Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Response to 'Kerry to blame for 9/11' gibberish

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:14 PM
Original message
Response to 'Kerry to blame for 9/11' gibberish
Suggestions, additions, tweaks etc. are gratefully welcome.

===

9/11 Nonsense

The attacks of September 11 have become, morosely, a political football. The Bush for President campaign is running commercials that display burning towers and the faces of brave firefighters, said firefighters being played by actors. Despite outraged howls of real firefighters, who were joined in rage by family members of 9/11 victims, the commercials continue to run. Bush believes his leadership in the aftermath of the attacks should be a campaign issue, and so there it is.

In truth, however, September 11 became a political football on September 11. Conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan, in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, blamed the Clinton administration. "The decision to get down and dirty with the terrorists, to take their threat seriously and counter them aggressively, was simply never taken,” wrote Sullivan. Senator Orrin Hatch referred in 1996 to the terrorist threats, threats which compelled Clinton to attempt the passage of a comprehensive anti-terrorism bill that would have gone a long way to stopping 9/11, as “Phony threats.” After September 11, he joined the ‘Blame Clinton’ chorus.

During his administration, Clinton offered legislation that would give the Treasury Secretary broad powers to ban foreign nations and banks from accessing American financial markets unless they cooperated with money-laundering investigations that would expose and terminate terrorist cash flows. The legislation was killed by Texas Republican Senator Phil Gramm, who was chairman of the Banking Committee. At the time, he called the bill “totalitarian.” It was revealed later, of course, that Gramm killed the bill because it would have blocked Enron officers from laundering stolen stockholder money through the same offshore conduits the terrorists were using. Gramm, from Texas, was beholden to Enron, and killed the bill at their behest. Of course, he joined the ‘Blame Clinton’ chorus after the attacks, and never mind the facts.

There was Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell blaming the attacks on gays, feminists and the ACLU a couple of days after the horror. They claimed the attacks were God’s justice being levied against America for tolerating such people. No one quite explained the glaring hole in this logic – if the terrorists were acting as an instrument of God’s justice, doesn’t that mean the terrorists themselves are blameless instruments of the Lord? – but in the end, the message was clear. Liberals like Clinton were to blame for the attacks.

The list goes on. September 11 became a political football on that very day, and it has since been punted all over the playing field. The GOP has tried relentlessly to throw the blame at Clinton, but on Tuesday, the game took a bizarre new turn. According to an editorial in the New York Post, John Kerry is to blame for the attacks of September 11. Yes, you read that right. John Kerry did it.

The article, written by Paul Sperry and titled “The Warning Kerry Ignored,” claims that Kerry was given a warning some months before the attacks of security problems at Logan Airport, where two of the planes originated, and failed to handle them properly. He sent the warning, received from an FAA agent in Boston, to the Department of Transportation’s Office of the Inspector General. According to this FAA agent, and according to Sperry, this wasn’t good enough. Because of Kerry’s failure, the article argues, 3,000 people are dead.

Hm.

The Bush administration received a blizzard of warnings before September 11 that something huge was about to happen. The security agencies of Germany, Israel, Egypt and Russia delivered specific warnings about airplanes being used as bombs against prominent American targets. FBI agents were raising alarms in Minnesota and Arizona. Donald Kerrick was a deputy National Security Advisor in the late Clinton administration. He stayed on into the Bush administration. He was a three-star General, and absolutely not political. He has reported that when the Bush people came in, he wrote a memo about terrorism, al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. The memo said, “We will be struck again.” As a result of writing that memo, he was not invited to any more meetings. No one responded to his memo. He felt that, from what he could see from inside the National Security Council, terrorism was demoted.

Richard Clarke was Director of Counter-Terrorism in the National Security Council. He has since left. Clark urgently tried to draw the attention of the Bush administration to the threat of al Qaeda. Richard Clarke was panicked about the alarms he was hearing regarding potential attacks. Clarke was at the center of what has since become a burning controversy: What happened on August 6, 2001? It was on this day that George W. Bush received his last, and one of the few, briefings on terrorism. According to reports, the briefing stated bluntly that Osama bin Laden intended to attack America soon, and contained the word “hijacking.” Bush responded to the warning by heading to Texas for a month-long vacation. It is this briefing that the Bush administration has refused to divulge to the committee investigating the attacks.

