Jones Beene wrote: > ... Already Obama is being compared to JFK.
"Already"? That comparison was being made at least six months before the election. But seriously, so what? Kennedy and Johnson worked to get us into Vietnam. Nixon worked to get us out of Vietnam. Perhaps the more apt comparison would therefore be with Nixon (but nobody's making that comparison ... I wonder why not...) > ... Jack Ruby was Oswald's biological father. Weird if true but aside from that, who cares? It doesn't implicate anybody. If anything it makes the whole conspiracy theory thing seem less likely. > There is no indication that Ruby, who > was itenerate at the time, was ever associated with Oswald's mother, > except for the Butler revelation- so it is very easy to dismiss. So it's irrelevant *and* implausible *and* an unsupported allegation. [ ... ] > There is no assurance that even the Secret Service has not been > infiltrated by Cheney. So he may be secret member of the Secret Service, working under cover? > Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan asked congressional leaders in > April to extend Cheney’s security detail beyond January So what? So he'll have a government-provided bodyguard for a few extra months. Why should we care? > This is not without precedent but scary. How on Earth is this *scary* ??? Because he'll have the ear of some common SS agents? Because he may hypnotize them or something, or shoot one of them by accident? If Cheney's pulling strings in the SS it's not by flirting with the guys with guns and bugs in their ears who are sleeping on his couch every night, that's for sure. His connections are surely just a bit higher level than that. Obama had SS coverage months before anyone running for president normally gets it, because somebody in the government thought he was at risk. Is that scary, too? > Former agency officials said the request is reasonable considering the > war in Iraq, the terrorism threat and the "unusually active role Cheney > played in Washington". No kidding. Right -- no kidding, this is obvious. So, again, how is this "scary"? > They did not mention any special need for Cheney to stay in touch with > the same people who will be protecting Obama. The "same people" will be various Secret Service agents. What's it mean for Cheney to "stay in touch" with them, anyway? If he's pulling strings in the SS it's not going to be by running numbers through individual agents assigned to guard duty, that's for sure! Do you really think Cheney's putting the make on agents assigned to him, who then may rotate off to Obama, where they're going to shoot Obama as a result of the "influence" Cheney peddled to them while they were over at Dick's house "protecting" him? What's he doing to "turn" them? Is he bribing them, or getting them free crack (or cheap gasoline), or what? Does this make any sense at all? If that's not what you had in mind, then what on Earth did you mean when you said it's "scary" that Cheney's getting protection for a few extra months -- protection which he, arguably, really needs? > Guess we have to trust out govenrment on that one, no? On which one? The job of providing bodyguards to government honchos? Yeah, I'd say so. Farming it out to Blackwater probably wouldn't be such a good idea.
