Motorola V60V Now available from Telesales

[Ron]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Bob

Why don't you just admit that you state things (aggressively) as facts
when you are just guessing?

Any one following your posts can read that only after claiming "give
us a break, it never happened", you morphed to "maybe never happened".
Then later your post makes it obvious that you had no clue until you
saw a comment thread on a URL I directed you to. Odd how you ignore
that the editors at SprintUser say it was a price increase buy cling
to a single a guy in the comment thread, that said it was a "typo",
even if you guess right, another guy in the same thread, said it was
too bad that you didn't get the phones when they where $200, before
the price went up.

Maybe you guessed right, maybe not, the point is you are just guessing
and can't admit it. Just say "Bob is just guessing" you will feel
better, and remember to post more honestly in the future Bob.

BTW Maybe one reason Sprint raised the price is that they are almost
sold out, in under a week no less. I ordered one this morning, the
guy at Telesales wasn't sure if it would ship because they are almost
out of stock. Just, speculation on my part, and I don't mind saying
it.


Ron


"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<I_xrc.4259$Tn6.3971@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> "Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e0a6369d.0405211700.307d452b@posting.google.com...
> > Bob
> >
> > Projecting Bob, projecting; just because you got lucky doesn't make it
> > not so.
> >
> > You started with:
> >
> > * give us a break, no way, that "never" happened
> >
> > After another poster confirmed, the post morphed to
> >
> > * It "might have" been a typo
> >
> > After I posted the URL, you more recent posts
> >
> > * state that only then did you look and that is when you noticed the
> > comments where a poster said it was an error
> > * did you notice a later poster saying "Sprint has now raised the
> > price to $250 from their $199 original offering. Too bad if you did
> > not jump on this deal earlier".
> >
> > Basically all one needs to do is read what "you" wrote to see you post
> > things "adamantly as fact" when in fact you are only guessing. Just
> > because you guessed correct doesn't score you any points. Like they
> > say a broken clock is right twice a day
>
> Ron, I said in my first follow up to the original post, it could have been a
> typo ... and it was confirmed in a message that I requoted verbatim ...
>
> I don't know why you keep harping on this, save for the fact you can't get
> over the fact a mistake was make by whoever entered in the data onto SPCS's
> website originally.
>
> You really are starting to look like one with an anal retentive personality.
>
> Bob

 

[Ron]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Bob

Why don't you just admit that you state things (aggressively) as facts
when you are just guessing?

Any one following your posts can read that only after claiming "give
us a break, it never happened", you morphed to "maybe never happened".
Then later your post makes it obvious that you had no clue until you
saw a comment thread on a URL I directed you to. Odd how you ignore
that the editors at SprintUser say it was a price increase buy cling
to a single a guy in the comment thread, that said it was a "typo",
even if you guess right, another guy in the same thread, said it was
too bad that you didn't get the phones when they where $200, before
the price went up.

Maybe you guessed right, maybe not, the point is you are just guessing
and can't admit it. Just say "Bob is just guessing" you will feel
better, and remember to post more honestly in the future Bob.

BTW Maybe one reason Sprint raised the price is that they are almost
sold out, in under a week no less. I ordered one this morning, the
guy at Telesales wasn't sure if it would ship because they are almost
out of stock. Just, speculation on my part, and I don't mind saying
it.


Ron


"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<I_xrc.4259$Tn6.3971@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> "Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e0a6369d.0405211700.307d452b@posting.google.com...
> > Bob
> >
> > Projecting Bob, projecting; just because you got lucky doesn't make it
> > not so.
> >
> > You started with:
> >
> > * give us a break, no way, that "never" happened
> >
> > After another poster confirmed, the post morphed to
> >
> > * It "might have" been a typo
> >
> > After I posted the URL, you more recent posts
> >
> > * state that only then did you look and that is when you noticed the
> > comments where a poster said it was an error
> > * did you notice a later poster saying "Sprint has now raised the
> > price to $250 from their $199 original offering. Too bad if you did
> > not jump on this deal earlier".
> >
> > Basically all one needs to do is read what "you" wrote to see you post
> > things "adamantly as fact" when in fact you are only guessing. Just
> > because you guessed correct doesn't score you any points. Like they
> > say a broken clock is right twice a day
>
> Ron, I said in my first follow up to the original post, it could have been a
> typo ... and it was confirmed in a message that I requoted verbatim ...
>
> I don't know why you keep harping on this, save for the fact you can't get
> over the fact a mistake was make by whoever entered in the data onto SPCS's
> website originally.
>
> You really are starting to look like one with an anal retentive personality.
>
> Bob


