Canada, or Alaska. The Air Force never promised me much of
 anything.

 RC> not any attempt to insult you, but lets be honest here,
 RC> enlisting allowed you to select both a branch of service
 RC> and a specialty close to something you wanted.

 Branch of service, yes, speciality, no. Just the general field,
 electronics. No choice within that field.

 RC> As for me, there was no draft or wars in progress when I
 RC> was that age.

 Which means you, and Hulett, did not enlist because there was no
 draft.

 RC>>> I also re-registered to show my updated address down here
 RC>>> in SC, at the onset of Desert Shield/Storm (got a rejection
 RC>>> letter for being too old)

 BK>>  How old were you? 25? Your behavior gives me reason to suspect
 BK>>  you are very young, and childish.

 RC> I was 1.5 months old when JFK was shot..

 You may not be too old to enlist now. If you had served before
 there would be a good chance you would have a skill they would
 need.

 RC> I was born on the 30th day of September in 1963, I have no
 RC> qualms in sharing this info.

 RC> On 30 September 1981, I registered for the draft at the
 RC> afore mentioned Post Office, I was only one month into my
 RC> Senior Year in HS. I want to say I drove straight to the PO
 RC> after I got out of school that day.

 I believe I took a bus, or walked. I didn't have a car then.

 RC> When the stuff began winding up for GW1, I re-registered
 RC> but as noted, rejected because I was 27.

 Oh, hell, you could have been drafted up into your 30's when I
 was that age. Wait a minute, reregistered, or tried to enlist?

 BK>>>>  Esp the ones who lie to demean the service of those who did
 BK>>>>  serve.

 RC>>> You mean Ross Sauer's service...

 BK>>  No, I mean at least three of us who served a full term. I mean
 BK>>  one combat veteran. I mean one career military. And I mean one
 BK>>  who served only 4 years. All honorable service, and far above
 BK>>  anything you chicken hawks ever did.

 RC> Why arent you after Sauer for demeaning the service of
 RC> those whom served one or more terms?

 I do not see Sauer attacking anyone who does not attack him
 first.

 OH, I did shut him down once when he did it in my echo, but
 that's another matter.

 RC>>> He didnt serve, 42 days of basic followed by 23 days that
 RC>>> included:

 RC>>> Probably a day or so of leave

 RC>>> Travel time to his specialty school

 RC>>> Getting injured.

 RC>>> Treated for injury

 RC>>> Being processed out.

 RC>>> He caught (and catches) this grief because he embellished
 RC>>> his service to score points in a debate that didnt require
 RC>>> said embellishment.

 BK>>  Not if you accept your timeline above. And he catches grief
 BK>>  because he dares to dispute with chicken hawks. They screech,
 BK>>  but have no claws.

 RC> You are the one saying those without service shouldnt be
 RC> critical of those who are with, I submit to you that

 Correction: I say they should not demean the service of those
 who did serve.

 RC> Sauer's position is no better in contrast to the angst you
 RC> have over the entire topic, now why arent you setting the
 RC> boy straight?

 Like I said, he jumps on those who jump on him. The right
 wingers around her play playground bullies on him, and he fights
 back. He may not do it well, but he doesn't stop fighting.

 RC> Remember this whole argument over military service has
 RC> roots with Sauer,

 That is bull shit squared. Neither I nor Ackley nor Wilson get
 that shit because we don't like the trash thrown as Sauer, but
 because we do not agree with the right wingers.

 RC> tell him to STFU, perhaps issue a mea
 RC> culpa over his embellishments and this all will wind itself
 RC> down.

 No, it won't. That's the big lie. He was told to admit he
 didn't see a crash. He admitted it, and they still shove it down
 his throat.

 So, it's a lie it will stop, it won't. Which is why I keep
 telling Sauer not to give the right wingers an inch. They will
 nail him with anything he gives them.

 RC> However I think you find it appropriate that Mr 65 days has
 RC> standing to critique Stans service yet 65 days doesnt rate
 RC> to your 1461.

 When Hardegree gets off Sauer's case then Sauer will not have
 any reason to attack him.

 Hardegree contributes nothing but smear and attack. Ross at
 least trys to contribute discussion.

 RC> Double Standard??

 No, one standard. Stop the attacks and the counter attacks stop.
 I have jumped Ross for when I felt he went too far, but I will
 not criticize him for tearing into those who attack him.

 RC>>> and whom he embellished it to was not anyone you yourself
 RC>>> would have ever considered a idealogical enemy.

 BK>>  BFD.

 RC> Just so you are clear, Raymond Yates.. (Jacks brother)

 Don't recall him. Either him.

 RC>>> If it is a bad thing to degrade military service, See
 RC>>> Kerry, then it is equally bad to embellish or exagerate
 RC>>> it...

 BK>>  Well, let's see, Kerry didn't degrade military service, he
 BK>>  earned his medals in combat, well above anything you even
 BK>>  considered doing. Then he came back and told the truth, which
 BK>>  has been twisted into a lie by right wingers ever since. See
 BK>>  "Tiger Force", you fool.

 RC> and then tossed his medals..

 His right. Actually, much more honorable if you believe the war
 is wrong. I have often said, an officer who puts his own career
 ahead of the welfare of the men under him is unworthy to be an
 officer. I don't see what that shouldn't apply esp to a bunch of
 ribbons.

 RC> But he did serve.

 Yes, and well.

 BK>>  And no, it's not equally bad to embellish or exagerate it. That
 BK>>  doesn't strike out at others, degrading it does.

 RC> Embellishment or exageration is done for personal gain, it

 Yeah... and claiming to have worked on A-10s is a real personal
 gain. Sure it is.

 RC> forms the foundations of lies, therefore it does harm
 RC> others, but especially the one doing it.

 Then let's go into Hulett's embellishments, and see how that
 plays out.

 RC>>> If someone came in here having attended one semester of law
 RC>>> school and then called themself a Lawyer, I'd call them out
 RC>>> on it as well.

 BK>>  Yet you don't call out Mimi who claims to have been trained in
 BK>>  psychology, gives out hokey diagnosis, and not only is not
 BK>>  licensed, but won't even admit there is such a thing as a
 BK>>  license for psychologists. IOW, your lines above are nothing but
 BK>>  chicken hawk shit.

 RC> Has she claimed to be a Psychologist?

 When did Ross claim to be a mechanic?

 RC> In the store, about 1.5 years ago, we ran a sale on a
 RC> laptop computer, $399 flat out, no mail in rebates, pay
 RC> sales tax and go. This was a Sunday, we started out with 15
 RC> of them (Nearly 1000 stores in chain, maybe 15 each store)

 RC> The Ad stated:

 RC> Quantities limited

 RC> Limit One

 RC> No rainchecks

 RC> All our ads also state we have the right to limit qty's.

 RC> Had a customer whom came in with his girlfriend, wanted 2
 RC> of them, I said I could only sell him one, I told him that
 RC> since I knew they were together I couldnt do it..

 RC> "He puffed out his chest" and told me he was a Lawyer and
 RC> that the law was on his side, unfortunately he forgot that
 RC> his girlfriend had already told me that he was only
 RC> beginning Law School.

 BFD. That is relevant how? Oh, and I believe you were in the
 wrong. Even if they were together, if they were not family, I
 can't see how you could refuse to sell each one a computer.

 If they were then you would need a lawyer to sort it out.

 RC> Is he your type of guy?

 Nope... nor are you... but that's another matter.

 And Hulett is dispicable. Which is a whole nother level.


BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a