[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Full-Disclosure] OT-POLITICAL: (Was: www.georgewbush.com)
- To: Andrew <notes@xxxxxxx>, Nancy Kramer <nekramer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Schmehl <pauls@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] OT-POLITICAL: (Was: www.georgewbush.com)
- From: yossarian <yossarian@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:12:46 +0100
Interesting - who said that DMCA or the Communications Decency Act or the
Patriot Act were tech friendly? These three are at best pro-certain
unmentionable tech companies, but basically against the free flow of
information, which many consider a condition sin qua non for tech
development. Probably news.com wants to rally the vote of the techies for
Bush.... If they buy that, they truly deserve another tech-slump, which
started if memory serves me right, round the time GWB got an election...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew" <notes@xxxxxxx>
To: "Nancy Kramer" <nekramer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Paul Schmehl"
<pauls@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] OT-POLITICAL: (Was: www.georgewbush.com)
> <BR>
> And don't forget to read some of the comments, like: "Wow is this
<BR>
> misleading Jim Grady -- 10/28/04"<BR>
> Summing it up, Bush wasn't included in the score, and being "pro
tech" <BR>
> doesn't mean you'd vote the way their scoring system says you
should.<BR>
> <BR>
> At 01:17 AM 11/2/2004, Nancy Kramer wrote:<BR>
> >Continuing in the political vein<BR>
> ><BR>
> >See the link below for the party who is most tech friendly in the
US.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >http://news.com.com/2009-1028_3-5431061.html<BR>
> ><BR>
> >The results surprised me.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Regards,<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Nancy Kramer<BR>
> >Webmaster http://www.americandreamcars.com<BR>
> >Free Color Picture Ads for Collector Cars<BR>
> >One of the Ten Best Places To Buy or Sell a Collector Car on the
Web<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> >At 06:43 PM 11/1/2004, Paul Schmehl wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> >>--On Sunday, October 31, 2004 09:59:55 PM -0600 "J.A.
Terranson" <BR>
> >><measl@xxxxxxx> wrote:<BR>
> >>><BR>
> >>>As Nader supporters continually point out, Kerry is a
compromised,<BR>
> >>>centrist Democrat,<BR>
> >><BR>
> >>Calling Kerry a centrist Democrat is akin to calling pigs
flamingos.<BR>
> >><BR>
> >>You know the rest...<BR>
> >><BR>
> >>Paul Schmehl (pauls@xxxxxxxxxxxx)<BR>
> >>Adjunct Information Security Officer<BR>
> >>The University of Texas at Dallas<BR>
> >>AVIEN Founding Member<BR>
> >>http://www.utdallas.edu<BR>
> >><BR>
> >>_______________________________________________<BR>
> >>Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.<BR>
> >>Charter:
http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html<BR>
> >><BR>
> >><BR>
> >><BR>
> >><BR>
> >><BR>
> >><BR>
> >>---<BR>
> >>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<BR>
> >>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).<BR>
> >>Version: 6.0.784 / Virus Database: 530 - Release Date:
10/27/2004<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> >---<BR>
> >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.<BR>
> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).<BR>
> >Version: 6.0.784 / Virus Database: 530 - Release Date:
10/27/2004<BR>
> <BR>
> _______________________________________________<BR>
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.<BR>
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html