|
"Vote for insanity. You know it makes sense." -Lord Sutch
Put my ballot in the mail today. In the past I've gotten a bit weirded out
voting before most everyone else, but what needed to be done this time was so obvious, if galling, that I just did the "all democrats" thing with the realization that if that doesn't work, things will only get worse, whereas if it does work, things may merely stay just as bad. On our ballot the only well-represented third-party is Libertarians. About two out of every three of their basic ideas aren't all that nutty, but when they're wrong, hooboy are they off the deep end nuts. If they ever had an ounce of power they promise to give the national forests away to big business who will of course be excellent guardians of the resources for everyone. And the moon is made of cheese. A civil libertarian myself, it annoys me that the word has become increasingly associated with these crackpots. The Greens weren't well represented on the ballot & the Green presidential candidate is such a screw-loose dipshit anyway; yesterday I heard him actually promising in his swishy Sylvester lisp, "We will fightth for the rightth of animalth and plantth." Well good for you buster, but I'm afraid the plants might outwit you, & by the way, you're embarrassing to environmentalists. Or how about voting Nader -- that'd be like voting for a pot of moldy beans & then when you sit down to eat, surprise surprise, it's still moldy beans. Besides, he still owes me the $20 he stole from me. Constitution party? Is there slogan on women's rights still, "Barefoot & Pregnant & In the Kitchen!" They make crazy-right Bush look like a moderate. They're such fundamentalist twits with zero sense of history, talking about some alternate-world wherein founding fathers weren't Deists & Masons after all, but Baptists, & they're not joking, they really believe their crap is sweet. The Constitution Party makes me miss the Northwest Rhinocerous Party which ran on platforms of party hats & moon colonies & a tiddly-wink in every pot, which made ever so much more logical sense. So while in past years I've liked to vote for the occasional third party, this year there wouldn't've been any non-loony choices anyhow. -paghat the ratgirl -- "Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher. "Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature. -from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers" Visit the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com |
"paghat" wrote in message
... On our ballot the only well-represented third-party is Libertarians. About two out of every three of their basic ideas aren't all that nutty, but when they're wrong, hooboy are they off the deep end nuts. If they ever had an ounce of power they promise to give the national forests away to big business who will of course be excellent guardians of the resources for everyone. And the moon is made of cheese. A civil libertarian myself, it annoys me that the word has become increasingly associated with these crackpots. The LP here (Rochester NY) has a booth at some of the local outdoor festivals. The following theory came from one of the staff, who I *hope* was not representative of the mainstream in that party. Ready? Do away with all tax except sales tax. When I questioned him about which charity would maintain the roads, he said the users of roads would pay for it. How? Toll booths. I commented that we already had toll booths on highways like the NY State Thruway, but I couldn't see how the concept would work on local roads. He said anything was possible. He looked young, so I told him that the "right turn on red" thing didn't exist in many states until the oil crisis of the early 1970s, and was instituted so less cars would idle uselessly at red lights. I suggested that toll booths would reverse this concept. He said "Oh well. What can I tell ya?" Oh boy. |
actually... what ya get is afghanistans and saudia arabias.... a combination of
devolution and muscle. Ingrid Larry Blanchard wrote: It helps if we'd remember that all politics is the result of a collision between two facts. 1. Most people want no laws that would restrict their freedom to do anything they want. 2. Without laws, and the means to enforce them, people with lots of smarts and no ethics will own the world. The current problems result from a third fact. Those people with no ethics are MAKING the laws! And I include both major parties in that. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List http://puregold.aquaria.net/ www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make. |
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:02:21 -0700,
(paghat) wrote: Put my ballot in the mail today. In the past I've gotten a bit weirded out voting before most everyone else, but what needed to be done this time was so obvious, if galling, that I just did the "all democrats" thing with the realization that if that doesn't work, things will only get worse, whereas if it does work, things may merely stay just as bad. On our ballot the only well-represented third-party is Libertarians. About two out of every three of their basic ideas aren't all that nutty, but when they're wrong, hooboy are they off the deep end nuts. If they ever had an ounce of power they promise to give the national forests away to big business who will of course be excellent guardians of the resources for everyone. And the moon is made of cheese. A civil libertarian myself, it annoys me that the word has become increasingly associated with these crackpots. The Greens weren't well represented on the ballot & the Green presidential candidate is such a screw-loose dipshit anyway; yesterday I heard him actually promising in his swishy Sylvester lisp, "We will fightth for the rightth of animalth and plantth." Well good for you buster, but I'm afraid the plants might outwit you, & by the way, you're embarrassing to environmentalists. Or how about voting Nader -- that'd be like voting for a pot of moldy beans & then when you sit down to eat, surprise surprise, it's still moldy beans. Besides, he still owes me the $20 he stole from me. Constitution party? Is there slogan on women's rights still, "Barefoot & Pregnant & In the Kitchen!" They make crazy-right Bush look like a moderate. They're such fundamentalist twits with zero sense of history, talking about some alternate-world wherein founding fathers weren't Deists & Masons after all, but Baptists, & they're not joking, they really believe their crap is sweet. The Constitution Party makes me miss the Northwest Rhinocerous Party which ran on platforms of party hats & moon colonies & a tiddly-wink in every pot, which made ever so much more logical sense. So while in past years I've liked to vote for the occasional third party, this year there wouldn't've been any non-loony choices anyhow. -paghat the ratgirl Presumably, Paggers, your header quote is from "Screaming" Lord Sutch, the quirky but illustrious UK politician and fighter of by-elections as a member of his "Monster Raving Loony" Party, who sadly checked out of political life before his full potential was ever realised. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/371216.stm Geoff |