"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<I_xrc.4259$Tn6.3971@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> "Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e0a6369d.0405211700.307d452b@posting.google.com...
> > Bob
> >
> > Projecting Bob, projecting; just because you got lucky doesn't make it
> > not so.
> >
> > You started with:
> >
> > * give us a break, no way, that "never" happened
> >
> > After another poster confirmed, the post morphed to
> >
> > * It "might have" been a typo
> >
> > After I posted the URL, you more recent posts
> >
> > * state that only then did you look and that is when you noticed the
> > comments where a poster said it was an error
> > * did you notice a later poster saying "Sprint has now raised the
> > price to $250 from their $199 original offering. Too bad if you did
> > not jump on this deal earlier".
> >
> > Basically all one needs to do is read what "you" wrote to see you post
> > things "adamantly as fact" when in fact you are only guessing. Just
> > because you guessed correct doesn't score you any points. Like they
> > say a broken clock is right twice a day
>
> Ron, I said in my first follow up to the original post, it could have been a
> typo ... and it was confirmed in a message that I requoted verbatim ...
>
> I don't know why you keep harping on this, save for the fact you can't get
> over the fact a mistake was make by whoever entered in the data onto SPCS's
> website originally.
>
> You really are starting to look like one with an anal retentive personality.
>
> Bob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

In article <I_xrc.4259$Tn6.3971@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> "Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e0a6369d.0405211700.307d452b@posting.google.com...
> > Bob
> >
> > Projecting Bob, projecting; just because you got lucky doesn't make it
> > not so.
> >
> > You started with:
> >
> > * give us a break, no way, that "never" happened
> >
> > After another poster confirmed, the post morphed to
> >
> > * It "might have" been a typo
> >
> > After I posted the URL, you more recent posts
> >
> > * state that only then did you look and that is when you noticed the
> > comments where a poster said it was an error
> > * did you notice a later poster saying "Sprint has now raised the
> > price to $250 from their $199 original offering. Too bad if you did
> > not jump on this deal earlier".
> >
> > Basically all one needs to do is read what "you" wrote to see you post
> > things "adamantly as fact" when in fact you are only guessing. Just
> > because you guessed correct doesn't score you any points. Like they
> > say a broken clock is right twice a day
>
> Ron, I said in my first follow up to the original post, it could have been a
> typo ... and it was confirmed in a message that I requoted verbatim ...
>
> I don't know why you keep harping on this, save for the fact you can't get
> over the fact a mistake was make by whoever entered in the data onto SPCS's
> website originally.
>
> You really are starting to look like one with an anal retentive personality.

Bingo, the insults start. heavens forfend he admit he was wrong.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Røbert M" <rmarkoff@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:rmarkoff-FA15AD.20031521052004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
<snipped>

> I feel your pain Ron. Be glad Smith hasn't started using 4 letter
> obscenity words against you like he is wont to do.

Oh? and what four letter words would those be Phillipe. The ones you use to
do bogus searches through Google? You surely are a Magog ...

Bob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

In article <t0yrc.4263$Tn6.1191@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> "Røbert M" <rmarkoff@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:rmarkoff-FA15AD.20031521052004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> <snipped>
>
> > I feel your pain Ron. Be glad Smith hasn't started using 4 letter
> > obscenity words against you like he is wont to do.
>
> Oh? and what four letter words would those be Phillipe. The ones you use to
> do bogus searches through Google? You surely are a Magog ...

If the results prove you a liar they are bogus?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Røbert M" <rmarkoff@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:rmarkoff-09C5C5.20264621052004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
<snipped>

> > You really are starting to look like one with an anal retentive
personality.
>
> Bingo, the insults start. heavens forfend he admit he was wrong.

No ... that wasn't an insult, it was a perception ... And by the way
Phillipe, you are the only insult in this newsgroup ... Actually 105 insults
....

Bob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Røbert M" <rmarkoff@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:rmarkoff-21E4CC.20333021052004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <t0yrc.4263$Tn6.1191@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> "Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Røbert M" <rmarkoff@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:rmarkoff-FA15AD.20031521052004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> > <snipped>
> >
> > > I feel your pain Ron. Be glad Smith hasn't started using 4 letter
> > > obscenity words against you like he is wont to do.
> >
> > Oh? and what four letter words would those be Phillipe. The ones you use
to
> > do bogus searches through Google? You surely are a Magog ...
>
> If the results prove you a liar they are bogus?

