[GCFL-discuss] FW: Is America Really Going to To this?

Mon Nov 3 12:48:19 CST 2008

Yes *GMail* does. :D

On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies List <
gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> wrote:

>  From the response I am getting, the color of text I set in Juno IS coming
> through. But the background color isn't. So people are getting yellow text
> on a white background, which is almost impossible to read.
>
> Do web-based services like gmail allow you to set text color? I've been
> telling people to just change the yellow text to red or blue or someting.
>
> Siarlys
>
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 20:25:57 -0700 "Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies
> List" <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> writes:
>
> HAHA something I actually know.
> Juno allows you to set visual however you like. Sadly that doesn't transfer
> over to your typing text. IF you edit your text color it should show it to
> us... why it's not? No clue :(
> Lance
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies List
> <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> wrote:
>
>>  OK, we're all on the same page then. Thanks for the exercise. Its been
>> fun. A friend I forwarded the discussion too also had trouble reading the
>> yellow text. On my email softward, I have the background set to brown, and
>> my text to green. Highlighting in yellow looks fine with a brown background,
>> but if the text comes out in yellow on a different background, it doesn't
>> work out very well. When I receive, it is usually with my background, brown.
>> But some messages, particularly Jeanene's, come in with a white background.
>> Green and blue are OK on that, but not yellow. When text comes in, it is
>> usually green, for me, but sometimes it comes in black, particularly from a
>> friend in DC, and I have to highlight to read it on a brown background.
>> greenBubble comes in blue, on a brown background, but occasionally in green.
>>
>> Siarlys
>>
>> P.S. This is Lance's area of expertise. He could tell us all what is
>> really going on.
>>
>> On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 00:11:22 -0400 "Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies
>> List" <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> writes:
>>
>>  I felt it was worth sharing, if only to sit back and see how siarlys
>> disected it, as i knew he would.
>> As to the yellow text, i can't read it at all in yellow, so i convert the
>> whole email into plain text, and then i can read it.
>>
>>  greenBubble
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *Subject:* Re: [GCFL-discuss] FW: Is America Really Going to To this?
>>
>>   Au contraire, I think you SHOULD read these two articles in full, AND I
>> think you should read one specific video paid for by Obama in full, and then
>> you should analyze them, cross-check them, to your heart's content. I find
>> these articles easy to discredit, but if you find them credible, so be it.
>> We each have one vote. greenBubble thought this article was worth sharing. I
>> thought it was worth dissecting. What I did note about both articles is
>> that, LIKE materials that issue from any candidate's campaign, they BEGIN
>> with a point of view they want to persuade the reader to, rather than
>> beginning with a set of facts they wish to report.
>>
>> Siarlys
>>
>> Incidentally, a Lutheran pastor I forwarded the discussion to thought it
>> was neat to put the citations in yellow text, because they were obviously
>> yellow journalism.
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:21:34 -0700 "Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies
>> List" <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> writes:
>>
>>   Wait, so 2 independent articles attacking Obama are being discredited
>> because you find they have conservative tendencies. And then Claim their all
>> lies (yet neither companies have anything to do with each other so 2 lies
>> saying the same thing is in need of mathematical explanation).
>>
>> BUT believe I should watch videos PAID for by Obama and believe it to be
>> all fact?
>>
>> Come on sir, I find this very hard to swallow.
>>
>> ~Lance
>>   On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 9:53 PM, Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies
>> List <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> wrote:
>>
>>>   Dear greenBubble and everyone,
>>>
>>> As you might expect, I can't find any merit in this article at all.
>>>
>>> The important reason is, why not?
>>>
>>> I note in passing that *The Spectator* and *World* magazine are somewhat
>>> MORE partisan in their peculiar caterwauling than either of the candidate's
>>> campaign organizations are. They have a right to express their opinion, but
>>> there is nothing factually reliable there.
>>>
>>> I have a long term view of politics. Barack Obama became a plausible
>>> candidate for president because he broke the decripit stereotypes that
>>> American politics had been locked into. The artificial monstrosities of
>>> "blue states" and "red states," the tired and almost meaningless terms
>>> "liberal" and "conservative," the infatuation with cultural polarization
>>> that accurately describes very few Americans. We are each much more complex
>>> than either the media or the professional politicos give us credit for, and
>>> we exist in much more complex webs of inter-relation to each other.
>>>
>>> Obama understands those complex interconnections that make us Americans,
>>> and those voters who have supported him, and seem ready to do so again,
>>> sense that, respond to it, look forward to leadership of the nature he
>>> offers.