There was not a single Republican member of Congress who ever raised a single question or put a query to the Clinton National Security Council about its efforts against terrorism before the attacks. When the Clinton team left office, their National Security group conducted three extensive briefings of the incoming Bush people. Their attitude was, essentially, dismissive, that it was a “Clinton thing.” Condoleezza Rice has admitted that the massive file on al Qaeda and bin Laden left for her by outgoing National Security Advisor Sandy Berger went completely unread until the attacks had taken place.

One FAA agent delivered a security warning that was forwarded to the proper agency by the Senator who received it. Meanwhile, dozens of alarm bells were blaring in the White House, and especially in the Oval Office, about impending attacks using airplanes against prominent targets. This particular chapter of the 9/11 blame game would be uproariously hilarious if it were not so completely absurd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
slinkerwink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. hmm...
"The attacks of September 11 have become, morosely, a political football. The Bush for President campaign is running commercials that display burning towers and the faces of brave firefighters, said firefighters being played by actors."

I'd take out the word "said" and put in "the faces of actors who were paid to be firefighters." It might have more impact that way.

Otherwise, the rest of the article is fine.;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. agree
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
32. absolutely
really "sticks" it in the readers face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetroLounge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
37. or brave actors playing firefighters.
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Well written as always William
I wouldn't change a thing about it! Great work!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElementaryPenguin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. Well done. It IS patently absurd, and I pray they keep it up!
Let's all keep a spotlight on WHO WAS WARNED ABOUT A POTENTIAL 9-11, shall we??

:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safi Donating Member (218 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. Time magazine article
I know you are aware of this lengthy Time article, but here is the link nonetheless. It has some juicy quotes that might be helpful. For instance...

<i>"Berger attended only one of the briefings-the session that dealt with the threat posed to the U.S. by international terrorism, and especially by al-Qaeda. "I'm coming to this briefing," he says he told Rice, "to underscore how important I think this subject is." Later, alone in his office with Rice, Berger says he told her, "I believe that the Bush Administration will spend more time on terrorism generally, and on al-Qaeda specifically, than any other subject."</i>

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,333835,00.html

-Safi
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. Excellent as usual....n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKNancy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. Kerry's office also said they sent it to the GAO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
molly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
7. GREAT - as always, but
"Richard Clarke was Director of Counter-Terrorism in the National Security Council. He has since left. Clark urgently tried to draw the attention of the Bush administration to the threat of al Qaeda."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MsUnderstood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. check your clarke spellings
Richard Clarke was Director of Counter-Terrorism in the National Security Council. He has since left. Clark urgently tried to draw the attention of the Bush administration to the threat of al Qaeda.

You've got clark in the second sentence missing an E.

Really good read!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chelsea0011 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
9. Pat Robertson said Nixon had more character than Kerry
And dough boy Chris Matthews backed him up by agreeing with xenophobe Pat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. Some info on the author
http://www.wnd.com/speakers/psperry.asp

Is this guy really a pirrahna or just an opportunistic junkie? He seems to have quite a "list" of people he enjoys writing on. From "Clinton-gate," where he was banned from the WH to his AWOL story on Bush.

Can't quite figure out who this guy pulls for--maybe just himself--but he seems to be quite popular on FOX.

I hate reporters who sit on both sides of the fence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynzM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #10
35. Why do you hate them?
Doesn't that mean they're slightly better than those who blindly spin everything to make one person/party look better?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #35
40. first of all
Edited on Tue Mar-16-04 10:41 PM by devrc243
"blindly spin" is an understatement for some like Chris Matthews who habitually spins and straddles the fence to suit his "flavor" for the night.

Second of all, there's something to be said for an unspoken kind of "integrity."

It's one thing to show honest debate of the issues, but it's another to slander and smear one's character just because they feel the "school-yard" bully may be watching, but then some just like the sleeze of it all.

Nonetheless, this reporter, Paul Sperry, who wrote this smear about Kerry is only out for himself, therefore putting him in the "all of the above" category. I read quite a few articles of his today and his motives became crystal clear--opportunistic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GainesT1958 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
11. One of the most OBVIOUS reasons 9/11 happened...
Was that Dub & Co. ignored the facts that Clinton left them...and that Sandy Berger sought to brief them on shortly after they came to power. They were hell-bent on implementation of the P.N.A.C. blueprint and invading Iraq, period. They didn't care about al Quaeda or Osama...until his henchmen made real what they'd been warned about for months.

How could John Kerry have ignored anything...when it was the Executive Branch's repsonsibility to take care of our security?

Typical repsonse from the Bushies...after all, with them:

"The buck stops ANYWHERE but HERE!" :eyes:

B-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. Thanks Will!
This, along w/ donating to Kerry, helped a bit to assuage my anger.