"escapee" wrote in message
... I had the same thought the other day of voting straight party democrat. I fluctuate between Bush is going to win and our country will suffer circumstances we'll never recover from; to Kerry will win in a landslide because of all the new voters, young voters, etc, who are probably not counted in these idiotic polls. The whole shit stinks. The Catholic is passing out booklets telling their parishioners how to vote according to Christ. Where's my book apologizing for the thousand priests (give or take) who have been convicted, caught, or indicted for raping children? Ya, I didn't think so. Those priests did it for god. Now, pull down your pants while I go get the ruler. |
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:02:21 -0700, (paghat)
wrote: The Constitution Party makes me miss the Northwest Rhinocerous Party which ran on platforms of party hats & moon colonies & a tiddly-wink in every pot, which made ever so much more logical sense. You've evidently not seen the Guns And Dope Party ("Every Man, Woman, and Ostrich is a Tsar"), http://www.gunsanddope.com |
In article ,
wrote: On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:02:21 -0700, (paghat) wrote: The Constitution Party makes me miss the Northwest Rhinocerous Party which ran on platforms of party hats & moon colonies & a tiddly-wink in every pot, which made ever so much more logical sense. You've evidently not seen the Guns And Dope Party ("Every Man, Woman, and Ostrich is a Tsar"), http://www.gunsanddope.com Oh, that's very cute, glad you pointed me to it, though I'd be more inclined to the Books & Movies Party. And they're outdone by the Owl Party in washington state & the Rhino party in British Columbia because they actually got onto ballots & were included in the primary voters' booklets. And received more votes than any other third-party for those years. It was the Owl Party I was actually thinking of when I typed Rhino, I get them mixed up, & the Rhinos were around so much longer. OWL stood for "Out With Logic, On With Lunacy." I wish someone put up a memorial website for all the folks involved. Jazz man Thomas Kelly, Owl Party candidate for governor of Washington, promised to change our capital's name from Olympia to Ept, so that everyone would be able to say the Legislature was In Ept. Owl Party secretary-of-state candidate Lucy Griswold ran on a platform opposing the heartbreak of psoriasis, & got 40,000 votes. Damn, I wish I'd saved that voter's book. Kelly died earlier this year so was briefly back in the news: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001953493_kellyobit11m.html -- "Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher. "Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature. -from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers" Visit the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com |
I have already decided that if Kerry doesnt win I am going to stop spending any money
for anything except absolute necessities. I am going to keep my money under the cushions, not in the bank. I will encourage everyone in this country to simply go on strike against the wealthy corporations who have bought the politicians. Ingrid escapee wrote: I had the same thought the other day of voting straight party democrat. I fluctuate between Bush is going to win and our country will suffer circumstances we'll never recover from; to Kerry will win in a landslide because of all the new voters, young voters, etc, who are probably not counted in these idiotic polls. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List http://puregold.aquaria.net/ www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make. |
wrote in message ... I have already decided that if Kerry doesnt win I am going to stop spending any money for anything except absolute necessities. I am going to keep my money under the cushions, not in the bank. I will encourage everyone in this country to simply go on strike against the wealthy corporations who have bought the politicians. Ingrid I would be happy to buy you a ticket to Havana or Peking, your choice. |
Good idea, but not practical. In a perfect world I'd grow all my own food, only
eat in season, never take a drug for anything, live in the boondocks. In the real world, I shop at the grocery store, take medication when needed, grow what I can. I am pretty ****ed off about the whole prescription drug thing with Canada. Why is it WE can make the drugs, export them out to Canada, but they can't import them back because they could be sub-standard? Are we selling sub-standard drugs to Canada? On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:50:14 GMT, opined: I have already decided that if Kerry doesnt win I am going to stop spending any money for anything except absolute necessities. I am going to keep my money under the cushions, not in the bank. I will encourage everyone in this country to simply go on strike against the wealthy corporations who have bought the politicians. Ingrid escapee wrote: I had the same thought the other day of voting straight party democrat. I fluctuate between Bush is going to win and our country will suffer circumstances we'll never recover from; to Kerry will win in a landslide because of all the new voters, young voters, etc, who are probably not counted in these idiotic polls. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List http://puregold.aquaria.net/ www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:02:13 -0400, "Hank Snatch"
opined: wrote in message ... I have already decided that if Kerry doesnt win I am going to stop spending any money for anything except absolute necessities. I am going to keep my money under the cushions, not in the bank. I will encourage everyone in this country to simply go on strike against the wealthy corporations who have bought the politicians. Ingrid I would be happy to buy you a ticket to Havana or Peking, your choice. This is not the point. Nobody is saying this is not a great country. However, the current administration is turning it into a shit heap with the rest of the world. We are more hated now than ever, especially by terrorists. Good going, Geo. I know someone who recently bought land in Costa Rica and the sound of having monkeys in my trees and waterfalls in my yard is starting to sound better and better to me. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
I am DAR .. long line of rebels. Ingrid
