Jump to content

BRH

Community Member
  • Posts

    9,016
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BRH

  1. BRH wants to not even THINK of the fact that they MIGHT be forged...wants to completely ignore even the remote possibility they might be bogus....doesnt even want to question whats going on.

     

    But WE...the people who have not taken whats going on as fact, but are just raising the issue and are waiting to find out the truth are "mindless".

     

    Right.

    25571[/snapback]

    Hypocrisy works both ways. You took the Swifties' word as gospel and effectively dismissed as "mindless" anyone who didn't.

  2. You two are arguing apples & oranges.

     

    The stated budget deficits/surpluses only reflect the annual differences between the revenues & expenses.  In that definition, there have been surpluses.

     

    The true deficit (amount US govt owes in totality) encopmpasses the government debt and other obligations that somehow don't make it into the calculations (imagine that!).  That number has never been in the positive.

    25496[/snapback]

    You're right, but the "deficit" you refer to in the second para is usually called the "national debt," in order to distinguish it from the yearly budget deficits that the Bushes and Reagan, among others, regularly gave us. I was talking about the deficit, not the debt.

  3. And you're ASSUMING they are genuine.

     

    Because of your agenda.

     

    See the problem, pal?

    25420[/snapback]

    I'm assuming they're genuine because you'd have to be a complete F'in IDIOT to run those things on national television two months before an election without authenticating them. And because the White House hasn't challenged their authenticity -- just like with the Swift Boat smears, they're more than happy to let others spread lies so they themselves won't have to. They'd look pretty damn stupid questioning the authenticity of the docs if they, um, turn out to be genuine, wouldn't they?

     

    I'm also assuming they're genuine because the FACTS show it was ENTIRELY possible to create those documents in 1972, and because his superior has corroborated the content of those documents. The people crying forgery are the ones spreading lies -- that you couldn't do proportional spacing in 1972, that closed 4's didn't exist back then, that you couldn't do superscripts, that Times Roman is only available on computers. All lies, and demonstrably so.

     

    But you think they're forgeries. Because of your agenda.

     

    See the problem, pal?

  4. But...but...but...what about the superscript "th"?  That proves they were forged!  This is just like the Democrats...first blow jobs in the Oval Office, now this...  :unsure:

     

    Yes, I'm being sarcastic.  What a load of crap this is all turning out to be...

    25410[/snapback]

    I understand that, Tom, but the annoying thing is that some people will regard it as a load of crap only because some idiots claim the documents are forged -- thereby excusing them from having to consider the implications of them being genuine.

  5. That's right, because Democrats never cheat, steal or LIE, right???!

     

    God damn you are an idiot.

     

    Let's just peruse a list of a few of  the crooks in the Democratic Party's history shall we?

     

    Boss Tweed. The Daleys. The kennedys. The Clintons.

     

    Yeah, some party you give allegiance to, superfreak.

    25378[/snapback]

    What the F does Boss Tweed have to do with the authenticity of these documents?

     

    And as for the idiot comment, :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:

  6. I'll admit the Repubs are pretty goddammned good at this. But they had help.

     

    The Swift Boaters come out with a bunch of lies and it takes the supposedly liberal media three weeks to beat them down with the weight of evidence.

     

    These documents come out and within 24 hours the supposedly liberal media is falling all over itself to try to show they're forgeries.

     

    Christ, people.

     

    1. Times New Roman was invented in 1932. It is not an exclusively "word processing font."

     

    2. IBM had proportional spacing as early as 1941 and it was widely available during the 1960s. The "experts" (who, by the way, have now been outed as partisans) say things like "only a few typewriter models had this capability." Yeah, like the IBM Selectric, which was only the fuggin Microsoft Windows of office typewriters in the 1960s and 1970s.

     

    3. The Selectric had font balls with proportional spacing, Times Roman-like fonts, and superscript "th"s. All this is easily looked up.

     

    4. Who do you think might know more about what Killian was thinking about George Bush in 1973 -- his widow, or his superior? Col. Hodges has already said that the documents reflect Killian's sentiments at the time.

     

    Most people in the media hate Dan Rather and would love to embarrass the stevestojan out of him. They also hate that they got beat on this exclusive. That's what's driving this forgery stevestojan, folks. Not the truth.

  7. I hate the Pats. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: And I hate the Colts for giving the Pats the game. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: And I hate that they didn't recover that last fumble. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:

     

    But I really like this :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: smiley. Comes in real handy at times like these.

×
×
  • Create New...