I owe you a shot of your choice on Sat. for this one!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Howardx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
13. seems like a can of worms..
the admin wouldnt really want opened up to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rumguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
14. tl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Sleep with one eye open
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
15. Any way to work in the Pontius Pilate remark
that just stood out to me as the most outrageous remark in the editorial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ParanoidPat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
16. BREAKING: Kerry warned Bush* Administration of 911 Security Lapses
DU News Service


KERRY ISSUED LOGAN SECURITY WARNING PRIOR TO 911



by ParanoidPat for DUNS :evilgrin:



New York - Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry is embroiled in a new controversy today as details emerged in the NY Post of security fears raised by a former FAA employee and passed on to the Massachusetts's Senator. According to the Post report, Brian Sullivan, a retired FAA special agent from the Boston area claims to have issued the warning in May 2001 in a two page letter to the Senator. Sullivan said he personally warned Kerry that Logan was ripe for a "jihad" suicide operation possibly involving "a coordinated attack."

On May 6, 2001 Boston TV station Fox-25 made public a story by reporter Deborah Sherman on an undercover investigation at Logan that Sullivan and another retired agent, Steve Elson, helped set up, possibly aiding the 911 hijackers by tipping them off to the vulnerabilities in security at Logan. The report cited that in nine out of 10 tries, a crew got knives and other weapons through security checkpoints - including the very ones exploited by the 9/11 hijackers.

In a bizarre twist, NY Post columnist Paul Sperry blames the Senator for the attacks that originated at Logan and subsequently devastated the World Trade Center in New York City. Although Kerry told the Boston Globe that he'd triggered an undercover probe of Logan security by the General Accounting Office in June 2001, and the Bush* Administrations FAA and DOT failed to act to bolster security at the airport in light of the findings of the security probes, Sperry holds Kerry responsible for not personally following up on the inaction of the DOT and FAA.

Sullivan wrote, "Where was Kerry's sense of urgency? Where was his leadership? These are fair questions to ask of someone vying for Bush's job." It is the opinion of this writer that these are also fair questions for someone holding Bush*'s job. Let's hope someone can squeeze them in during Bush*'s 1 hour before the 911 commission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #16
38. Yep, offense, not defense
I must say, I like your approach better. Will's piece is excellent too, but this sums it up: "These are fair questions to ask of someone vying for Bush's job." It is the opinion of this writer that these are also fair questions for someone holding Bush*'s job."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ParanoidPat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. Keep in mind that Will is writing for people like us,.....
.....those who can handle an in-depth discussion of the facts surrounding a complex subject. The piece I threw together is basically a NY Post column turned inside out to place the facts on the outside. ;-)

IOW, written for Joe Six Pack. :evilgrin:

FACT: FAA knew security was bad at Logan by their own testing.

FACT: FAA failed to act according to their own employee.

FACT: FAA employee notified Senator Kerry of his concerns.

FACT: Kerry delivered the message to the Administration prompting GAO investigation.

FACT: GAO failed to act.

FACT: FOX reported the results of the undercover investigation before any changes were made thereby alerting possible terrorists and the government to the situation at Logan.

FACT: Three different departments in the Bush* Administration, the FAA, DOT & GAO all failed to act in spite of the media coverage of the situation.

FACT: The hijackers did exactly what FOX reported was possible.

Those are the facts, they can't be denied. But the relative importance of the facts can be spun. I just wanted to take this version out for a spin to see how well it sticks in the corners. :)

I believe this Administration is far too preoccupied with what words are being used in the media rather than the civic responsibility of the media in what information they present. Broadcasting details of serious security issues and outing deep cover CIA agents who are actively involved in stopping the proliferation of nuclear materials to terrorist groups are far more dangerous to the public at large than use of any particular word IMHO. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
18. Nice piece. Has a smooth flow of the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
20. Minor comments
Is it really a political football? Are both sides using it to play a game? Or is it mostly one side? Is there another more effective analogy? Maybe it's more like a child custody dispute? Okay, that's a bad, but you know what I mean. I would revise the first sentence so the word morose is not in such close proximity to 9/11. Move it closer to Bush who is morose because his eagerness to wear his "badge" (remember the badge he took from the mother of the dead cop?) of glory is fading in a haze of criticism. Maybe that's what it is. For Bush, 9/11 has become a medal to pin on his chest like a badge. But not one he's earned. That's why the image is so offensive.