What results? Your google searches? Those aren't results ... I've already
explained it to you and everyone else how and why those results are bogus...

Bob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

In article <p9yrc.4289$Tn6.441@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> "Røbert M" <rmarkoff@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:rmarkoff-09C5C5.20264621052004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> <snipped>
>
> > > You really are starting to look like one with an anal retentive
> personality.
> >
> > Bingo, the insults start. heavens forfend he admit he was wrong.
>
> No ... that wasn't an insult, it was a perception

RIGHT - you have your own definition for everything, and your own UNIQUE
rules for usenet.

 

[Ron]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Larry

Can I ask is Vision and 1X the same thing? I was wondering about
hooking it up to a laptop (airports, etc...). Given my last phone was
a p8767 I Vision has not been on my radar screen

I keep toying with going over to Verizon but Sprnt is so much cheaper
for me, aside from list price being less the association discounts on
Sprint are bigger on Sprint (10%).

Ron


larryt510@hotmail.com (Larry Thomas) wrote in message news:<9c02589b.0405212328.6a2425e5@posting.google.com>...
> ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote in message news:<e0a6369d.0405211519.86c5cce@posting.google.com>...
> > Larry
> >
> > As you know my interest in the new phone is because in side-by-sides
> > with Sanyo and other supposedly better Sprint phone my p8767 gets a
> > signal when these other Sprint phones are out of service.
> >
> > In the review found at sprintuser.com the poster did a critical review
> > of the new phone. He noted the lack of bells and whistles, the UI,
> > etc? but had great things to say about its call quality and although
> > he notes he has had limited time to test it did get a signal in what
> > he previously considered a Sprint No Service.
> >
> > I am going to email him in a week or so and see how is call quality
> > testing is going. His early results match mine. The other phones are
> > great if you want the bells and whistles. However, if you need to
> > pull in a signal in a weak signal area better ditch the Sanyo and get
> > a Motorola phone.
> >
> >
> > Ron
>
>
> Sprint recently put up a new tower near my house so signal is not a
> problem for me. Any brand will work good here. My beef with many of
> the newer Sprint phones (especially Sanyos) is that the earpiece sound
> quality is not as good as they used to be. The Samsung A680 and
> Toshiba 4050 both have pretty good sound quality but the 4050 is
> lacking in volume so I can rule that one out. If the Motorola was
> Vision capable I probably would pick one up right away. I have the
> old $10/mo Vision plan which is too good to cancel. I can live without
> a camera, RL capabilities, speakerphones and other bells and whistles
> but I must have my Vision. Looks like it will be the A680 for me. I'm
> up for the 18 month rebate program on July 8th so I might wait until
> then to get it. I've always liked the looks & size of the V60 and it
> appears to be built very well. If only it was Vision capable.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e0a6369d.0405212306.d1a5ac@posting.google.com...
> Bob
>
> Why don't you just admit that you state things (aggressively) as facts
> when you are just guessing

<snipped>

Hmmm, run out of things to say Ron, posting the same message 3 times?

This argument of ours has gone on way to long. I've already said numerous
times, I never saw it @ $199. I was guessing, that it could have been typo,
before I ever went to sprintpcsinfo.com.

End of story and my last contribution to this thread.

Bob

 

[Ron]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Bob

No, it an error with goggle post but again, please project your
opinion as fact (again)

now don't you feel better admitting that when you posted "give us a
break it never happened" you where just guessing.

Ron

"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<W9Hrc.5029$Tn6.990@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> "Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e0a6369d.0405212306.d1a5ac@posting.google.com...
> > Bob
> >
> > Why don't you just admit that you state things (aggressively) as facts
> > when you are just guessing
>
> <snipped>
>
> Hmmm, run out of things to say Ron, posting the same message 3 times?
>
> This argument of ours has gone on way to long. I've already said numerous
> times, I never saw it @ $199. I was guessing, that it could have been typo,
> before I ever went to sprintpcsinfo.com.
>
> End of story and my last contribution to this thread.
>
> Bob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote in message news:<e0a6369d.0405220707.222ad99@posting.google.com>...
> Larry
>
> Can I ask is Vision and 1X the same thing? I was wondering about
> hooking it up to a laptop (airports, etc...). Given my last phone was
> a p8767 I Vision has not been on my radar screen
>
> I keep toying with going over to Verizon but Sprnt is so much cheaper
> for me, aside from list price being less the association discounts on
> Sprint are bigger on Sprint (10%).
>
> Ron

