--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00005 Date: 05/13/98 From: JUSTIN BAUSTERT Time: 10:30pm \/To: TOM GOODMAN (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: Lost Messages TG> lines above mean. Like, I am a habitual record keeper and lousy file TG> keeper. But, my ole pewter DOS thingy can locate all manner of TG> things in these 2 gigs. I have a problem in holding down the copy. TG> Yep. I've got that much copy. So what you are basically trying to tell me is that you read through each and every one of Tom's messages in your 2 gigs of archived messages? Now that I think about it, it might have been Larry.. Look that up, too, if you'd like. TG> In the last 3 lines you fired off, I think your just a bit riled at TG> someone or something, for your commentary doesn't settle for an TG> answer, and it didn't build anyone or anything. You spent 3 lines TG> and accomplished nothing. Therein lies the Liberal intent. Riled is what I would call the participants attacking me every chance they get, placing political views onto me that aren't even close to the truth.. You spent a multitude of lines, and accomplished nothing but to throw "liberal" around as though you actually knew it fit. You don't, it doesn't, what else can I say? TG> be happy on here, try to converse in a nice fashion. Otherwise, for TG> me, I will just jump all posts with your name. I don't like the TG> death tongue of Proverbs and your not taking me with you. I have no problem conversing in a nice fashion when I'm not being attacked. As far as you "jumping" my posts, have at it.. JB --- Telegard/2 v3.09.b17/mL * Origin: Courier Central \ Cashion, OK \ 405.433.2665 (1:147/92) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00006 Date: 04/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 08:41pm \/To: JUSTIN BAUSTERT (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: smoking On 04/27/98 Justin Baustert was overheard discussing Re: smoking with John Sampson JB> JB> I don't recall telling you how to live, but if that indeed were the JB> JS> case, my way is the right way. What you may have read was others JB> JB> putting words into my mouth, as it has happened quite regularly JB> JB> in this very echo. JB> JS> Excuse me? YOUR way is the RIGHT way? My aren't WE a bit presumptive? JB>Correct. Is *your* way not the right way for you? No, we aren't. The connotation that your statement made indicated that you were presumptive in telling someone ELSE that YOUR way was better than theirs. As in "MY way is better, ergo *I* am better than you". As in ARROGANT. JB> JS> Son, you better hunker down and be prepared for some incoming. Tact JB> JS> and diplomacy, I see, aren't your strong suits. JB>I'm not your son, so that is really unnecessary. If I receive "incoming", I JB>figure it will be coming from the mouths of hypocrits, because they probably JB>feel the same. It seems some of us are just looking for a fight anyway. You are quite correct in noting that you are not my son. For my son would be somewhat better mannered than you have been. As for "looking for a fight anyway", it would seem that one who barges into an echo and begins to flame others in total contradiction to the rules of the echo is the one who is "looking for a fight". IOW, YOU, sir, are the one picking the fight here. And therein lies the hypocrisy. Yours. Not ours. We welcome opposing viewpoints based upon fact, not "warm fuzzies" (ie. wishful thinking). We also, just like anyone else, expect a certain amount of respect. If you can't keep a civil tongue in your mouth (figuratively speaking of course due to the medium we are using), then might I suggest a rather simple solution to your distress? Leave. Go away. Bug off. John Sampson Rocky Mountain ILKS ___ X OLXWin 1.00b X Just put your money in the sack and shut up! - Clintonomics --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00007 Date: 04/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 08:48pm \/To: ROBERT CRAFT (Read 0 times) Subj: A new theory On 04/27/98 ROBERT CRAFT was overheard discussing A new theory with JOHN SAMPSON RC> JS> Are you suggesting that if Hillary divorced Bill that RC> JS> Hillary's chances for mounting a successful campaign to get RC> JS> the Democratic nomination for the candidacy for President RC> JS> would be next to nil? RC>Yup - a divorced Hillary would stand revealed as the RC>power-seeking dominatrix that she is. Besides, the RC>convention would never nominate her with indictments RC>hanging over her head. Unless of course she goes on national TV and claims that the indictments are just another part of a "VAST right wing conspiracy". RC> JS> I don't agree with that. I think that if she DID divorce RC> JS> him, that would increase her chances rather nicely, RC> JS> especially with the Feminazis. RC>The Feminazi's are in full retreat - they're even polling RC>their chapters to see if they should enter a Friend of the RC>Court Brief in *support* of Paula Jones' appeal. Unfortunately Ms. Jones didn't get their support. They claim that she has allied herself with too many "right wing extremists". Yeah, as if Patty Ireland hasn't allied herself with too many LEFT wing socialist extremists. Also, Paula got booed when she showed up with bodyguards at a black tie affair (no pun intended here) where the Unagroper showed as well. Something to do with journalists I believe. So much for the vaunted LIbEral "virtue" of being open minded and understanding. Yeah. Right. John Sampson Rocky Mountain ILKS jnsampson@ibm.net --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00008 Date: 04/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 08:53pm \/To: STEVE FRAGNER (Read 0 times) Subj: Gotcha! On 04/27/98 Steve Fragner was overheard discussing Gotcha! with John Sampson SF>-> TE> In honor of April 15th remember this thought: SF>-> SF>-> TE> Tax dollars pay for cleaning the Oval Office carpet. SF> Probably costing a total of $115.00. Wait! SF>Investigating the cause of that dirt is-------------------) SF>$35,000,000!!!!!!! SF> Yes worth all those tax dollars! Got me? You're kidding, right? Let's see if I can explain this to you in terms you can understand. A. The cost of a criminal investigation is irrelevant. In order for the criminal justice system to work properly, we can't budget it like a business. B. If you knew what the average criminal investigation cost, you'd be upset. After all, you put a dollar amount to such an endeavor. C. Lawrence Walsh, of Iran - Contra fame, or is it INFAMY?, spent in excess of $100 million dollars in the same amount of time in the 80s trying to nail Reagan and Bush. He got absolutely nowhere. Oh yeah, let's see, he indicted Cap Weinberger the Friday before the '92 elections only to have that indictment thrown out because the statute of limitations had run out. And he did get a "conviction" against Ollie North only to have it thrown out by an appeals court for violating Ollie's Constitutional rights. Accounting for inflation, it would appear that Mr. Walsh, recently very vocal in criticizing Mr. Starr for his "unfair" tactics, spent a whole bunch of money (more than Starr has) and got a whole lot less "bang for his buck" (make that OUR buck). But you NEVER heard the Republicans complain that it was "costing too much". D. Mr. Starr has indicted several people, and has gotten several convictions. In my book, it's been worth the expense. Even Walsh's investigation, which cost much more and yielded much less, was worth the cost. You see Steve, you can't put a price on justice. It's the price we pay for the system of justice we enjoy. You wouldn't have said it if it was a REPUBLICAN as the target of the investigation and a Democrat conducting it. IOW, where were YOU Stevie Wonder when Bonoir and company were going after Newt Gingrich for a book deal? John Sampson Rocky Mountain ILKS ___ X OLXWin 1.00b X Clintons - The Gang That Couldn't Keep Their Lies Straight --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00009 Date: 04/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 09:01pm \/To: STEVE FRAGNER (Read 0 times) Subj: Taxes On 04/27/98 Steve Fragner was overheard discussing Taxes with John Sampson SF>-> SF> We put into government what we reap. To sow a SF>-> SF> better crop we must plant better seeds. SF>-> SF>-> The only possible connotation one can make of your comment is that SF>-> you believe that Clinton is a bad seed and that we need to do better SF>-> for ourselves. SF>-> Tell me this isn't so, Steve. Otherwise I'd be forced to ask the SF>-> question: SF>-> "Who are you and what have you done with Steve Fragner?" SF>-> SF>-> What I would suggest is that we roto till the current occupants of SF>-> the White House and the Minority side of Congress and start anew. SF> People do not have to agree all the time to agree SF>sometimes. Clinton needs indeed, to do a morality check. SF>He has been of course been encouraged by his "better" SF>"other" 1/2 to act accordingly. SF> But I still am still wholeheartedly upset that my SF>money ($35,0000,000) is being used to tell me what I SF>already know. And of, course nothing will happen in the SF>end...... A. A morality check won't do it for him. Armey was 100% correct when he said that Clinton's moral code is "I'm entitled to do what I can get away with". B. His "better 1/2" as you so ineleqouently put it, can't control him. They sleep in seperate bedrooms. She does "her thing" and he "does his". After all, it was reputed that she and Vince Foster were having an affair. IOW, it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. C. There you go again putting a price tag on justice. See my prior post. D. And knowing what you do now, when you voted, did you vote for the scoundrel? If so, you have no basis to complain. Just remember. There is only ONE person responsible for all this misery that is being heaped on the Administration. And no, his name ISN'T Kenneth Starr. It's none other than Bill Clinton. John Sampson Rocky Mountain ILKS ___ X OLXWin 1.00b X Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make liberal. --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00010 Date: 04/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 09:06pm \/To: STEVE FRAGNER (Read 0 times) Subj: DUI vs. "The Gun" On 04/27/98 Steve Fragner was overheard discussing DUI vs. "The Gun" with John Sampson SF>-> The sad fact of reality is that those who champion gun control aren't SF>-> concerned about public safety. They want the American public SF>-> disarmed. SF> Please explain the source of this argument. ] There are in excess of 17,000 DUI related fatalities a year. There aren't anywhere near that amount of gun related deaths during the same time. Yet no one is screaming that we either have stricter licensing laws for drivers or in some other way control vehicles so that a drunk can't drive it. There is technology presently in existence that could be used to require a person to blow into a breathalyzer which is integrated into a car's ignition system. If the driver is intoxicated, the car doesn't start. However, when this was proposed, it was soundly defeated as an infringement of one's "rights". And quite rightly so. The government's purpose is NOT to intrude in the private lives of its citizens. Yet the gun control lobby is demanding similar measures, as well as more draconian ones, in the form of gun control. However, common sense dictates that a criminal intent in getting a gun will NOT simply waltz into a gun shop and fill out the appropriate forms and subject himself or herself to a criminal history check. It just doesn't work that way. Criminals buy guns through the black market. Or they simply steal them. In short, gun control laws have absolutely no effect in curtailing a criminal's access to a firearm. It DOES curtail a law abiding citizen's right to possess a firearm. Waiting periods don't work. Criminals just don't give a hoot. The only people gun control laws affect are the law abiding ones. Ask yourself this. If those who are in favor of strict gun control are trying to stop the "violence" , then WHY would Schummer and Company, who profess they are trying to make our streets safer, enact laws that seem to blame the inanimate object ie. the gun, instead of placing blame where it rightfully belongs, on the criminal? If they're so interested in curbing crime, then punish the criminal. Don't punish the rest of society for the misdeeds of a few. It's called accountability. And just so you know what I base all of this on, it's in excess of 20 years in law enforcement. With over 15 years as a Federal Agent. Lastly, to remind you. There is this little thing called the Bill of Rights that is supposed to guarantee that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. And the Supreme Court has already decided what the phrase "right of the people" means. Just what one would think it means, the individual citizen. Just like in the 1st Ammendment and the 4th Ammendment. I realize that the 2nd Ammendment is one of those nasty little nuisances that gun control activists can't seem to accept and want to abolish. After all, it's so inconvenient to have a Constitutional right interfering with one's political agenda. John Sampson Rocky Mountain ILKS ___ X OLXWin 1.00b X Words mean things ... except to drive-bys. --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00011 Date: 04/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 09:17pm \/To: TOM ENRIGHT (Read 0 times) Subj: A new theory On 04/27/98 Tom Enright was overheard discussing A new theory with John Sampson TE> DD>John, according to Gary Aldrich in his book "UNLIMITED ACCESS" Inside TE> DD>the Clinton Whitehouse by a former FBI agent, you are right on target. TE> DD>She ran the Whitehouse. Did the hiring and firing, and people ran when TE> DD>she came close. Ordered the secret service to get no closer to her han TE> DD>40 feet. Screamed at Billy Bob in her tantrums and cared less who eard TE> DD>her. If the FBI reccommended someone not to have access to a hitehouse TE> DD>position, she overruled that reccomendation and hired the person TE> DD>anyway. Yep, John...Once more you are right on target! TE> JS> Scary, isn't it? TE>A female, wanna-be Stalin? TE>Scary? TE>You better honk she's scary! Yep. Has me concerned. VERY concerned. She makes no bones about what she thinks is good for us. John Sampson Rocky Mountain ILKS jnsampson@ibm.net ___ X OLXWin 1.00b X Cat, the OTHER white meat. --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00012 Date: 04/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 09:18pm \/To: TOM ENRIGHT (Read 0 times) Subj: Gotcha! On 04/27/98 Tom Enright was overheard discussing Gotcha! with John Sampson TE> JS> What a dreadful thought! Kinda makes you want to send the White House TE> JS> a Bissel Carpet Cleaner!. TE>Is that one of those steam cleaning thingies? It had better be TE>to remove the stains on that carpet. I doubt that anything will TE>remove the stains that Clinton has left on the office itself. Ain't THAT the truth. It'll take more than a few coats of paint. John Sampson Rocky Mountain ILKS jnsampson@ibm.net ___ X OLXWin 1.00b X Clintons - The Gang That Couldn't Keep Their Lies Straight --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F5I00013 Date: 04/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 09:20pm \/To: TOM ENRIGHT (Read 0 times) Subj: DUI vs. "The Gun" On 04/27/98 Tom Enright was overheard discussing DUI vs. "The Gun" with John Sampson TE> JS> The interesting thing is that there is an agency in the Federal TE> JS> government in place that could handle booze control. It's ATF. The A" TE> JS> does stand for Alcohol, after all. TE>BATF is not an agency I want to receive expanded powers or TE>duties. There is already talk of licensing wholesale TE>distributors of tobacco products and "registering" retail TE>sellers. What's next, serial numbers on each pack, DROS TE>paperwork with a background check and a waiting period for each TE>purchase? The BATF bureaucracy has (IMHO) inherited the attitude TE>(guilty until proven innocent) of it's parent agency (IRS). A. BATF already has the jurisdiction. B. Nope. Won't happen. Too many LIbEralS smoke don't you know? It would be infringing on THEIR rights. And that's something we can't have. Messing with the "little people's rights" is one thing. Messing with the hot shots is something else entirely. All one has to do is look at the abject hypocrisy that Carl Rowan demonstrated as it relates to gun control. John Sampson Rocky Mountain ILKS jnsampson@ibm.net TE>T.E. - San Diego Ilks (Sgt. at arms) TE>... If only BATF knew what I was do=2+OX:+4+b+o NO CARRIER TE>___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] TE>--- MysticToss 1.20/Pro TE> * Origin: Guilde of High Sorcery (619)575-8249 San Diego, CA (1:202/1100) ___ X OLXWin 1.00b X Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make liberal. --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725)