"Hank Snatch" wrote: wrote in message ... I have already decided that if Kerry doesnt win I am going to stop spending any money for anything except absolute necessities. I am going to keep my money under the cushions, not in the bank. I will encourage everyone in this country to simply go on strike against the wealthy corporations who have bought the politicians. Ingrid I would be happy to buy you a ticket to Havana or Peking, your choice. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List http://puregold.aquaria.net/ www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make. |
but we have quite a bit of disposable income. we go out to eat, I buy stuff on ebay
all the time, etc. we would just stop buying anything EXCEPT necessities. I mean it would only be for 4 years. I think I got enough fur coats, boots, etc to last that long. Got enough furniture. The problem as I see it is that the very wealthiest people and companies are buying more and more of our elections every year. I think if a significant number of people just stopped buying everything but the necessities for a while it may put a dent in the amount of money they can dump on "their" candidates. OTOH, maybe I should just take all my disposable income and only buy stuff made by Democrats. the whole reimportation from Canada is bullshit. production of many if not most drugs is out sourced to other countries already, that is why we are coming up short on flu vaccine. I find it unbelievable that W insist he is protecting Americans from sub-standard drugs from Canada and then in the next breath says we are working with Canadians to get flu vaccine from them. INgrid escapee wrote: Good idea, but not practical. In a perfect world I'd grow all my own food, only eat in season, never take a drug for anything, live in the boondocks. In the real world, I shop at the grocery store, take medication when needed, grow what I can. I am pretty ****ed off about the whole prescription drug thing with Canada. Why is it WE can make the drugs, export them out to Canada, but they can't import them back because they could be sub-standard? Are we selling sub-standard drugs to Canada? On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:50:14 GMT, opined: I have already decided that if Kerry doesnt win I am going to stop spending any money for anything except absolute necessities. I am going to keep my money under the cushions, not in the bank. I will encourage everyone in this country to simply go on strike against the wealthy corporations who have bought the politicians. Ingrid escapee wrote: I had the same thought the other day of voting straight party democrat. I fluctuate between Bush is going to win and our country will suffer circumstances we'll never recover from; to Kerry will win in a landslide because of all the new voters, young voters, etc, who are probably not counted in these idiotic polls. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List http://puregold.aquaria.net/ www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List http://puregold.aquaria.net/ www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make. |
In article , "Hank Snatch"
wrote: wrote in message ... I have already decided that if Kerry doesnt win I am going to stop spending any money for anything except absolute necessities. I am going to keep my money under the cushions, not in the bank. I will encourage everyone in this country to simply go on strike against the wealthy corporations who have bought the politicians. Ingrid I would be happy to buy you a ticket to Havana or Peking, your choice. I'll take the ticket to Peking! If you're only offering one-way tickets I'll buy my own to get back. If you're only buying it for who you'd falsely assess as antiAmerican, well hey, for the vacation I'll play: AMERICA SUCKS. Now send me that ticket. Hoohoo! I'm going to China! -paghat the ratgirl -- "Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher. "Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature. -from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers" Visit the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com |
In article ,
wrote: but we have quite a bit of disposable income. we go out to eat, I buy stuff on ebay all the time, etc. we would just stop buying anything EXCEPT necessities. I mean it would only be for 4 years. I think I got enough fur coats, boots, etc to last that long. Got enough furniture. The problem as I see it is that the very wealthiest people and companies are buying more and more of our elections every year. I think if a significant number of people just stopped buying everything but the necessities for a while it may put a dent in the amount of money they can dump on "their" candidates. OTOH, maybe I should just take all my disposable income and only buy stuff made by Democrats. the whole reimportation from Canada is bullshit. production of many if not most drugs is out sourced to other countries already, that is why we are coming up short on flu vaccine. I find it unbelievable that W insist he is protecting Americans from sub-standard drugs from Canada and then in the next breath says we are working with Canadians to get flu vaccine from them. INgrid If you go four years as a minimalist consumer you may find you're healthier & prefer living without the clutter, so will continue the habit for life. There's much to be said for minimal consumerism because Americans tend to use up the world's resources hundreds of times faster than in many other countries, & we have very little to show for it beyond exposure to more carcinogens, fat asses, & an accumulation of pricy junk we scarsely even look at a second time. -paghat the ratgirl -- "Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher. "Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature. -from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers" Visit the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com |
Ingrid, it's a deal. I promise to really put my mind to it. No buying outside