>>>
>>> Also, he has a capacity to think about what he is doing, or saying, and
>>> to then answer decisively, as opposed to acting without thinking (the Bush
>>> style) or dithering without saying or doing anything (the style which cost
>>> John Kerry the 2004 election). He doesn't run away or go into loud denial
>>> either -- for instance, he waded right into the Jeremiah Wright controversy,
>>> and refused to cater to any loud demands from either admirers or critics of
>>> Wright.
>>>
>>> The Rush Limbaughs and Ann Coulters of the world (and add Melanie
>>> Phillips to the list) feel threatened by Obama, because their careers and
>>> influence, such as it is, are built in the very hatreds and polarizations
>>> which Obama is capably demolishing. So, rather than criticize him for what
>>> he is, they are trying to demonize him with the same tired old
>>> characterizations. It is not working, because these characterizations do not
>>> fit him, and a majority of voters recognize that.
>>>
>>> This article you just posted is exactly the kind of desperate hysteria I
>>> am referring to.
>>>
>>> By contrast, the *Chicago Tribune*, the most conservative Republican
>>> major daily in the country, has probably endorsed a Democrat for the first
>>> time in its history in choosing Barack Obama. The Tribune has been the
>>> source of the most critical factual data about Obama's less than savory
>>> associations with Chicago politics. The Tribune observes, however, that
>>> having had the opportunity to observe his career close-up for many years,
>>> before he became a national figure, and since, it is satisfied he is the
>>> most qualified candidate this year. By all accounts from Illinois, people in
>>> the state like a combination of vision with pragmatic political strategy,
>>> and don't hold some compromises with whoever is in power against Obama.
>>>
>>> I believe the authors will be surprised at how Obama does in office. I
>>> believe that his administration will not only be the end of
>>> pseudo-"conservative" hysteria, it will be the end of liberalism as we know
>>> it. Nancy Pelosi will just have to go along for the ride, because she
>>> doesn't have any other options.
>>>
>>> Now, as to the specific matter of Israel, I am a little disappointed that
>>> Obama has catered so much to the mantra required of American politicians to
>>> loudly proclaim their commitment to Israel. I don't believe that the foreign
>>> policy of the United States of America should be held hostage to any nation,
>>> including Israel. It speaks poorly of our democracy when any ethnic voting
>>> bloc can exercise a veto for its pet nation. (By the same token, I am not
>>> offended that Jonathan Pollard felt impelled to spy on the U.S. for Israel
>>> -- they are, after all, two distinct sovereign nations, and their interests
>>> do not always perfectly coincide). I feel the same way about urban
>>> concentrations of Slovaks, Serbs and Croats sabotaging George F.  Kennan's
>>> diplomatic work with President Tito of Yugoslavia during circa 1960. This is
>>> America, not a surrogate for any foreign power. I also feel the same about
>>> President Reagan appointing an ambassador to the Vatican, which is not a
>>> state except in its own pretensions.
>>>
>>> Israel does have a right to exist. Some of its policies are, in the long
>>> run, going to jeopardize its own existence, and perhaps our nation should
>>> firmly make that clear and refuse to give any Israeli government carte
>>> blanche. Likewise, we should stop catering to brutal dictatorships in
>>> Arabic-speaking nations, which simply turn the oppressed population hostile
>>> to us, when we should be a beacon of hope to them. (Hosni Mubarak in Egypt
>>> comes to mind, and our schizophrenic relationship to the Wahabi theocracy in
>>> Saudi Arabia).
>>>
>>> But I expect President Obama will for the most part leave US policy
>>> toward Israel about as it is. That is the safe thing to do, politically,
>>> particularly during a president's first term. He may be able to help Israel
>>> by reaching out more credibly to its neighbors.
>>>
>>> There are, in fact, millions of Arab-Americans, who have endured the
>>> absurdity of being cast as second class citizens as Obama was accused of
>>> being Muslim or Arab. As Colin Powell finally had the courage to point out,
>>> "So what if he is?" He's not, but neither Muslim faith nor Arab descent
>>> disqualifies any native-born American citizen from being president. A large
>>> portion of Arab-Americans are fifth generation. Labor unions in 1900 had to
>>> translate leaflets into Arabic, among a dozen other languages, because so
>>> many Syrian and Lebanese immigrants were in the work force. Generally, these
>>> Americans have not held candidates hostage by demanding that they denounce
>>> Israel, or pledge military aid to whatever country their grandparents or
>>> great great grandparents emigrated from.
>>>
>>> Is America really going to do this? I believe we are, and thank G-d for
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Siarlys
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Click to compare life insurance rates. Great rates, quick and easy.<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2142/fc/Ioyw6i3m2vxgtvSzjZ6eswuNu4BpZBODZn50ZyB6F1XLL7AjhAuZmE/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GCFL-discuss mailing list
> GCFL-discuss at gcfl.net
> http://gcfl.net/mailman/listinfo/gcfl-discuss
>
>

-- 
No animals were harmed in the sending of this message.
However, a few million electrons were extremely inconvenienced...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://gcfl.net/pipermail/gcfl-discuss/attachments/20081103/4a770551/attachment.htm 