1X is another term for 3rd generation compatible which a phone has to
be in order to be capable of Vision. But some of the phones (such as
the Motorola V60V and Nokia 3588i) have Vision disabled.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e0a6369d.0405220943.7f527d8e@posting.google.com...
> Bob
>
> No, it an error with goggle post but again, please project your
> opinion as fact (again)
>
> now don't you feel better admitting that when you posted "give us a
> break it never happened" you where just guessing.
>
> Ron

Nope, as I was under the impression it was always $249 ...

Bob

 

[Ron]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Keep guessing Bob once in a while you are bound to be right.... again
there is a job for you in the Bush administration


"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<F3Nrc.5368$Tn6.4152@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> "Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e0a6369d.0405220943.7f527d8e@posting.google.com...
> > Bob
> >
> > No, it an error with goggle post but again, please project your
> > opinion as fact (again)
> >
> > now don't you feel better admitting that when you posted "give us a
> > break it never happened" you where just guessing.
> >
> > Ron
>
> Nope, as I was under the impression it was always $249 ...
>
> Bob

 

[Eric]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote:
> Keep guessing Bob once in a while you are
> bound to be right.... again
> there is a job for you in the Bush
> administration

So does that mean you have taken up all the jobs in the Kerry
administration? Bet there were a lot of vacancies there. After all, he
voted for it before he voted against it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

In article <3081-40AFCEE7-70@storefull-3236.bay.webtv.net>,
caperenewal@webtv.net (Eric) wrote:

> ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote:
> > Keep guessing Bob once in a while you are
> > bound to be right.... again
> > there is a job for you in the Bush
> > administration
>
> So does that mean you have taken up all the jobs in the Kerry
> administration? Bet there were a lot of vacancies there. After all, he
> voted for it before he voted against it.

Kerry is not the one who went AWOL from a Desk Job.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Røbert M wrote:

> RIGHT - you have your own definition for everything, and your own UNIQUE
> rules for usenet.

As do you, the difference is his definition and rules mirror those
accepted by the majority and your don't.


Frank

 

[Ron]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

I have you noticed my posts not being consistent?

An additional aside, don't take a "Bush" camp snippet from a
commercial as truth. Or for that matter much of anything they say as
the "whole truth".

What appears to be a good bill is voted against for different, and
valid, reasons. For example someone tags on billions of unrelated pork
for their pals, so a no vote also includes the message, "send us a
clean bill". Often the pork is attached just to make it easy to attack
the person who votes no, knowing that most people, like you for
example, don't really follow what is going on and only listen to the
30 second propaganda snippets.

For example, recently congress told Bush he does not get a blank
check, if he wants another check with 10 zeros he needs to provide
some details. Not unreasonable considering how far off track the war
has gone.

BTW I support our troops 120% and believe we MUST succeed. I don't
believe Bush understands how to succeed. He fires or ignores anyone
who tells him the "emperor has no cloths" then claims bad intelligence
when he finds out he is naked.


caperenewal@webtv.net (Eric) wrote in message news:<3081-40AFCEE7-70@storefull-3236.bay.webtv.net>...
> ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote:
> > Keep guessing Bob once in a while you are
> > bound to be right.... again
> > there is a job for you in the Bush
> > administration
>
> So does that mean you have taken up all the jobs in the Kerry
> administration? Bet there were a lot of vacancies there. After all, he
> voted for it before he voted against it.

 

[Ron]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Larry

Acutally I don't thing Vision is really 3G, more like 2.5G is what I
think I read.

There are some true 3G high speed networks but there are just getting
to the USA. KDDI (Japan) did great with their high speed. In fact it
was a huge turn-around for thier company. I think DoCoMo is still
stuggleing to get decent 3G fielded. 3G EV-DO was a huge win for KDDI
/ Motorola (KDDI is 100% Motorala network).

I think Verizon and Sprint are both looking at deploying the same
equipment here in the USA. Verizon has some high speed in spot areas
but I though I heard them say it would be a national thing by end of
year.

Ron

larryt510@hotmail.com (Larry Thomas) wrote in message news:<9c02589b.0405221504.20d49f@posting.google.com>...
> ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote in message news:<e0a6369d.0405220707.222ad99@posting.google.com>...
> > Larry
> >
> > Can I ask is Vision and 1X the same thing? I was wondering about
> > hooking it up to a laptop (airports, etc...). Given my last phone was
> > a p8767 I Vision has not been on my radar screen
> >
> > I keep toying with going over to Verizon but Sprnt is so much cheaper
> > for me, aside from list price being less the association discounts on
> > Sprint are bigger on Sprint (10%).
> >
> > Ron
>
> 1X is another term for 3rd generation compatible which a phone has to
> be in order to be capable of Vision. But some of the phones (such as
> the Motorola V60V and Nokia 3588i) have Vision disabled.

 

[Eric]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote:
> I have you noticed my posts not being
> consistent?

No idea what that statement means.

> Often the pork is attached just to make it easy
> to attack the person who votes no, knowing
> that most people, like you for example, don't
> really follow what is going on and only listen
> to the 30 second propaganda snippets.

I follow politics *very* closely. All I was making a comment on was
that this thread is about a Motorola phone, and you consistantly talking
about Bush and politics in a cell phone group and thread. Its sad when
one cannot just talk and discuss a topic without throwing some stupid
political nonsense like "there's a place for you in the Bush
administration" about every other post.

 

[Eric]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote:
> An additional aside, don't take a "Bush" camp
> snippet from a commercial as truth. Or for
> that matter much of anything they say as the
> "whole truth".

I apolgize Ron, I reread my intial post in response to your post and
realized it was a bit harsh. But from my perspective, it just seemed to
be coming out of left field, with the multiple "there's a place for you
in the Bush administration" postings. I am all for a good political
debate/discussion, but it just seemed like you were going out of your
way to turn the thread political when it didn't start out that way. I
apologize again for my behavior.

> What appears to be a good bill is voted
> against for different, and valid, reasons. For
> example someone tags on billions of
> unrelated pork for their pals, so a no vote also
> includes the message, "send us a clean bill".
> Often the pork is attached just to make it easy
> to attack the person who votes no, knowing
> that most people, like you for example, don't
> really follow what is going on and only listen
> to the 30 second propaganda snippets.

I follow politics very closely, and this kind of thing happens to most
potential candidates. I remember John McCain was victim to this back in
2000. But sadly, that is how politics in this country is ran. You
could look back on either voting record of John Kerry or George W. Bush
and find inconsistencies. But as a cadidate, you always want to pick up
on something quick and attack it... get it in peoples' minds and pound
on it.. and that is what Bush's camp did about Kerry's voting record.
Kerry, in turn, hasn't done enough I don't think to damage Bush's rep
that he could have. Bush's rep seems to be taking hits all over the
place, and Kerry is smart for just letting it go with the tide and let
the bad press do all the talking.

> BTW I support our troops 120% and believe
> we MUST succeed. I don't believe Bush
> understands how to succeed. He fires or
> ignores anyone who tells him the "emperor
> has no cloths" then claims bad intelligence
> when he finds out he is naked.

I do think Bush rushed the war somewhat. There's no doubt that Saddam
was a threat to everyone, but had he not been caught last December, Bush
wouldn't have a leg to stand on concerning the war. There have been no
WMD found - a few hints at it, but nothing concrete - and with the
prisoner abuse scandel going on, this war would have been a total bust
had we not captured Saddam. Do I think that the world is a better place
without Saddam in power? Of course. But I also think that this war
didn't go nearly according to plan, and that really reflects poorly on
Bush, his staff, the intelligence around him, and our country. He
should have been alerted to any kind of prisoner abuse going on, and not
have been blindsided by it. If you can't depend on your staff in times
like these to keep you informed, who can you depend on?

Kerry I do not think has the personality to be a president. Some may
say that to be the leader of this country, you don't need to have
personality as it is not a personality contest. But Kerry's image is so
bland, and with Bush's people painting him as indecisive and
flip-floppy, it makes it even worse. Look what Clinton's appearance on
MTV and The Arsenio Hall Show did for his campaign. Kerry will pick up
a lot of votes from democrats who are just itching for revenge from the
"wronging" of the 2000 election, but he's going to need the support of
the undecided voter and young people to win in November.

I know I am way off topic here, but I have a lot of thoughts about
politics heading into this year's election.

Eric

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Ron <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Larry
>
> Acutally I don't thing Vision is really 3G, more like 2.5G is what I
> think I read.

Right. When Sprint goes 1xEV-DV it'll be 3G. 1xRTT is 2.5G. Verizon's
still mostly 2.5G, but they are rolling out EV-DO. Sprint is skipping DO
and going directly to DV.

> I think Verizon and Sprint are both looking at deploying the same
> equipment here in the USA. Verizon has some high speed in spot areas
> but I though I heard them say it would be a national thing by end of
> year.

They're testing 1xEV-DO in San Diego and DC. I'm a VZW customer as well
as a Sprint customer and I haven't heard anything about nationwide deployment
of BroadbandAccess (their brand name for their 1xEV-DO service) yet.

>> 1X is another term for 3rd generation compatible which a phone has to
>> be in order to be capable of Vision. But some of the phones (such as
>> the Motorola V60V and Nokia 3588i) have Vision disabled.

Specifically, Vision is 1xRTT, which allows for speeds of up to about 120K.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

[Ron]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Eric

Odd you mention personality. Bush's only qualification, it appears,
is that he is appealing to the masses. More and more evidence is
emerging that our policies, including Iraq, are guided by political
dogma. He is losing the war and lives because he will not commit the
resources to win, because he will not admit he was wrong and change
his course. That is unforgivable.

Getting Saddam out of power was a good thing, and at to be done
eventually.

The key word is eventually. We had a policy of containment with USSR
for 50 years and still do with Korea and Cuba. We could have waited a
few more months to better prepare for Iraq. Also we could have shared
the post-war burden with the rest of the world. If the goal is Saddam
out of power and a democratic Iraq we had a better chance of success
with an international effort. The offer was mode and Bush was OK the
International support as long he controlled 100% no bid contract pork
for his pals. I am not in love with our allies but I don't blame them
for telling him to shove it. Halliburton is getting rich and our
troops are taking almost 100% of the hits. That's a good deal for
someone.

As far as credibility goes, what I find amazing, is that since the
campaign, Bush can lie, about BIG thing, get caught, give a feeble
excuse and he gets a free pass. For example:

He produces a 5 year budget plan to show the USA how he can reduce the
deficit. He budgets ZERO dollars for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The reason given was we didn't exactly know how much it would cost so
we entered ZERO. Interesting that when he was making his case he
seemed to know exactly how much, but that aside ZERO is a huge lie.

Same budget, that is supposed to prove, he can control the deficit,
relied on income from sun setting tax breaks. At the exact same time
Bush is requesting the tax break become permanent. Thus again his
budget lies.

As we argue if the Medicare bill will cost 400 billion or 500+ billion
over then next ten years what is not being discussed is that Bush has
the benefits phasing in over 10 years. When fully deployed the cost
is 2 trillion for then next 10 years. Plus his bill does nice things
for certain groups. Like it guarantees drug companies get paid full
retail and make it illegal (look it up) for states to continue to
negotiate discounted prices. What happened to local control and
State's right? Guess those ideals got lost in the great deal for a
drug companies. They can pump up retail for the Gov't covered meds and
give bigger discounts to groups that can still negotiate large
purchase discounts

During the last election, Bush had refused to release details (who
knew that would be a reoccurring theme) of his budget proposals until
just before the 3rd and last debate. Gore pointed out he was off by 1
trillion dollars and Bush accused him of "fuzzy math". A few days
later when groups including the non-partisan American association of
actuaries showed Gore correct and Bush a liar the reply from the bush
camp was something like, "I can't tell you how I will come up with the
1 trillion because I need something to negotiate with congress" .
That was it, the issue died. How?

After the Enron scandal more light was focused on GWB's own cooking
the books and insider trading with Harkin Energy. It helps a lot when
you steal millions to have the President (your Dad) appoint a friendly
lawyer to instigate. Bush of course maintains he had no knowledge of
the cooked books. A year or so ago, released board meeting minutes
proved he was in the room when the restatement of earning was begin
discussed. Recall that before the cooked books went public, Bush
dumped his stock and made a tidy bundle. The Bush white house response
was that (MBA) Bush, did not understand that restating earning (by
what 70%) was going to effect the stock price.

Eric want to tell me how he keeps getting away with this? I do not get
it.

Ron









caperenewal@webtv.net (Eric) wrote in message news:<22110-40B0EE76-215@storefull-3238.bay.webtv.net>...
> ronf957@hotmail.com (Ron) wrote:
> > An additional aside, don't take a "Bush" camp
> > snippet from a commercial as truth. Or for
> > that matter much of anything they say as the
> > "whole truth".
>
> I apolgize Ron, I reread my intial post in response to your post and
> realized it was a bit harsh. But from my perspective, it just seemed to
> be coming out of left field, with the multiple "there's a place for you
> in the Bush administration" postings. I am all for a good political
> debate/discussion, but it just seemed like you were going out of your
> way to turn the thread political when it didn't start out that way. I
> apologize again for my behavior.
>
> > What appears to be a good bill is voted
> > against for different, and valid, reasons. For
> > example someone tags on billions of
> > unrelated pork for their pals, so a no vote also
> > includes the message, "send us a clean bill".
> > Often the pork is attached just to make it easy
> > to attack the person who votes no, knowing
> > that most people, like you for example, don't
> > really follow what is going on and only listen
> > to the 30 second propaganda snippets.
>
> I follow politics very closely, and this kind of thing happens to most
> potential candidates. I remember John McCain was victim to this back in
> 2000. But sadly, that is how politics in this country is ran. You
> could look back on either voting record of John Kerry or George W. Bush
> and find inconsistencies. But as a cadidate, you always want to pick up
> on something quick and attack it... get it in peoples' minds and pound
> on it.. and that is what Bush's camp did about Kerry's voting record.
> Kerry, in turn, hasn't done enough I don't think to damage Bush's rep
> that he could have. Bush's rep seems to be taking hits all over the
> place, and Kerry is smart for just letting it go with the tide and let
> the bad press do all the talking.
>
> > BTW I support our troops 120% and believe
> > we MUST succeed. I don't believe Bush
> > understands how to succeed. He fires or
> > ignores anyone who tells him the "emperor
> > has no cloths" then claims bad intelligence
> > when he finds out he is naked.
>
> I do think Bush rushed the war somewhat. There's no doubt that Saddam
> was a threat to everyone, but had he not been caught last December, Bush
> wouldn't have a leg to stand on concerning the war. There have been no
> WMD found - a few hints at it, but nothing concrete - and with the
> prisoner abuse scandel going on, this war would have been a total bust
> had we not captured Saddam. Do I think that the world is a better place
> without Saddam in power? Of course. But I also think that this war
> didn't go nearly according to plan, and that really reflects poorly on
> Bush, his staff, the intelligence around him, and our country. He
> should have been alerted to any kind of prisoner abuse going on, and not
> have been blindsided by it. If you can't depend on your staff in times
> like these to keep you informed, who can you depend on?
>
> Kerry I do not think has the personality to be a president. Some may
> say that to be the leader of this country, you don't need to have
> personality as it is not a personality contest. But Kerry's image is so
> bland, and with Bush's people painting him as indecisive and
> flip-floppy, it makes it even worse. Look what Clinton's appearance on
> MTV and The Arsenio Hall Show did for his campaign. Kerry will pick up
> a lot of votes from democrats who are just itching for revenge from the
> "wronging" of the 2000 election, but he's going to need the support of
> the undecided voter and young people to win in November.
>
> I know I am way off topic here, but I have a lot of thoughts about
> politics heading into this year's election.
>
> Eric

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Ron" <ronf957@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e0a6369d.0405230856.2c8101d9@posting.google.com...
> BTW I support our troops 120% and believe we MUST succeed. I don't
> believe Bush understands how to succeed. He fires or ignores anyone
> who tells him the "emperor has no cloths" then claims bad intelligence
> when he finds out he is naked.

Monday morning quarterbacking is real easy to do but not very
helpful. I haven't seen any of the Bush critics come up with a
better plan on how to run the war in Iraq.

--

John Richards

 

[Eric]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

(John Richards) wrote:
> Monday morning quarterbacking is real easy
> to do but not very helpful. I haven't seen any
> of the Bush critics come up with a better plan
> on how to run the war in Iraq.

That is the same way I feel about these ridiculous 9/11 hearings and
such. I am all for finding better ways to avoid such tragedies or
training our police/firefighters on how to handle situations like that
better... but going back and trying to place blame on people involved on
that day because "they didn't act fast enough" or "they should have done
this" or "should have done that" is insulting and absurd. The images of
people hecking former the New York Mayor made me sick... *he* didn't
cause 9/11... he was stunned and shocked like everyone else. Nobody
had ever faced a challenge like that... it was a few hours of sheer
panic... and to place blame on someone or a group of people is
ridiculous.

Eric