of necessities. I can't promise four years, but I can promise one month at a time. More feasible for me that way. I know you're right, but it's not as easy as it sounds. If I never bought another thing outside of necessities I have way more than I ever thought I'd have, so it's not really a big stretch to not buy things. I'm also making my own clothes, lately. V On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:45:53 GMT, opined: but we have quite a bit of disposable income. we go out to eat, I buy stuff on ebay all the time, etc. we would just stop buying anything EXCEPT necessities. I mean it would only be for 4 years. I think I got enough fur coats, boots, etc to last that long. Got enough furniture. The problem as I see it is that the very wealthiest people and companies are buying more and more of our elections every year. I think if a significant number of people just stopped buying everything but the necessities for a while it may put a dent in the amount of money they can dump on "their" candidates. OTOH, maybe I should just take all my disposable income and only buy stuff made by Democrats. the whole reimportation from Canada is bullshit. production of many if not most drugs is out sourced to other countries already, that is why we are coming up short on flu vaccine. I find it unbelievable that W insist he is protecting Americans from sub-standard drugs from Canada and then in the next breath says we are working with Canadians to get flu vaccine from them. INgrid escapee wrote: Good idea, but not practical. In a perfect world I'd grow all my own food, only eat in season, never take a drug for anything, live in the boondocks. In the real world, I shop at the grocery store, take medication when needed, grow what I can. I am pretty ****ed off about the whole prescription drug thing with Canada. Why is it WE can make the drugs, export them out to Canada, but they can't import them back because they could be sub-standard? Are we selling sub-standard drugs to Canada? On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:50:14 GMT, opined: I have already decided that if Kerry doesnt win I am going to stop spending any money for anything except absolute necessities. I am going to keep my money under the cushions, not in the bank. I will encourage everyone in this country to simply go on strike against the wealthy corporations who have bought the politicians. Ingrid escapee wrote: I had the same thought the other day of voting straight party democrat. I fluctuate between Bush is going to win and our country will suffer circumstances we'll never recover from; to Kerry will win in a landslide because of all the new voters, young voters, etc, who are probably not counted in these idiotic polls. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List http://puregold.aquaria.net/ www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List http://puregold.aquaria.net/ www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
In article says...
The whole shit stinks. The Catholic is passing out booklets telling their parishioners how to vote according to Christ. Actually this is illegal. According to their non-profit, tax exempt status, the Catholic church or any church can't campaign for any candidate. -- Nixon hated running for president during football season, but he did it anyway. Nixon was a professional politician, and I despised everything he stood for -- but if he were running for president this year against the evil Bush-Cheney gang, I would happily vote for him. -- Hunter S. Thompson http://tinyurl.com/3smr2 |
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:46:17 -0500, Mark Anderson
opined: In article says... The whole shit stinks. The Catholic is passing out booklets telling their parishioners how to vote according to Christ. Actually this is illegal. According to their non-profit, tax exempt status, the Catholic church or any church can't campaign for any candidate. They do it in a sneaky way. They list out several things which a Catholic must consider when voting. Abortion, for example. They tell the parishioners they must not vote for anyone who is pro-choice. That is one I can think of. There are others which guilt them into not thinking for themselves and people who are ignorant, like my mother in law, will follow into the fire. I'm off to vote for the man who will sign off on stem cell research, and pro-choice. I'm voting for the man who will consider the world view when acting in an International way. I'm voting for the better of the two. I AM of the belief "anybody but bush," but I also truly think Kerry will make a better president. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
Why do you want a traitor for President?? If the Swifty's are lying about
Kerry why doesn't he take them to court and sue them for slander and defamation of character?? I'm sure the Swifty's would love to get him in court and have him prove that they are telling lies about him. "escapee" wrote in message ... On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:46:17 -0500, Mark Anderson opined: In article says... The whole shit stinks. The Catholic is passing out booklets telling their parishioners how to vote according to Christ. Actually this is illegal. According to their non-profit, tax exempt status, the Catholic church or any church can't campaign for any candidate. They do it in a sneaky way. They list out several things which a Catholic must consider when voting. Abortion, for example. They tell the parishioners they must not vote for anyone who is pro-choice. That is one I can think of. There are others which guilt them into not thinking for themselves and people who are ignorant, like my mother in law, will follow into the fire. I'm off to vote for the man who will sign off on stem cell research, and pro-choice. I'm voting for the man who will consider the world view when acting in an International way. I'm voting for the better of the two. I AM of the belief "anybody but bush," but I also truly think Kerry will make a better president. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
"Mark Anderson" wrote in message .net... In article says... The whole shit stinks. The Catholic is passing out booklets telling their parishioners how to vote according to Christ. Actually this is illegal. According to their non-profit, tax exempt status, the Catholic church or any church can't campaign for any candidate. That may be the law, but no one follows it. Just look at how black churches support and campaign for Democrats. |
Tom wrote:
Kerry doesn't have the balls to take them to court. He knows he will lose if he does. He has all the time in the world to take them to court after he looses the election. If he thinks he will win he'll need the money after Teresa kicks him in the ass. I doubt that he will find another sugarmommy, because all the rich ones will be wise to him. "Cereus-validus." wrote in message . com... Even if Kerry does take the lying *******s to court, it will take month before it goes to trial. That is long after the election. The lying cowards are well aware of that and are taking advantage of it. Kerry's war record is still far better than that awol coward Dubya. If Kerry sues the SwiftBoatVets, or anyone else for that matter, regarding his Vietnam war service, his military records will be subpoenaed and everyone will see his discharge papers from the early 70's, not just the version that was reviewed and reissued in 1978 by order of President Carter. I suspect he *really* wants to keep those original papers buried. Kerry never should have made his military service the centerpiece of his campaign, because that makes it an issue for close scrutiny. If he had kept his mouth shut about it, everyone already knew his military service (on the surface anyway) was better than Bush and Chaney. I doubt his service record stands up to close scrutiny. Best regards, Bob |
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:51:06 GMT, "Tom" wrote:
Kerry doesn't have the balls to take them to court. He knows he will lose if he does. He has all the time in the world to take them to court after he looses the election. If he thinks he will win he'll need the money after Teresa kicks him in the ass. I doubt that he will find another sugarmommy, because all the rich ones will be wise to him. Tom your ignorant ****, perhaps your tin hat is to tight? Swifties are stone cold liars. Do a little reading in depth, that means beyond the headlines or bar room one liners. |
Don't be so hard on uncle Tom. He's still reeling from getting gang porked
by Republican rednecks and squeeling like a pig during happy hour last night. After four years of abuse, he's gotten used to it!!!! The fascist swifties are relatively nice to him because they only demand oral from him. The only balls he has are in his mouth. He's afraid if Kerry gets elected, he won't be getting any abuse anymore and he might miss it. "hippy gardener" wrote in message ... On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:51:06 GMT, "Tom" wrote: Kerry doesn't have the balls to take them to court. He knows he will lose if he does. He has all the time in the world to take them to court after he looses the election. If he thinks he will win he'll need the money after Teresa kicks him in the ass. I doubt that he will find another sugarmommy, because all the rich ones will be wise to him. Tom your ignorant ****, perhaps your tin hat is to tight? Swifties are stone cold liars. Do a little reading in depth, that means beyond the headlines or bar room one liners. |
Why don't you two grab ahold of your left ears with your right hand and pull
your heads out of your asses! "Cereus-validus." wrote in message om... Don't be so hard on uncle Tom. He's still reeling from getting gang porked by Republican rednecks and squeeling like a pig during happy hour last night. After four years of abuse, he's gotten used to it!!!! The fascist swifties are relatively nice to him because they only demand oral from him. The only balls he has are in his mouth. He's afraid if Kerry gets elected, he won't be getting any abuse anymore and he might miss it. "hippy gardener" wrote in message ... On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:51:06 GMT, "Tom" wrote: Kerry doesn't have the balls to take them to court. He knows he will lose if he does. He has all the time in the world to take them to court after he looses the election. If he thinks he will win he'll need the money after Teresa kicks him in the ass. I doubt that he will find another sugarmommy, because all the rich ones will be wise to him. Tom your ignorant ****, perhaps your tin hat is to tight? Swifties are stone cold liars. Do a little reading in depth, that means beyond the headlines or bar room one liners. |
Calm down uncle Tom. We know you are still sore from that daily reaming you
like to get from the republican party. So you do admit that you like getting GOP head up your butt, eh? At least you have a full time job, eh? Too bad we homeys don't play that rough rider stuff you political masochists like so much. "Tom" wrote in message news:h8Aed.448004$Fg5.119305@attbi_s53... Why don't you two grab ahold of your left ears with your right hand and pull your heads out of your asses! "Cereus-validus." wrote in message om... Don't be so hard on uncle Tom. He's still reeling from getting gang porked by Republican rednecks and squeeling like a pig during happy hour last night. After four years of abuse, he's gotten used to it!!!! The fascist swifties are relatively nice to him because they only demand oral from him. The only balls he has are in his mouth. He's afraid if Kerry gets elected, he won't be getting any abuse anymore and he might miss it. "hippy gardener" wrote in message ... On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:51:06 GMT, "Tom" wrote: Kerry doesn't have the balls to take them to court. He knows he will lose if he does. He has all the time in the world to take them to court after he looses the election. If he thinks he will win he'll need the money after Teresa kicks him in the ass. I doubt that he will find another sugarmommy, because all the rich ones will be wise to him. Tom your ignorant ****, perhaps your tin hat is to tight? Swifties are stone cold liars. Do a little reading in depth, that means beyond the headlines or bar room one liners. |
A traitor? Why, because he spoke out against the men who were in the war doing
their crimes to humanity? What was he a traitor on? I'd prefer him to a man who never made anything work unless his father bought the win. The Bush family goes back many years, many of those full of lies, deceit and tons of money changing hands. Bush was AWOL. Not one person has come forward to say they served with him during the time he was AWOL on the campaign trail for daddy. I give no time to who you call "the Swifty's." Maybe you are not up to date on your information, but they were proven wrong a while ago. On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:30:03 GMT, "Tom" opined: Why do you want a traitor for President?? If the Swifty's are lying about Kerry why doesn't he take them to court and sue them for slander and defamation of character?? I'm sure the Swifty's would love to get him in court and have him prove that they are telling lies about him. "escapee" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:46:17 -0500, Mark Anderson opined: In article says... The whole shit stinks. The Catholic is passing out booklets telling their parishioners how to vote according to Christ. Actually this is illegal. According to their non-profit, tax exempt status, the Catholic church or any church can't campaign for any candidate. They do it in a sneaky way. They list out several things which a Catholic must consider when voting. Abortion, for example. They tell the parishioners they must not vote for anyone who is pro-choice. That is one I can think of. There are others which guilt them into not thinking for themselves and people who are ignorant, like my mother in law, will follow into the fire. I'm off to vote for the man who will sign off on stem cell research, and pro-choice. I'm voting for the man who will consider the world view when acting in an International way. I'm voting for the better of the two. I AM of the belief "anybody but bush," but I also truly think Kerry will make a better president. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:27:20 -0500, zxcvbob opined:
If Kerry sues the SwiftBoatVets, or anyone else for that matter, regarding his Vietnam war service, his military records will be subpoenaed and everyone will see his discharge papers from the early 70's, not just the version that was reviewed and reissued in 1978 by order of President Carter. I suspect he *really* wants to keep those original papers buried. Kerry never should have made his military service the centerpiece of his campaign, because that makes it an issue for close scrutiny. If he had kept his mouth shut about it, everyone already knew his military service (on the surface anyway) was better than Bush and Chaney. I doubt his service record stands up to close scrutiny. Best regards, Bob Based on what? Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
escapee wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:27:20 -0500, zxcvbob opined: If Kerry sues the SwiftBoatVets, or anyone else for that matter, regarding his Vietnam war service, his military records will be subpoenaed and everyone will see his discharge papers from the early 70's, not just the version that was reviewed and reissued in 1978 by order of President Carter. I suspect he *really* wants to keep those original papers buried. Kerry never should have made his military service the centerpiece of his campaign, because that makes it an issue for close scrutiny. If he had kept his mouth shut about it, everyone already knew his military service (on the surface anyway) was better than Bush and Chaney. I doubt his service record stands up to close scrutiny. Best regards, Bob Based on what? A few months ago, an old college buddy of mine who is a retired Air Force officer was badmouthing Kerry for protesting the Vietnam War. I told him that whatever else I thought of Kerry, I believed he had earned the right to protest the war. (that kind of ****ed him off) Recently, he sent me a bunch of information that suggests that Kerry may have originally received a dishonorable discharge. I've looked up some of the info myself, and I think the dishonorable discharge thing is plausible but the evidence is *very* stretchy. However I do believe it presents a strong case that he did not receive an honorable discharge: From JohnKerry.com, his separation from Active Duty was on March 1, 1970. http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_..._timeline.html Now notice the date [Feb 16, 1978] on this document: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilse...om_Reserve.pdf This was right after President Carter granted amnesty to "draft dodgers" (a little background info that doesn't directly affect this case but sets the atmosphere.) Now the phrases "by direction of the President" [Carter] and "board officers convened under authority of reference to examine the official records...", and "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163". Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163 refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. If his original separation had been an honorable discharge, there would have been no need for a review. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge. We'll never know unless Kerry sues the SBV's for libel (and they subpoena the records), because Kerry will not release his full military records. Best regards, Bob |
"zxcvbob" wrote in message ... escapee wrote: ... However I do believe it presents a strong case that he did not receive an honorable discharge: From JohnKerry.com, his separation from Active Duty was on March 1, 1970. http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_..._timeline.html Now notice the date [Feb 16, 1978] on this document: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilse...om_Reserve.pdf This was right after President Carter granted amnesty to "draft dodgers" (a little background info that doesn't directly affect this case but sets the atmosphere.) Now the phrases "by direction of the President" [Carter] and "board officers convened under authority of reference to examine the official records...", and "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163". Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163 refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. If his original separation had been an honorable discharge, there would have been no need for a review. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge. You are just wrong. Kerry was released from active duty and transferred to the Navel Reserve (inactive status) in 1970. In 1972 he was transferred to the Standby Reserve (inactive) and in 1978 was honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve. Check it out: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilse...of_Service.pdf Karen |
Anonny Moose wrote:
"zxcvbob" wrote in message ... escapee wrote: .. However I do believe it presents a strong case that he did not receive an honorable discharge: From JohnKerry.com, his separation from Active Duty was on March 1, 1970. http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_..._timeline.html Now notice the date [Feb 16, 1978] on this document: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilse...om_Reserve.pdf This was right after President Carter granted amnesty to "draft dodgers" (a little background info that doesn't directly affect this case but sets the atmosphere.) Now the phrases "by direction of the President" [Carter] and "board officers convened under authority of reference to examine the official records...", and "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163". Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163 refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. If his original separation had been an honorable discharge, there would have been no need for a review. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge. You are just wrong. Kerry was released from active duty and transferred to the Navel Reserve (inactive status) in 1970. In 1972 he was transferred to the Standby Reserve (inactive) and in 1978 was honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve. Check it out: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilse...of_Service.pdf Karen Thanks. I'll forward this to my Air Force buddy and see what he says. I still think the "board of officers" thing is weird, because a board review shouldn't be necessary for a routine discharge -- but I don't know what kind of legal b.s. are perhaps always on these forms. Best regards, Bob |
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:38:52 -0500, zxcvbob opined:
escapee wrote: On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:27:20 -0500, zxcvbob opined: If Kerry sues the SwiftBoatVets, or anyone else for that matter, regarding his Vietnam war service, his military records will be subpoenaed and everyone will see his discharge papers from the early 70's, not just the version that was reviewed and reissued in 1978 by order of President Carter. I suspect he *really* wants to keep those original papers buried. Kerry never should have made his military service the centerpiece of his campaign, because that makes it an issue for close scrutiny. If he had kept his mouth shut about it, everyone already knew his military service (on the surface anyway) was better than Bush and Chaney. I doubt his service record stands up to close scrutiny. Best regards, Bob Based on what? A few months ago, an old college buddy of mine who is a retired Air Force officer was badmouthing Kerry for protesting the Vietnam War. I told him that whatever else I thought of Kerry, I believed he had earned the right to protest the war. (that kind of ****ed him off) Recently, he sent me a bunch of information that suggests that Kerry may have originally received a dishonorable discharge. I've looked up some of the info myself, and I think the dishonorable discharge thing is plausible but the evidence is *very* stretchy. However I do believe it presents a strong case that he did not receive an honorable discharge: From JohnKerry.com, his separation from Active Duty was on March 1, 1970. http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_..._timeline.html Now notice the date [Feb 16, 1978] on this document: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilse...om_Reserve.pdf This was right after President Carter granted amnesty to "draft dodgers" (a little background info that doesn't directly affect this case but sets the atmosphere.) Now the phrases "by direction of the President" [Carter] and "board officers convened under authority of reference to examine the official records...", and "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163". Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163 refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. If his original separation had been an honorable discharge, there would have been no need for a review. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge. We'll never know unless Kerry sues the SBV's for libel (and they subpoena the records), because Kerry will not release his full military records. Best regards, Bob Like I said...what do you base this on? It would appear to me he was honorably discharged. I know if it was a fact that he was not, we'd have heard about it ad nauseam by now. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
Like I said...what do you base this on? It would appear to me he was
honorably discharged. I know if it was a fact that he was not, we'd have heard about it ad nauseam by now. They are not basing it on anything other than trying to fabricate something bad to say about a democrat war hero. They aught to be ashamed of themselves. Anyway you look at it, Kerry's war record is far superior to nonexistent one of that awol inept dopehead Dubya. There is no contest at all. "escapee" wrote in message ... On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:38:52 -0500, zxcvbob opined: escapee wrote: On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:27:20 -0500, zxcvbob opined: If Kerry sues the SwiftBoatVets, or anyone else for that matter, regarding his Vietnam war service, his military records will be subpoenaed and everyone will see his discharge papers from the early 70's, not just the version that was reviewed and reissued in 1978 by order of President Carter. I suspect he *really* wants to keep those original papers buried. Kerry never should have made his military service the centerpiece of his campaign, because that makes it an issue for close scrutiny. If he had kept his mouth shut about it, everyone already knew his military service (on the surface anyway) was better than Bush and Chaney. I doubt his service record stands up to close scrutiny. Best regards, Bob Based on what? A few months ago, an old college buddy of mine who is a retired Air Force officer was badmouthing Kerry for protesting the Vietnam War. I told him that whatever else I thought of Kerry, I believed he had earned the right to protest the war. (that kind of ****ed him off) Recently, he sent me a bunch of information that suggests that Kerry may have originally received a dishonorable discharge. I've looked up some of the info myself, and I think the dishonorable discharge thing is plausible but the evidence is *very* stretchy. However I do believe it presents a strong case that he did not receive an honorable discharge: From JohnKerry.com, his separation from Active Duty was on March 1, 1970. http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_..._timeline.html Now notice the date [Feb 16, 1978] on this document: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilse...e_From_Reserve. This was right after President Carter granted amnesty to "draft dodgers" (a little background info that doesn't directly affect this case but sets the atmosphere.) Now the phrases "by direction of the President" [Carter] and "board officers convened under authority of reference to examine the official records...", and "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163". Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163 refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. If his original separation had been an honorable discharge, there would have been no need for a review. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge. We'll never know unless Kerry sues the SBV's for libel (and they subpoena the records), because Kerry will not release his full military records. Best regards, Bob Like I said...what do you base this on? It would appear to me he was honorably discharged. I know if it was a fact that he was not, we'd have heard about it ad nauseam by now. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
"Cereus-validus." wrote in message ... Anyway you look at it, Kerry's war record is far superior to nonexistent one of that awol inept dopehead Dubya. Hanoi John is a fraud and a pothead. |
You must still be having bad acid flashbacks. You are confusing Kerry with
Jane Fonda and that is truly deranged, you Boozehound. "StanB" wrote in message ... "Cereus-validus." wrote in message ... Anyway you look at it, Kerry's war record is far superior to nonexistent one of that awol inept dopehead Dubya. Hanoi John is a fraud and a pothead. |
"zxcvbob" wrote in message
... Kerry never should have made his military service the centerpiece of his campaign, because that makes it an issue for close scrutiny. He had to make it an issue because there are quite a few dummies who think it's relevant. Unfortunately, Kerry needs to stoop low in his attempt to steal some of Bush's supporters, and perhaps some of the knuckleheads who are still undecided. If throwing large chunks of raw meat is what it takes, he'll do it. |
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:18:30 GMT, "Cereus-validus."
