Net Llama! wrote:
On 11/09/2004 03:40 PM, Alma J Wetzker wrote:

Collins Richey wrote:

I just finished reading the Sunday opinion section for post election
commentary, and the results are pretty much what I would expect from
the usual suspects and a few contra opinions from those who really
understood. There were the expected "the voters are ddduuummmbbb" "the
Bible thumpers are in control" and "imbecilic war" columns. There was
one neutral column, and a total of three in favor of the results. The
really positive note came with two separate columns (both Democrats
concerned for their party) that stressed how far out of touch the
party has become with the average citizen. Of course we had the usual
laugh from Molly Ivins who is convinced that GWB is responsible for
the slow withdrawal of Vioxx from the drug market. This is not even in
the news category: Everyone knows that Republicans are responsible for
all evils, and Molly never lets us forget it.

I listened to Rush Limbaugh today. I don't always agree with Rush, but
I get more real information from one of his programs that most other
programs. Rush is prone to gloat and to beat his own drum, but I can
ignore that. He has a superb news gathering staff, and his satire is
really good. Today (in addition to beating his own drum with recent
speeches of his own) he played lengthy excerpts from Carole ???? a
newswoman. The net effect was her complaint that young people these
days hang on cell phones and never listen to the standard news
sources. The reason, of course: their parents have been dumbed down
and are passing their stupidity on to their children!

At least the leftists won't have John Ashcroft to kick around any longer.



Please be careful about using Rush as a source for news. Some of his information comes from the same tree that Michael Moore shakes. (I admire Rush, he turned politics into something that people get passionate about. He got people interested again.)


He got people who agree with his slant interested. Those who disagreed really didn't need him to take an interest in the world around them

I grew up in Missouri. I truly admire John Ashcroft. He is a man of true Christian convictions. If more "Christians" lived their life like him, there would be much less hostility and hatred in this world. I had


Other than the hostility and hatred that he bred with his behavior. Apparently separate of church & state is just a suggestion as far as he was concerned.

occasion to meet with John Ashcroft several times and found him to be unflinchingly honest and have impeccable integrity. Ashcroft lost the senate because he would not attack a recent widow, in spite of her venom


He was losing the election before his competitor died in that plane.


It was a dead heat before Carnahan died.

toward him in the last weeks. The John Ashcroft I know is NOTHING like the Ashcroft scarecrow reported in the press. The media portrait of Ashcroft is some sort of bogey man that folks should be afraid of. That is not reality, even outside my head.


I don't know of anyone that fears him. They just detest his wanton ability to stomp on civil liberties, while injecting religion into government afairs.


I don't know where you formed you opinion of the man. The caricature you are describing does not match John Ashcroft. John Ashcroft's only visible failing that I can see is that he is a conservative.


    -- Alma
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsub/Pause/Etc -> http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general

Reply via email to