Also, I'd revise this sentence thus:

The Bush for President campaign is running commercials that display burning towers and the faces of brave firefighters, said firefighters being played by actors.

"The Bush for President campaign is running commercials that display burning towers and the faces of brave firefighters whose actions have been recreated by professional actors in a paid political ad."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
21. Beautiful...just fucking beautiful...here's some nitpicks
:)

"It was on this day that George W. Bush received his last, and one of the few, briefings on terrorism."

That just reads a little funny and I have no idea how to fix it. But it does have an agreement problem - if you take out the part between the commas it says "...Bush recieved his last briefings on terrorism". That ain't quite right. :)

"It is this briefing that the Bush administration has refused to divulge to the committee investigating the attacks."

Is it the briefing they refuse to divulge or the contents of the breifing?

Anyway...otherwise it's wonderful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DinahMoeHum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
22. Love that next-to-last paragraph. . .
It articulates what I've been thinking: The Bush Administration didn't merely drop the baton Clinton/Gore gave them; they flung it into a dumpster.

Spiteful mofos.

:evilfrown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LandOLincoln Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
23. Beautiful. Just two minor copy edits--one of which,
The Clarke/Clark spelling, has already been caught by another eagle eye.

However, I'd change "morosely" to "absurdly," or "grotesquely," or something like that. People get morose, not events.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
never cry wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
24. Nice piece Will
One grammar question, the next to last para, this sentence:

When the Clinton team left office, their National Security group conducted three extensive briefings of the incoming Bush people.

shouldn't it read:

When the Clinton team left office, their National Security group conducted three extensive briefings for the incoming Bush people.

Also, from a post in a thread by OKNancy, this guy Sullivan apparently just now is having a problem:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic...

---
Article by Sullivan, and about him.
( the retired FAA guy)
----------

Edit:

Here is the post..better over here anyway

Brian Sullivan ( the retired FAA guy they are using to smear Kerry)

http://www.freedomtocare.org/page213.htm

Read the whole thing....

and this:

Sullivan says Sen. Kerry responded to his letter and asked the

Department of Transportation's Inspector General look into the matter.

"I think Sen. Kerry did get it to the right people and they were

about to take action."

The FAA also responded, but in a way that left Sullivan unconvinced

that anything would happen anytime soon.
---------

Edit: in this article, written by Sullivan he blames DOT,FAA and the Airlines

http://www.insightmag.com/news/2002/06/17/FairComment/Dot-Faa.And.Airl ...

-----------
An article from 9-12-2001
Sullivan is quoted but makes no mention of Kerry or blames Kerry one single time.

http://www.insightmag.com/news/2002/06/17/FairComment/Dot-Faa.And.Airl ...

------------
9-14-01

http://www.seacoastonline.com/2001news/9_14_sb2.htm

Brian Sullivan, who retired in January as an FAA risk management specialist in the New England, said he warned federal authorities as early as May of security problems at Logan. He even suggested then that the airport was vulnerable to multiple hijackings.

"Think what the result would be of a coordinated attack which took down several domestic flights on the same day," Sullivan wrote in a letter to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. "The problem is that with our current screening system, this is more than possible. We don't have to wait for a tragedy to occur to act."

Kerry's office said it took Sullivan's concerns seriously and sent his letter, along with a news video Sullivan had included, to the General Accounting Office for review.

The GAO did not "give us follow-up on that," said Kerry spokeswoman Kelly Benander.

----------
THis one is good:
http://www.american-reporter.com/2,307/252.html

Sullivan is involved in the lawsuit against the airlines as a whistleblower......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
25. Very nice - is the final version going to be on truthout.org?
I wish I could suggest improvements but it looks very good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. Yes, in about 2 1/2 hours
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. Excellent...
and is this little rant gonna make it into the overview tonight? You know how I love to listen to you rant. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Already done
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. WOOHOO!!!
:)

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
26. Oh, that's good! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 05:18 PM
Response to Original message
27. kickety
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 06:34 PM
Response to Original message
33. Once again
a DUP for Will. (DU Pulitzer))
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zomby Woof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
34. wonderful wealth of info
The material about the '96 bill is priceless. Smackdown time!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynzM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
36. Grammar stuff
has already been addressed, and the article itself is great. Excellent writing!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-17-04 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #36
43. Hi LynzM!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-04 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
39. LINK FOR THIS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ParanoidPat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-17-04 03:04 AM
Response to Reply #39
42. Kick for the night owls!
Will's piece is a must read! :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC