<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
Saundra Lund deserves better than this from a coward who won't even use his name when mocking someone by hers.<br><br>The idea that Saundra Lund, one of the brightest, kindest, most adept people I know, suffers from envy of anyone, much less Sarah Palin, is laughable. The "intervention" joke crosses the line, though. <br><br>And no, Saundra doesn't need my defense or anyone else's -- but that won't keep me from objecting to your disrespectful, asinine portrayal of someone I respect, even if I haven't seen her or talked with her for a year or so.<br><br>Keely<br>http://keely-prevailingwinds.blogspot.com/<br><br><br>> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:55:06 -0800<br>> From: no.weatherman@gmail.com<br>> To: vision2020@moscow.com<br>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A Plea to Saundra Lund<br>> <br>> Paul:<br>> <br>> I believe you wrote these questions in response to the dialogue<br>> between Chas and I because that would be the appropriate context for<br>> them.<br>> <br>> In case I'm wrong, however, my thesis regarding Ms. Lund is that she's<br>> a bit undone with Palin envy and her friends should schedule an<br>> intervention before she hurts herself.<br>> <br>> With regards to my exchange with Chas, he specifically asked,<br>> <br>> "You appear to demand a level of scrutiny for Obama that you don't for<br>> the other candidates. Why?"<br>> <br>> I answered his question by listing a myriad of concerns about Obama<br>> that scares the holy Shiite out of me and that the msm and this forum<br>> have completely ignored.<br>> <br>> You ask, "What's the actual point you're trying to make?"<br>> <br>> The point that I'm trying to make and the point that hitherto for I<br>> thought I made is that the msm has not vetted Barack Obama at all, let<br>> alone to the same degree it has vetted the other ticket.<br>> <br>> I have no other thesis than that.<br>> <br>> With regard to you other questions, I have not gone that far because<br>> we simply do not have the data.<br>> <br>> But I think you are terribly naïve to repeat Obama's sound bite, "I<br>> don't get what the implications are of Obama knowing someone else who<br>> was a "domestic terrorist" when Obama was eight years old."<br>> <br>> It does not matter if Obama was 8 years old when Ayers declared war<br>> against the US government or if he was 88 years old. Obama's age is<br>> irrelevant. What's relevant is that Ayers has not surrendered his war<br>> against the US, i.e., his radical agenda to overthrow the government,<br>> and Obama has spent an inordinate amount of time palling around with<br>> the creep. Ayers is much more than "just a guy who lives in my<br>> neighborhood," and how much more than that we need to know.<br>> <br>> I also find it curious that he wants to scrub his history with Ayers<br>> from the record.<br>> <br>> He can hide the smoke but he can't douse the fire.<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> On 10/20/08, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter@yahoo.com> wrote:<br>> > So what is your thesis, here? That Barack Obama is a closet domestic<br>> > terrorist? That he wants to take down the government from the top down?<br>> > That he wants to open our defenses and invite the terrorists in to trash our<br>> > country as they please? I don't get what the implications are of Obama<br>> > knowing someone else who was a "domestic terrorist" when Obama was eight<br>> > years old.<br>> ><br>> > What's the actual point you're trying to make?<br>> ><br>> > Paul<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > No Weatherman wrote:<br>> ><br>> > > Ms. Lund:<br>> > ><br>> > > I made it clear from the beginning that I had only one objective in<br>> > > this exercise — to force the question of Barack Obama's long-standing<br>> > > personal and professional relationship with domestic terrorists.<br>> > ><br>> > > Joe Campbell accused my of making a "guilt by association" argument<br>> > > while he pronounced me "guilty by association" because of his<br>> > > delusional perception that I belong to a local church. He called me a<br>> > > "neo-Nazi" even though I have decried anti-Semitism with every other<br>> > > post or so.<br>> > ><br>> > > My objective changed early on when the name calling began in concert<br>> > > with the continued gang banging of Gov Palin. Now I consider myself<br>> > > balance to your catty, shrill, dishonest, disingenuous, and<br>> > > discombobulated and hormonally imbalanced posts as well as Mr.<br>> > > Hansen's and Dr. Gier's.<br>> > ><br>> > > You now claim that you object to the "***quantity***" of my posts. But<br>> > > this was not the case last month when you wrote this literary<br>> > > masterpiece:<br>> > ><br>> > ><br>> > http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2008-October/057066.html<br>> > ><br>> > > Let's see, you called me a "monster," a "racist monster . . . puffed<br>> > > with pathetic notions of grandiosity." You called me a "troll," a<br>> > > "piece of moral slime properly to be shunned by all decent people."<br>> > > You declared that shunning me was a religious duty of yours lest you<br>> > > be "bad Samaritans" who add to my "hate-mongering propensities."<br>> > ><br>> > > Funny, though, you never mentioned the "***quantity***" of my posts.<br>> > ><br>> > > Personally, I think you're unhinged by Palin envy though I would not<br>> > > begin to speculate why.<br>> > ><br>> > > They say that friends don't let friends drive drunk. You seem to me to<br>> > > be inebriated by hate for Palin. If I was your friend I'd pull you off<br>> > > the road ASAP before you end up hurting yourself.<br>> > ><br>> > ><br>> > ><br>> > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Saundra Lund <sslund_2007@verizon.net><br>> > wrote:<br>> > ><br>> > ><br>> > > > Roger,<br>> > > ><br>> > > > I think you're completely wrong on this. I think what Tom and many,<br>> > many,<br>> > > > many other forum members really object to is the ***quantity*** of the<br>> > > > troll's posts. The anonymous coward made it clear from the beginning<br>> > that<br>> > > > he wasn't interested in honest dialogue or debate but rather in simply<br>> > > > hurling invective and insulting those who disagree with him. When<br>> > someone<br>> > > > pointed out to him that the convention in the V2020 living room was to<br>> > try<br>> > > > to limit posts to 2-3 per day, he said he'd post as much as he wanted.<br>> > And,<br>> > > > he's proceeded to do so: just in October, he's posted OVER THREE<br>> > HUNDRED<br>> > > > TIMES. Get a clue: he's nothing more than a cowardly rude troll with<br>> > an<br>> > > > agenda to disrupt and destroy this forum with his invective.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > While I refuse to interact with nameless cowards, I also refuse to allow<br>> > > > this troll to turn this COMMUNITY forum into his own one-sided<br>> > playground.<br>> > > > Only when it became undeniable that the troll has absolutely no respect<br>> > for<br>> > > > the way the V2020 community works did I start standing up to the bully<br>> > by<br>> > > > posting news from the other side, and even then, my "count" is still way<br>> > > > under a hundred for this month -- and barely over a daily average of<br>> > three<br>> > > > posts per day. And, I'll add that I've received more than a few offlist<br>> > > > responses from folks all along the political spectrum thanking me for<br>> > the<br>> > > > articles I've been posting in response to the troll's firestorm.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > I see your subsequent post where you suggest that people apply Donovan's<br>> > > > (joking or not) suggestion about dealing with the troll's record posting<br>> > > > frequency by doing the same to me. Shame on you, Roger -- you've been<br>> > > > around here long enough to know that I am a genuine participant who has<br>> > > > posted according to our "on our honor" posting guidelines for years now.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > I do find it telling that you once again come out in defense of those<br>> > with<br>> > > > whom you agree while ignoring their multitude transgressions and insults<br>> > > > against those with whom you disagree.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > So, what -- if any -- suggestions do you have to deal with trolls like<br>> > the<br>> > > > one trick pony No Weatherman's attempts to take over this forum for his<br>> > own<br>> > > > anti-Obama agenda by posting OVER THREE HUNDRED TIMES in fewer than 20<br>> > days?<br>> > > > He's drowning out legitimate conversation and driving away list members<br>> > and<br>> > > > their participation in this COMMUNITY forum, which is indisputably one<br>> > of<br>> > > > his goals.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Yes, you're completely wrong Roger -- those of us who object to the<br>> > cowardly<br>> > > > anonymous troll's attempt to take over this forum would be just as<br>> > > > frustrated by the volume regardless of the topic or political direction.<br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > > Saundra Lund<br>> > > > Moscow, ID<br>> > > ><br>> > > > The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to<br>> > do<br>> > > > nothing.<br>> > > > ~ Edmund Burke<br>> > > ><br>> > > > ***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2008 through life<br>> > plus<br>> > > > 70 years, Saundra Lund. Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce<br>> > outside<br>> > > > the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the<br>> > > > author.*****<br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > > -----Original Message-----<br>> > > > From: vision2020-bounces@moscow.com<br>> > [mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com]<br>> > > > On Behalf Of lfalen<br>> > > > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 11:09 AM<br>> > > > To: No Weatherman; vision2020@moscow.com<br>> > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A Plea to Visionaires<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Tom apparently only wants left wing views to be aired. Anything else is<br>> > > > racist and profane. I would like Ton to demonstrate where No<br>> > Wheathermans<br>> > > > posts have been any more objectionable than some of his. I submit that<br>> > they<br>> > > > are objectionable and profane because he disagrees with the veiws<br>> > > > expressed. No Wheatherman seems to me to do a petty good job of<br>> > > > documentation when listing facts. Everyone have the right to an<br>> > > > opinion(within reason) without documentation as long as it not presented<br>> > as<br>> > > > fact.<br>> > > > Roger<br>> > > ><br>> > > > =======================================================<br>> > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>> > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>> > > > http://www.fsr.net<br>> > > > mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>> > > > =======================================================<br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > ><br>> > > =======================================================<br>> > > List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the<br>> > communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net<br>> > mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>> > > =======================================================<br>> > ><br>> > ><br>> > ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> <br>> =======================================================<br>> List services made available by First Step Internet, <br>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <br>> http://www.fsr.net <br>> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>> =======================================================<br><br /><hr />When your life is on the go—take your life with you. <a href='http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/115298558/direct/01/' target='_new'>Try Windows Mobile® today</a></body>
</html>