opined: They are not basing it on anything other than trying to fabricate something bad to say about a democrat war hero. They aught to be ashamed of themselves. Anyway you look at it, Kerry's war record is far superior to nonexistent one of that awol inept dopehead Dubya. There is no contest at all. One of the problems is that, many people listen to Rush and regardless what Rush says, they take it as truth. Rush can pull it right out of his ass ("Franken") and people think it's truth. Never mind actually checking the facts. I hope you're right and I hope people vote for Kerry not only by a small margin, but a complete landslide. Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for yourself or a friend? http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html |
"Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority
of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both." Kerry met in 1970, by his own admission, with delegations from the North Vietnamese communist government and discussed how the Vietnam War should be stopped. |
"IntarsiaCo" wrote in message ... "Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both." Kerry met in 1970, by his own admission, with delegations from the North Vietnamese communist government and discussed how the Vietnam War should be stopped. Looked at the tags clothing lately? Vietnam's becoming a happy little capitalist country, regardless of their government. It probably could've gotten there about 30 years faster without our so-called "help". Since capitalism is what we WANT to see as a worldwide system (supposedly), Kerry may have done us a favor, if his efforts in any way sped things up. |
In article , "Doug Kanter"
wrote: "IntarsiaCo" wrote in message ... "Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both." Kerry met in 1970, by his own admission, with delegations from the North Vietnamese communist government and discussed how the Vietnam War should be stopped. Looked at the tags clothing lately? Vietnam's becoming a happy little capitalist country, regardless of their government. It probably could've gotten there about 30 years faster without our so-called "help". Since capitalism is what we WANT to see as a worldwide system (supposedly), Kerry may have done us a favor, if his efforts in any way sped things up. Intarsia has always had trouble with the truth & Kerry never met with any Vietnamese delegation in 1970. In 1970 he met with the delegates of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, & gave testimony before Congress repeating some of the eye-witness testimony about atrocities committed by our Vets as a commonplace, the more decent of whom felt guilt & sadness for being placed in that position. This testimony is on the record & is very condemning of the war, as it should have been. But far-right loons, including some vets who apparently lost their humanity & so have never felt the requisit guilt & sorrow, have "spun" the testimony to make Kerry out to be a traitor for having the moral integrity, as a decorated vetaran, to stand up against injustice. For people with absolutely no moral integrity it is easy to twist that around & heap lie up on lie, including that he colluded with communists. The justification for this amazing lie is that the Vietnam Vets Against the War were or are themselves a "communist delegation." These vets were among the greatest of my generation's true patriots, who both fought the Vietnamese as they were told was necessary, & spoke out afterward about the undeniable & horrific injusticies & introcities they saw first-hand. Kerry listened to them; he retold some of their stories; his own integrity was in sync with that of other brave men. But to very, very, very bad people, they were always "commies," the name tossed at anyone in those days who was capable of decency, in emulation of McCarthy. That they'd still be doing it these decades later shows only that there is still unrepentent evil afoot -- & evil loves Bush. The same people who have gathered around liar & propogandist John O'Neill whose dirty deeds have been repeatedly "outed" as the lies & falsehoods they inevitably are, but the hope is that by telling these whoppers enough people will be stupid enough to believe it that some harm will be done (against all of American). Besides the assinine assumption that war heros who dislike war are all communists & to speak to them is to conspire with communists, the other "basis" for the lie is Kerry's presence at a peace conference in Paris in 1971 (Intarsia says 1970 but that's when he met with antiwar Veterans; Intarsia like all liars can't keep the lies straight). The truth is that Kerry as a leading antiwar activist at the time attended a peace conference attended also by Nguyen Thi Binh from Vietnam. There were no meetings with Nguyen Thi Binh let alone negotiations, but being in the same city for the same conference is all it takes for John O'Neill to start a new round of fabulous lying. These exact same wackies also claim that Kerry orchestrated in 1995 a cover-up of the American Prisoners of War still held prisoner in Vietnam today, obtaining the proof under the guise of heading a Missing in Action Task Force, then destroying that evidence when it was discovered vets are still alive. Bushite far-right Republicans haven't tried to take much advantage of that one yet because even they know it'd make Kerry's attackers sound like the nutsacks they are. As Machievelli recommended, find the most unassailable trait of your opponent & assail that -- for Kerry that means assailing his honesty & heroism. I would listen to these lies only as a means to assess who is so morally reprehensible as to be disregarded as even human. Our choice this year is between a war hero who knows war is a bad thing, or lying propogandists who want as many wars as possible without regard for how many Americans & other nationals are killed, so long as Bush's corporate buddies, safe in their corporate headquarters, can rake in profits, indebting even our grea-tgrandchildren to today's corporate greed. -paghat the ratgirl -- "Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher. "Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature. -from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers" Visit the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:51 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter