The politics of nature

[Sportsmen Against Bush]

The politics of nature
Bush has said his environmental strategies won't harm nature or man--a
claim some doubt

Chicago Tribune , December 19,2003
by Julie Deardorff

Standing before a group of schoolchildren, President Bush repeated an
oft-stated promise that his environmental policies would stand on hard
scientific research.


"We'll base decisions on sound science," he said in 2001. "We'll call
upon the best minds of America to help us achieve an objective, which
is: cleaner air, cleaner water and a better use of our land."


But the role of science in forging environmental policy has grown into
a central controversy of Bush's presidency. Critics say that although
Bush vowed to "rely on the best of evidence before deciding," many of
his policies dismiss the scientific recommendations of federal
agencies.


From air to wetlands, Bush's policies have sparked a national debate,
prompting a closer look at some of the most controversial
environmental decisions in decades.


Tuesday, a federal judge agreed that science was being misapplied in
one case. On the eve of the snowmobile season's opening day, the
National Park Service was ordered to restore a plan--cast aside by the
Bush administration--that will phase out snowmobile use at Yellowstone
National Park.


In another development that pleased environmental groups, the
administration retreated from a proposal that could have reduced
federal protection for millions of acres of wetlands. Facing public
opposition to the plan, the White House reaffirmed its commitment to
the goal of "no net loss" of wetlands.


White House officials say "sound science" fits with Bush's
market-based approach to environmental protection. The administration
says it's possible to balance the need for biodiversity, clean air and
clean water with economic growth, energy production and reduced
regulation.


Nevertheless, the administration misapplied science when deciding
policy on more than 20 issues, said a report by the minority party
staff of the House Committee on Government Reform. The Democratic
report charged that the administration also has manipulated and
omitted work done by government scientists.


Other federal reports have determined that regulatory agencies,
including the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Park
Service, made decisions on clean air and national park issues based in
part on industry anecdotes and promises.


And leading scientific journals have questioned both the state of
scientific independence and several key Bush appointees who are former
lobbyists from the industries they now regulate.


Snowmobile decision


In the seesaw battle over snowmobiles in Yellowstone, a judge said
this week that the Bush administration's decision to relax the ban set
by the Clinton administration was inconsistent with scientific
findings.


In peak periods, more than 500 snowmobiles might zip through
Yellowstone's west entrance in one hour, motoring along in a single
corridor. Park employees, from snowmobile mechanics to west entrance
workers, have complained of nausea, dizziness, headaches, sore throats
and eye irritation from the high levels of toxic pollutants from
snowmobile emissions. A 2000 National Park Service report on
air-quality concerns related to snowmobiles found that "levels of
individual pollutants found in snowmobile exhaust, including
carcinogens such as benzene, can be high enough to be a threat to
human health."


For wildlife trying to survive harsh winters on stored fat supplies,
the roar of a snowmobile is another threat.


"Research has shown that their heart rates increase when a snowmobile
passes, indicating they are stressed even if they do not move away,"
according to a National Park Service's State of the Parks report. "Any
energy loss affects the animal's ability to survive in the winter."


Several studies by the EPA have said that banning the machines would
eliminate that noise, water and air pollution and is the best way to
preserve the park and its inhabitants.


A letter signed by eight former government officials, including Park
Service directors, urged the Bush administration to rescind its
decision.


"The Park Service should follow its own scientific studies about the
adverse effects of allowing snowmobiles to continue in the parks," the
letter said. "To ignore its conclusion would clearly be to accept
avoidable risks to health and safety, a narrowing of beneficial uses
and weaker preservation of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National
Parks."


The public overwhelmingly supported a ban on the machines set during
the Clinton administration that would have taken effect Wednesday. But
the Bush administration reversed the policy and said snowmobiles could
stay with some restrictions, including a daily limit on the machines
at each gate--which meant fewer snowmobiles during peak periods--and
the use of newer and cleaner machines. Snowmobiles were only allowed
on groomed roads, about 1 percent of the 2.2 million acre park.


The National Park Service argued that its plan struck a balance
between its dual missions of conservation and public access. But on
Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Emmett Sullivan rejected the argument,
saying, "conservation can rarely be trumped."


Sullivan also found that the Bush decision contradicted the scientific
analysis.


"There is evidence in the record that there isn't an explanation for
this change and that the supplemental environmental impact statement
was completely politically driven," he wrote in his 48-page brief.


Critics decry policies


In other instances, including public-land and clean-air issues,
critics say the Bush administration has glossed over scientific
studies in favor of industry.


Citing national energy needs, the administration has pushed to open
the coastal plain of the 19 million-acre Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge for oil exploration and development. Though dropped from this
year's energy bill, the plan still is on the agenda, White House
officials say.


Often described as "America's Serengeti" because of its abundance of
wildlife, the refuge makes up 5 percent of Alaska's North Slope. The
remaining 95 percent is open to drilling.


The Bush administration and industry say drilling can be performed in
an environmentally friendly manner, using new technology to probe
underneath the tundra without destroying the fragile arctic land. This
smaller "footprint" would prevent another sprawling Prudhoe Bay--North
America's largest oil field--which has turned parts of Alaska's North
Slope into a gritty industrial zone.


"The whole world doesn't have to be zero sum," Bush said to
Environmental Youth Award winners in 2001. "It doesn't have to be that
we find more energy and, therefore, the environment suffers. We've got
technologies now to make sure that we explore and protect the
environment at the same time ... we need to be good stewards of the
land."


Putting nature at risk?


But federal reports have found that oil exploration and development
could significantly disturb the caribou, musk oxen, snow geese and
other species in the coastal plain, as well as the vegetation.


Although the plain is home to more than 200 species of birds and
mammals, it is the fate of the porcupine caribou herd that has been a
central issue. In the spring, when the snow recedes, 130,000 caribou
migrate over the mountains to the coastal plain, which is relatively
predator-free and well stocked with nutritious forage.


Three times in the last 18 years, lingering tundra snow has prevented
the caribou from reaching the coastal plain. In those three years,
calf survival was poorer because of less nutrition and higher levels
of predation.


Pipelines and roads associated with oil development in the coastal
plain area would displace the caribou cows, reducing the amount and
quality of forage during and after calving and render the herd more
vulnerable to predators.


"A reduction in annual calf survival of as little as 5 percent would
be sufficient to cause a decline in the porcupine caribou population,"
according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.


"Ecological science is never cut and dry," said wildlife biologist Jim
Sedinger, a member of the National Academy of Sciences committee that
studied the cumulative effects of oil and gas activities on Alaska's
North Slope. "When the administration is bent on development in
particular areas, it gives them an out; you can never say with
certainty what will happen. It's not just [the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge] issue--it's a number of them. They're using
uncertainty to ignore potential impacts of lots of different
activities."


Uncertainty was one of the reasons given after the administration
altered scientific reports that indicate a growing problem with
industry emissions and global warming.


In the EPA's annual 2002 report on air-pollution trends, a chapter on
climate was omitted, even though climate change had been addressed the
previous six years.


In June, the White House revised a section on global warming in the
EPA's comprehensive state of the environment report. Earlier drafts
had contained a section describing the risks of rising global
temperatures.


Former EPA chief Christie Whitman, who stepped down in June, said the
section was deleted because the agency could not agree on the science
in the climate-change debate. But it sparked widespread criticism.
Several members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
called for the White House to release the unaltered version of the EPA
report. The senators also said the action "brings into question the
ability and authority of the EPA or any agency within this
administration to publish unbiased scientific reports."


- - -


To our readers:


"Environmental Battlegrounds," a special photo report that appears as
a separate section in this newspaper, was printed on Monday to
accommodate production demands. Since then, there have been
developments in two of the issues covered in the report.


On Tuesday, a federal judge ordered the Bush administration to abandon
its plan to relax a ban on snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park.


On Wednesday, the administration steered away from a draft proposal
that would have removed federal protection from millions of acres of
wetlands. Those isolated wetlands, which are not connected to other
waterways, will continue to fall under the jurisdiction of the Army
Corps of Engineers.


Neither development is expected to end the debate, ensuring that each
issue will remain an environmental battleground.

[Hayduke]

Sound science. This administration lies and spins like no other.
Their reliance on politcally driven "science" led the the killing of
over 30,000 salmon on the Klamath to appease potato farmers; an
overturn of the snowmobile policy because the judge found their policy
"abritrary and capricious", will see many former BLM employees
involved in the San Rafael Swell land exchange going to prison for
undervaluing the land to be exchanged to line their own pockets, they
don't believe in Global Warming even though most scientists can prove
it is happening, former EPA Chief Whitman had to guts to leave due to
the pressure the administration placed on her to not use sound science
in her enforcement and rulemaking, the list goes on and on.

I love it. This administration will be taking a beating on their
environmental record in this year's election - not for their
environmental legacy but for their lying to the public with proof in
hand.

Ha!

Peace

On 28 Dec 2003 22:07:58 -0800, (Sportsmen
Against Bush) wrote:


>
>"We'll base decisions on sound science," he said in 2001. "We'll call
>upon the best minds of America to help us achieve an objective, which
>is: cleaner air, cleaner water and a better use of our land."
>

[Larry L]

"Sportsmen Against Bush" > wrote

I consider myself very moderate and have voted in one election or another
for members of both major parties, two minor ones, and an "independant"

That said, I find "the current administration" to be THE biggest threat to
America, as I was taught to believe in it, at nearly all levels, since the
late 60s, early 70's

However, I'd suggest that to be more effective you drop the "against Bush"
and instead take a "for Something" approach .... everytime you say the man's
name you unconsciously give him air time, for one thing. They have
available, and are expert at using, a huge negative, fear, to
jerk the strings of "knee jerk" voters. Finding stronger negatives would
be difficult, so beating them at the negative game is unlikely.

The hope for administration change lies in the "non knee jerk" segment. And
lies in getting more of that segment to remember and think about what they
want America TO
be, not what they fear ... imho

[Ken Fortenberry]

Larry L wrote:
> ...
> The hope for administration change lies in the "non knee jerk" segment. And
> lies in getting more of that segment to remember and think about what they
> want America TO
> be, not what they fear ... imho

Well said, Larry.

Of those people of voting age in the US, 20% will always vote Dem,
20% will always vote Repub, and 50% won't vote at all. The remaining
10% of the voting age people are the so-called "swing voters" and
they drift in and out of the non-voting demographic.

Soccer moms, NASCAR dads, dumb**** rednecks, who the hell knows what
the "swing voter" will be this time around. I hope the "swing voter"
cares about the environment, outdoor issues, the growing gap between
the mega-rich and the working poor, the huge bill we're handing our
grandkids to pay for the economic folly of the smirking chimp, and
knows that Saddam Hussein didn't mastermind 9/11.

But I wouldn't bet on it.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Larry L]

"rw" > wrote
>
> .. and votes for someone like Al Gore (or Howard Dean, or virtually any
> Democrat), instead of making an egotistical, feel-good gesture that
> subverts the larger purpose.
>
> When I look at what the current administration is doing, I think that
> Ralph Nader and his supporters have a lot to answer for.
>

good point ... my votes for "oddballs" have all been in local offices ....
but still wasted in that sense

although I think "getting people thinking" depends on focusing them on what
the want, not fear, I nonetheless feel that in a choice of evils.... the
current evil is far too evil ...... and we must vote for a lesser one, a
lesser one with hope of winning

[rw]

Ken Fortenberry wrote:
> Larry L wrote:
>
>> ...
>> The hope for administration change lies in the "non knee jerk"
>> segment. And
>> lies in getting more of that segment to remember and think about what they
>> want America TO
>> be, not what they fear ... imho
>
>
> Well said, Larry.
>
> Of those people of voting age in the US, 20% will always vote Dem,
> 20% will always vote Repub, and 50% won't vote at all. The remaining
> 10% of the voting age people are the so-called "swing voters" and
> they drift in and out of the non-voting demographic.

And a small percentage will vote Green, in a futile, dumb**** "protest"
that hands victory to the party they LEAST want to see in power.

> Soccer moms, NASCAR dads, dumb**** rednecks, who the hell knows what
> the "swing voter" will be this time around. I hope the "swing voter"
> cares about the environment, outdoor issues, the growing gap between
> the mega-rich and the working poor, the huge bill we're handing our
> grandkids to pay for the economic folly of the smirking chimp, and
> knows that Saddam Hussein didn't mastermind 9/11.

... and votes for someone like Al Gore (or Howard Dean, or virtually any
Democrat), instead of making an egotistical, feel-good gesture that
subverts the larger purpose.

When I look at what the current administration is doing, I think that
Ralph Nader and his supporters have a lot to answer for.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Scott Seidman]

rw > wrote in
m:


> When I look at what the current administration is doing, I think that
> Ralph Nader and his supporters have a lot to answer for.
>

There's noone to blame for the last election except the Gore team and the
Democratic Party. Alternatives are what maked elections in this country
great. It's not a weakness.

Scott

[Tom Littleton]

rw notes:
>When I look at what the current administration is doing, I think that
>Ralph Nader and his supporters have a lot to answer for.
>

well-put......
Tom

[Tom Littleton]

Scott writes:
>There's noone to blame for the last election except the Gore team and the
>Democratic Party. Alternatives are what maked elections in this country
>great. It's not a weakness.

Yeah, but politics is ultimately about what the end result gets you
policy-wise. The Greens failed to forsee this part, and the Dems failed to
impress it upon anyone.
Enough screwups to go around....note that Nader quickly refused another run,
what the Greens do this time will be interesting.
Tom

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"rw" > wrote in message
m...
> > Of those people of voting age in the US, 20% will always vote Dem,
> > 20% will always vote Repub, and 50% won't vote at all. The remaining
> > 10% of the voting age people are the so-called "swing voters" and
> > they drift in and out of the non-voting demographic.

Where'd ya find this info Ken? I find it very hard to believe.

> And a small percentage will vote Green, in a futile, dumb**** "protest"
> that hands victory to the party they LEAST want to see in power.

Again, rw where did you find this tid-bit of BS?

> > Soccer moms, NASCAR dads, dumb**** rednecks, who the hell knows what
> > the "swing voter" will be this time around. I hope the "swing voter"
> > cares about the environment, outdoor issues, the growing gap between
> > the mega-rich and the working poor, the huge bill we're handing our
> > grandkids to pay for the economic folly of the smirking chimp, and
> > knows that Saddam Hussein didn't mastermind 9/11.

Or the Elite, Ken, don't for get the Elite!

> .. and votes for someone like Al Gore (or Howard Dean, or virtually any
> Democrat), instead of making an egotistical, feel-good gesture that
> subverts the larger purpose.


> When I look at what the current administration is doing, I think that
> Ralph Nader and his supporters have a lot to answer for.

If I have to reiterate the Pirates words, I think I will just puke. Give me
a ****in' break, Ralph Nader and his supporters had/have a legitimate right
to be heard. The votes cast for Nader in no way helped nor hurt Dubya.

Op --It's is my vote after-all, and I'll cast it as I damn well please!--

> --
> Cut "to the chase" for my email address.
>

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Larry L" > wrote in message
...
>
> "rw" > wrote
> >
> > .. and votes for someone like Al Gore (or Howard Dean, or virtually any
> > Democrat), instead of making an egotistical, feel-good gesture that
> > subverts the larger purpose.
> >
> > When I look at what the current administration is doing, I think that
> > Ralph Nader and his supporters have a lot to answer for.
> >
>
> good point ... my votes for "oddballs" have all been in local offices ....
> but still wasted in that sense

If you feel, now, that you wasted a vote, then, I suggest that you just quit
votin'. Maybe then you'll feel better about yourself!

> although I think "getting people thinking" depends on focusing them on
what
> the want, not fear, I nonetheless feel that in a choice of evils.... the
> current evil is far too evil ...... and we must vote for a lesser one, a
> lesser one with hope of winning

Your vote doesn't have to count for ****, if it satisfies your conscience.

Op

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> rw > wrote in
> m:
>
>
> > When I look at what the current administration is doing, I think that
> > Ralph Nader and his supporters have a lot to answer for.
> >
>
> There's noone to blame for the last election except the Gore team and the
> Democratic Party. Alternatives are what maked elections in this country
> great. It's not a weakness.
>
> Scott

Thank goodness, finally, an honest individual!

Op

[Wayne Knight]

"Guyz-N-Flyz" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> Ralph Nader and his supporters had/have a legitimate right
> to be heard. The votes cast for Nader in no way helped nor hurt Dubya.
>

From a macro-political veiwpoint markie, nader did help Bush. If one assumes
the greenies were going to vote, one would have to assume they were not
going to vote georgie, even if 50% voted for another alternative candidate,
one must assume Gore would have received the rest of those votes and in
Florida that would have been enough to save Gore's inept campaign.

But what most democrats conviently forget, that Perot probably did the same
thing to aid clinton during the first election.

Personally I think the need to find Bin Laden is greater than ever. His
group's act of mass murder and property destruction "saved" the Bush II
presidency. It's a shame all those innocent people who were murdered for an
ideology ended up dying to save a president.

[Lat705]

> I hope the "swing voter"
>cares about the environment, outdoor issues, the growing gap between
>the mega-rich and the working poor, the huge bill we're handing our
>grandkids to pay for the economic folly of the smirking chimp, and
>knows that Saddam Hussein didn't mastermind 9/11.
>
>But I wouldn't bet on it.
>
>--
>Ken Fortenberry
>
>
>
>

You forgot "and has an IQ above room temperature"


Lou T

[rw]

Scott Seidman wrote:
>
> There's noone to blame for the last election except the Gore team and the
> Democratic Party.

Well, besides Ralph Nader, there's Jeb Bush, Kathleen Harris, and the
Supreme Court.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[daytripper]

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:45:21 -0500, "Guyz-N-Flyz" >
wrote:
[snip]
>If I have to reiterate the Pirates words, I think I will just puke.

Yeah, well, if I did that I'd puke too...

>Give me a ****in' break, Ralph Nader and his supporters had/have a legitimate right
>to be heard. The votes cast for Nader in no way helped nor hurt Dubya.

Do the math:

Shrublett "won" Florida by less than a thousand "votes".
Nader took around 30000 votes in Florida.

There are 30000 voters in Florida that we can all blame for the result.

/daytripper (*I* sure as hell didn't vote for the First Nitwit...)

[daytripper]

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:49:02 -0500, "Guyz-N-Flyz" >
wrote:
>If you feel, now, that you wasted a vote, then, I suggest that you just quit
>votin'. Maybe then you'll feel better about yourself!

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FBI_ALMANACS?SITE=MOCOM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

/daytripper (This is not the country I was raised in. I want MY country back.)

[Wolfgang]

"daytripper" > wrote in message
...

> ...(*I* sure as hell didn't vote for the First Nitwit...)

I assume you mean the CURRENT First Nitwit.

Wolfgang
who didn't either......nor for the first first nitwit either, for that
matter.

[Wolfgang]

"daytripper" > wrote in message
...

>
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FBI_ALMANACS?SITE=MOCOM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

"The FBI noted that use of almanacs or maps may be innocent, 'the product of
legitimate recreational or commercial activities.' "

Hm.....I dunno.....every time I'm in downtown Chicago and some swarthy
individual with a thick Arabic accent holding an almanac asks me how he
might find a tall building, please, it sets my antennae to wiggling
something fierce.

"But it warned that when combined with suspicious behavior - such as
apparent surveillance - a person with an almanac 'may point to possible
terrorist planning.'"

God help us all when the feebs find out about DeLorme. :(

> /daytripper (This is not the country I was raised in. I want MY country
back.)

Well, that's what you get for wasting your vote.

Wolfgang
who would be content to find his way back to his home planet.

[Scott Seidman]

rw > wrote in
m:

> Scott Seidman wrote:
>>
>> There's noone to blame for the last election except the Gore team and
>> the Democratic Party.
>
> Well, besides Ralph Nader, there's Jeb Bush, Kathleen Harris, and the
> Supreme Court.
>

Not to mention an imperfect voting method that can't guarantee an accurate
count, but face it, the election was Gore's to lose, and he lost it.

Scott

[Scott Seidman]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in news:bsqpob$lg8$0@
216.39.143.18:

> The
> US intell knows where he is in Pakistan,

Yup. Area 51 East.

Scott

[Ken Fortenberry]

David Snedeker wrote:
> ... Saddam
> has been "found." ...

The story going around is that the Kurd militia captured Saddam
then stuck him in a hole for three weeks while they tried to
negotiate the $25 mil reward. Meanwhile, US Intel acting on info
from the captors, tortured a bit player until he gave up Saddam's
location.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Scott Seidman]

Ken Fortenberry > wrote in
y.com:

> David Snedeker wrote:
>> ... Saddam
>> has been "found." ...
>
> The story going around is that the Kurd militia captured Saddam
> then stuck him in a hole for three weeks while they tried to
> negotiate the $25 mil reward. Meanwhile, US Intel acting on info
> from the captors, tortured a bit player until he gave up Saddam's
> location.
>

How come the captors didn't take the wad of US cash they found at Saddam's
capture by US forces?? Or was that planted?

Scott

[Dave LaCourse]

Dave T. writes:

>On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:45:21 -0500, "Guyz-N-Flyz" >
>wrote:
>[snip]
>>If I have to reiterate the Pirates words, I think I will just puke.
>
>Yeah, well, if I did that I'd puke too...
>
>>Give me a ****in' break, Ralph Nader and his supporters had/have a
>legitimate right
>>to be heard. The votes cast for Nader in no way helped nor hurt Dubya.
>
>Do the math:
>
>Shrublett "won" Florida by less than a thousand "votes".
>Nader took around 30000 votes in Florida.
>
>There are 30000 voters in Florida that we can all blame for the result.
>
>/daytripper (*I* sure as hell didn't vote for the First Nitwit...)

From your reaction to the capture of Saddam, we should probably set up a
suicide watch at your home when they capture Osama. Too phunny.

Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Ken Fortenberry]

Scott Seidman wrote:

> Ken Fortenberry > wrote in
> y.com:
>
>
>>David Snedeker wrote:
>>
>>>... Saddam
>>>has been "found." ...
>>
>>The story going around is that the Kurd militia captured Saddam
>>then stuck him in a hole for three weeks while they tried to
>>negotiate the $25 mil reward. Meanwhile, US Intel acting on info
>>from the captors, tortured a bit player until he gave up Saddam's
>>location.
>>
>
>
> How come the captors didn't take the wad of US cash they found at Saddam's
> capture by US forces?? Or was that planted?

Maybe they left in a big hurry ? Rumsfeld indicated that the $750,000
cash consisted of traceable, consecutively numbered US currency. I
wonder when we'll ever find out where that cash came from ?

--
Ken Fortenberry

[slenon]

>The story going around is that the Kurd militia captured Saddam
>then stuck him in a hole for three weeks while they tried to
>negotiate the $25 mil reward. Meanwhile, US Intel acting on info
>from the captors, tortured a bit player until he gave up Saddam's location.
>Ken Fortenberry

And other than your prominent dislike of the President and administration we
both voted against, what reason do you have to believe such a story to be
any more reliable than the story the Army released?

I doubt the Kurds would have kept Hussein's capture quiet or left him in
such good physical shape. He is not well liked by Kurds and vengeance often
takes precedence over greed in such situations.

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Scott Seidman]

Ken Fortenberry > wrote in
y.com:

> Scott Seidman wrote:
>
>> Ken Fortenberry > wrote in
>> y.com:
>>
>>
>>>David Snedeker wrote:
>>>
>>>>... Saddam
>>>>has been "found." ...
>>>
>>>The story going around is that the Kurd militia captured Saddam
>>>then stuck him in a hole for three weeks while they tried to
>>>negotiate the $25 mil reward. Meanwhile, US Intel acting on info
>>>from the captors, tortured a bit player until he gave up Saddam's
>>>location.
>>>
>>
>>
>> How come the captors didn't take the wad of US cash they found at
>> Saddam's capture by US forces?? Or was that planted?
>
> Maybe they left in a big hurry ? Rumsfeld indicated that the $750,000
> cash consisted of traceable, consecutively numbered US currency. I
> wonder when we'll ever find out where that cash came from ?
>

I find it hard to believe that $750K in cold currency would lie around for
three weeks when it could buy a ton of assets that insurgents would find
valuable. If you want to stick with your "Saddam was kept on ice for three
weeks" conspiracy theory, you should probably go with "the money was
planted" for consistency.

Scott

[Ken Fortenberry]

Scott Seidman wrote:
>
> ... If you want to stick with your "Saddam was kept on ice for three
> weeks" conspiracy theory, you should probably go with "the money was
> planted" for consistency.

It's not MY theory. It was put forth by Debka.

Debka, if you're not familiar with it, is an Israeli publication.
On a left to right scale Debka would be WAY off the scale to the
right. But they do have a way of reporting things that the mainstream
press misses. There was an article about them in _Wired_ a while back.

http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,47325,00.html

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Dave LaCourse]

Ken Fortenberry writes:

>The story going around is that the Kurd militia captured Saddam
>then stuck him in a hole for three weeks while they tried to
>negotiate the $25 mil reward. Meanwhile, US Intel acting on info
>from the captors, tortured a bit player until he gave up Saddam's
>location.

Hogwash. If you've ever been in the military, or even around it for awhile,
you would know that such a cover-up is just about impossible. Troops like to
talk. They love to tell mom and dad and sweetheart Rosie about their
adventures.

"Ok, guys, this is how it's gonna go down: The Kurds will stuff old Saddam in
a hole with $750K, and we'll find him and get all the glory." Bull****! But
phunny and entertainin!
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Ken Fortenberry]

Dave LaCourse wrote:
> Ken Fortenberry writes:
>
>>The story going around ...
>
> Hogwash. ...

If you want to call it hogwash AFTER you read it, fine, but
at least read it first. Debka has an agenda and they make no
bones about it, but I find a lot of their stuff at least as
credible as the outrageous lies spewed forth by the US military.

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=743

--
Ken Fortenberry

[daytripper]

On 30 Dec 2003 14:09:42 GMT, (Dave LaCourse) wrote:

>Dave T. writes:
>
>>On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:45:21 -0500, "Guyz-N-Flyz" >
>>wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>If I have to reiterate the Pirates words, I think I will just puke.
>>
>>Yeah, well, if I did that I'd puke too...
>>
>>>Give me a ****in' break, Ralph Nader and his supporters had/have a
>>legitimate right
>>>to be heard. The votes cast for Nader in no way helped nor hurt Dubya.
>>
>>Do the math:
>>
>>Shrublett "won" Florida by less than a thousand "votes".
>>Nader took around 30000 votes in Florida.
>>
>>There are 30000 voters in Florida that we can all blame for the result.
>>
>>/daytripper (*I* sure as hell didn't vote for the First Nitwit...)
>
>From your reaction to the capture of Saddam, we should probably set up a
>suicide watch at your home when they capture Osama. Too phunny.

What's phunny is your ability to dismiss everyone that disagrees with your
unique "perspective" as being somehow less patriotic than you.

It's pretty close to how people might dismiss you as being an over the hill,
dried up ex-kinda-military person who fawns at the feet of the hard core
right.

/daytripper (I take it back - it's not phunny, it's a sickness. Tough break.)

[Dave LaCourse]

Ken Fortenberry writes:

>If you want to call it hogwash AFTER you read it, fine, but
>at least read it first. Debka has an agenda and they make no
>bones about it, but I find a lot of their stuff at least as
>credible as the outrageous lies spewed forth by the US military.

I read the article. It amuses me that you wouldn't believe a right-winger like
Limbaugh or even Coulter, but you believe this extrememly right wing source. I
guess we believe what we want to.

This whole political thread has gone to the ****s. I've hurt a lot of people
and in return have hurt by them and others, and for what? No one is going to
change the left's or the right's ideas. It's just plain bull**** that we spend
so much time hurting one another.
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Tim J.]

"Dave LaCourse" wrote...
<snip>
> This whole political thread has gone to the ****s.

Hmmmm. . . I can't remember THAT ever happening before. ;-)
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Scott Seidman]

Ken Fortenberry > wrote in
y.com:

> Dave LaCourse wrote:
>> Ken Fortenberry writes:
>>
>>>The story going around ...
>>
>> Hogwash. ...
>
> If you want to call it hogwash AFTER you read it, fine, but
> at least read it first. Debka has an agenda and they make no
> bones about it, but I find a lot of their stuff at least as
> credible as the outrageous lies spewed forth by the US military.
>
> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=743
>

From that link:

******************
A number of questions are raised by the incredibly bedraggled, tired and
crushed condition of this once savage, dapper and pampered ruler who was
discovered in a hole in the ground on Saturday, December 13:

1. The length and state of his hair indicated he had not seen a barber or
even had a shampoo for several weeks.

2. The wild state of his beard indicated he had not shaved for the same
period

3. The hole dug in the floor of a cellar in a farm compound near Tikrit
was primitive indeed – 6ft across and 8ft across with minimal sanitary
arrangements - a far cry from his opulent palaces.

4. Saddam looked beaten and hungry.

5. Detained trying to escape were two unidentified men. Left with him
were two AK-47 assault guns and a pistol, none of which were used.

6. The hole had only one opening. It was not only camouflaged with mud
and bricks – it was blocked. He could not have climbed out without
someone on the outside removing the covering.

7. And most important, $750,000 in 100-dollar notes were found with him
(a pittance for his captors who expected a $25m reward)– but no
communications equipment of any kind, whether cell phone or even a
carrier pigeon for contacting the outside world.

According to DEBKAfile analysts, these seven anomalies point to one
conclusion: Saddam Hussein was not in hiding; he was a prisoner.
********************

Ken-

This is thready, at best. They don't even bother to find some loony
"witness" to talk about this.

He was only carrying two AK-47's and a pistol, and he only had 750K in
cash, so he was obviously a prisoner.

He's been running and hiding in a war zone for months. Perhaps that
might serve as an explanation for observations 1, 2, and 4. Hell, I
looked beaten and hungry after I graded 41 final exams and 41 term papers
solo on a 4-day deadline. I only felt like I was in captivity, though I
was really free to leave.

As for the sorry state of his hidey-hole, hell, it was a hidey hole, not
a palace. Yeah, it only had one opening. Perhaps that's why they call
it a hole and not a tunnel. Maybe the reasons for the austerity had to
do with the fact that he was hiding from the US and from his own
citizens, many of whom would probably kill him on sight if given the
opportunity. When this is the case, you don't bring in the backhoe to
dig your hole--you dig it by hand in the middle of the night. You also
might pile flowerpots on the entrance to help hide it.

Bottom line-- a despotic killer of hundreds of thousands is in US
custody.

With so much verifiably bad **** going down, I see little reason to
spread this canard.


Scott

[Dave LaCourse]

DT writes:

<snipped>

Dave, see my reply to Ken. We've let this **** come between us just because we
have different beliefs. I expect more flames, but for me, I'll try to stay out
of it. No promises.......
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Ken Fortenberry]

Dave LaCourse wrote:
> Ken Fortenberry writes:
>
>>If you want to call it hogwash AFTER you read it, fine, ...
>
> I read the article. It amuses me that you wouldn't believe a right-winger like
> Limbaugh or even Coulter, but you believe this extrememly right wing source.

I don't know if I believe it or not. I called it "the story going around"
in response to a cryptic post from Dave Snedeker, mostly, I suppose, to
indicate that Dave is not a complete, nutcase, fruitcake whackjob. I do
believe that ANY source is at least as credible as the US military.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[slenon]

Scott Seidman:
>A number of questions are raised by the incredibly bedraggled, tired and
>crushed condition of this once savage, dapper and pampered ruler who was
>discovered in a hole in the ground on Saturday, December 13:


Scott, I'll make an attempt at this.

Someone in hiding does not normally visit a barber and may not have access
to all the personal hygiene options that person once had. Growing a beard
is an easy disguise for many people, particularly in a region where beards
are common place.

Bunkers are often primitive in nature and are made small to aid concealment.
The entrance to this one was plugged, but with styrofoam and covered with a
rug. That hardly precludes being opened from beneath. Living on the run
will make one look beaten and hungry. As to the two men who fled and left
him, and the money, your supposition is as good as mine.

And with regard to Debka, I read it from time to time. Like any other
source it needs to be considered in light of its agenda and its actual
access to information. In this situation, I tend to believe the Army's
story.


--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Frank Church]

(Dave LaCourse) wrote in
:

> Ken Fortenberry writes:
>
>>If you want to call it hogwash AFTER you read it, fine, but
> This whole political thread has gone to the ****s. I've hurt a lot of
> people and in return have hurt by them and others, and for what? No
> one is going to change the left's or the right's ideas. It's just
> plain bull**** that we spend so much time hurting one another.

Which speaks to the point I tried to raise some weeks back. NOTHING is ever
resolve in these damned political threads, but recrimination and hurt
feelings are almost always the result. OT subjects should be allowed within
reason, but political posts should be banned entirely. This can't be done
in this newsgroup, more's the pity.

Frank Church
another over the hill, dried up ex-kinda-military person who fawns at the
feet of the hard core.

[Scott Seidman]

(Dave LaCourse) wrote in
:

> This whole political thread has gone to the ****s. I've hurt a lot of
> people and in return have hurt by them and others, and for what? No
> one is going to change the left's or the right's ideas. It's just
> plain bull**** that we spend so much time hurting one another.
> Dave

I don't know, Dave. This most recent discussion is going on civilly, for
the most part. And, I'm certainly learning about everybody here. Useful
stuff. It's al going into my book for when I have to lead the charge to
tear my party from the grasp of Howard Dean!!

Right now, we're just playing tag. For those who aren't following
closely, Ken never actually said he believed this Debka editorial
observation--he's just passing it along.

FWIW, I think its the fact that we can openly discuss issues like this
that makes this a pretty good place to live.

Also, never forget that polite but vigorous discourse like this is part
of my tradition. If you've never done so, pick up a Passover Hagadah
some day, and read endlessly about the endless discussions about the
interpretations of Gods works

For example:
Tradition says there were even more plagues than these. Rabbi Jose, the
Galilean, said: "How can one infer that the Egyptians were afflicted with
ten plagues in Egypt, and on the sea with fifty plagues? Concerning the
ten plagues in Egypt, it is said: 'And the magicians said to Pharaoh:
"This is the finger of God," but concerning the sea, it is said: 'And
Israel saw the mighty hand with which the Lord smote the Egyptians, and
the people feared the Lord, and believed in the Lord and his servant
Moses.' Now, if by the finger they were afflicted with ten plagues, one
can infer from this that in Egypt (where the word finger is used) they
were smitten with ten plagues, and at the sea (where the word hand is
used) they were smitten with fifty plagues."

You can't stop a guy who comes from a line of people like this from
arguing!

Scott

[slenon]

>I do believe that ANY source is at least as credible as the US military.
>Ken Fortenberry

RWBNS

Now you can concentrate on your holiday feast and I can begin to deal with a
rather nice rib roast for 1, Jan, and a large pot of cioppino for 31 Dec.
Lobster, mussels, cod, grouper, shrimp, and lots of herbs and tending to the
stock!


--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Scott Seidman]

Scott Seidman > wrote in
. 1.4:

> You can't stop a guy who comes from a line of people like this from
> arguing!
>
> Scott
>

PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!

[Ken Fortenberry]

Scott Seidman wrote:
> ...
> With so much verifiably bad **** going down, I see little reason to
> spread this canard.

Like I told Louie, I got Snedeker's back.

Have a heart attack in the back seat of my car and you've got
a friend for life. ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

[rb608]

"Frank Church" > wrote in message
> another over the hill, dried up ex-kinda-military person who fawns at the
> feet of the hard core.

Yeah, but we love ya anyway. <g>

My absence from this thread is more for lack of time than lack of
conviction; but it's been interesting reading whenever I get to catch a few
posts. Undoubtedly there are more than a few folks here whose political
opinions are diametrically opposed to my own, and with whom I would expect a
heated discussion over a few brews. At the same time, through the magic of
this place, I've been fortunate to meet and befriend some of those otherwise
misguided souls. That I disagree with their politics does little to
diminish my estimation of their character.

Joe F.

[Dave LaCourse]

Ken Fortenberry writes:

>I don't know if I believe it or not. I called it "the story going around"
>in response to a cryptic post from Dave Snedeker,

Good enough.

Have you tried this year's Beaujolais Nouveau yet? I forgot all about it, but
managed to find a bottle.
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Dave LaCourse]

Scott writes:

<snippage>

>You can't stop a guy who comes from a line of people like this from
>arguing!
>

<BSEG>

d;o)

[Tim J.]

"Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> Scott Seidman > wrote in
> . 1.4:
>
> > You can't stop a guy who comes from a line of people like this from
> > arguing!
> >
> > Scott
> >
>
> PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!

Happy B'day to the entire roff rules committee!
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Tim J.]

"rb608" wrote...
<snip>
> Undoubtedly there are more than a few folks here whose political
> opinions are diametrically opposed to my own, and with whom I would expect a
> heated discussion over a few brews. At the same time, through the magic of
> this place, I've been fortunate to meet and befriend some of those otherwise
> misguided souls. That I disagree with their politics does little to
> diminish my estimation of their character.

:)
--
TL,
Tim
who suspects that he may be one of the misguided looking forward to buying you a
beer or two.
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Stan Gula]

"Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!

Cheers, Scooter. I just drank a shot of Aberlour 15 in your honor - too bad
I couldn't share that with you. Maybe we can do that belatedly in the New
Year.

[Scott Seidman]

"Stan Gula" > wrote in
:

> "Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
> . 1.4...
>> PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!
>
> Cheers, Scooter. I just drank a shot of Aberlour 15 in your honor -
> too bad I couldn't share that with you. Maybe we can do that
> belatedly in the New Year.
>
>
>
>

Why thank you, Stan!!

Aberlour! Is that that reasonable and tasty single malt I found for
Penns I, and can never remember what it is, no matter how many times I'm
told? Man, this hypothyroid **** is getting old. Gotta get that dose
right.

I think I'll be going home now, and do some of the same till I get
somewhere near numb, and stay that way till Jan 1. Should make work
tomorrow interesting.

Alas, Penns is off the docket for me this year. I figger if I spend one
wife's birthday home in 5 years, that should make her feel OK. She's had
a miserable year in terms of employment, so she's feeling pretty fragile,
and leaving her alone on her birthday is an indignity she shouldn't have
to put up with this year.

Maybe we can get together on some other neutral ground, like the Beamoc
area when NY State Council TU holds its meeting in that area come Spring
(it's obviously timed for good fishing), or we can do a bluegill clave in
your neck of the woods. Anyone up for a mini-clave, maybe Beamoc?

Anyhoo, here's hoping that next year brings us all more good things than
this year did!

I like that. I bet it would sound even better if translated to Welch.

Scott

[Tim J.]

"Scott Seidman" wrote...
> "Stan Gula" wrote:
> > "Scott Seidman" wrote...
> >> PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!
> >
> > Cheers, Scooter. I just drank a shot of Aberlour 15 in your honor -
> > too bad I couldn't share that with you. Maybe we can do that
> > belatedly in the New Year.
> >
<snip>
>
> Maybe we can get together on some other neutral ground, like the Beamoc
> area when NY State Council TU holds its meeting in that area come Spring
> (it's obviously timed for good fishing), or we can do a bluegill clave in
> your neck of the woods. Anyone up for a mini-clave, maybe Beamoc?

Where is that, Scott?

BTW, we could REALLY splurge and do both!
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Allen Epps]

In article >, Dave
LaCourse > wrote:

> Ken Fortenberry writes:
>
> >I don't know if I believe it or not. I called it "the story going around"
> >in response to a cryptic post from Dave Snedeker,
>
> Good enough.
>
> Have you tried this year's Beaujolais Nouveau yet? I forgot all about it, but
> managed to find a bottle.
> Dave
>
> http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html
>
Got one of the last bottles at my local gin slingers last week. Very
enjoyable.

Allen
Catonsville, MD

[Scott Seidman]

"Tim J." > wrote in
:

>
> "Scott Seidman" wrote...
>> "Stan Gula" wrote:
>> > "Scott Seidman" wrote...
>> >> PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!
>> >
>> > Cheers, Scooter. I just drank a shot of Aberlour 15 in your honor
>> > - too bad I couldn't share that with you. Maybe we can do that
>> > belatedly in the New Year.
>> >
> <snip>
>>
>> Maybe we can get together on some other neutral ground, like the
>> Beamoc area when NY State Council TU holds its meeting in that area
>> come Spring (it's obviously timed for good fishing), or we can do a
>> bluegill clave in your neck of the woods. Anyone up for a
>> mini-clave, maybe Beamoc?
>
> Where is that, Scott?
>
> BTW, we could REALLY splurge and do both!

That's in NY, in the Catskills. It's not really a place in and of itself,
just our shorthand for the Beaverkill/Willowemoc region. I should be there
for the State TU meeting, but I'm not sure of the dates. Likely as not,
I'll try to book a group site.

Scott

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Wayne Knight" > wrote in message
...
> From a macro-political veiwpoint markie, nader did help Bush. If one
assumes
> the greenies were going to vote,

See, Wyanie there's the catch. You assume that folks would just vote for
the sake of votin'.

See my reply to 'tripper below:

************************************************** **************************
************************************************** **
"daytripper" > wrote in message
...
> >Then you don't understand how our system works.
>
> You'll have to provide a little illumination to explain that one, Mark...
>
> /daytripper (the math sez you're quite wrong...)

Math has nothin' to do with it. If I voted for Nader--and I did-- I did so
because I didn't want to vote for neither Bush nor Gore. Had I not voted
for Nader or some other candidate, I wouldn't have voted at all. So You
might as well argue that all the folks who could have registered to vote,
but didn't, and all of the folks that were registered to vote, but didn't
were also spoilers.

I don't vote for the lesser of two evils. Why would I want to choose
between Stalin and Hitler? The folks that complain that Nader voters
spoiled the election for Gore are the ones who are spoiled. They didn't get
things their way and so they want to place blame. There is no blame to
place, at least not with part of the electorate that didn't vote for either
Bush or Gore. We made our choices, knowin' full well that our candidate
didn't have a snow-balls chance in hell of winnin', yet we voted for them
nonetheless. Imagine that, there are folks that actually vote their
conscience.

Op
************************************************** **************************
************************************************** ****
> But what most democrats conviently forget, that Perot probably did the
same
> thing to aid clinton during the first election.

I worked in the Perot petition drive, as it never actually got to the
campaign phase, and I stil don't buy this arguemen.

Op

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> Scott Seidman > wrote in
> . 1.4:
>
> > You can't stop a guy who comes from a line of people like this from
> > arguing!
> >
> > Scott
> >
>
> PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!

Happiest of B-Days Scott!!!!!!!

Op --you'll have to excuse me if I don't argue this point.--

[Scott Seidman]

(Greg Pavlov) wrote in news:3ff302d5.22910052
@news.cis.dfn.de:

> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 15:08:40 -0500, "Tim J."
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!
>
>
> Really ! Mine's tomorrow.

Wow- a new year's kid!

Funny coincidence

Scott

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Greg Pavlov" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 15:08:40 -0500, "Tim J."
> > wrote:
>
> >
> > PS-- It's my birthday and I'll argue if I want to!!
>
>
> Really ! Mine's tomorrow.

****! Happiest of B-Days to you too Greg!

Op --Damn, ya have one announced B-Day, and everyone thinks they gotta
announce theirs too :~^( --

[Scott Seidman]

"Guyz-N-Flyz" > wrote in news:bunIb.66145$xB5.35141
@bignews1.bellsouth.net:

> Op --you'll have to excuse me if I don't argue this point.--
>

Along the lines of John Cleese-- no, I don't :-)


Thanks
Scott

[Tom Littleton]

Stev notes:
>In this situation, I tend to believe the Army's
>story.

yeah, after that whopper they cooked up for the Jessica Lynch saga, could they
have that much bull**** left in them?
Tom

[Stan Gula]

"Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> Aberlour! Is that that reasonable and tasty single malt I found for
> Penns I, and can never remember what it is, no matter how many times I'm
> told? Man, this hypothyroid **** is getting old. Gotta get that dose
> right.

Yes, the Aberlour 10 has usually been a great deal. It recently went up
localy, but the 15 was a deal and it's really, really good.

> Alas, Penns is off the docket for me this year...

Me too. You should come out to Western Mass. the weekend after Penns (week
before Memorial day?). We rent a campground on the Westfield... I might be
interested in your Beaverkill campout.

> Maybe we can get together on some other neutral ground, like the Beamoc
> area when NY State Council TU holds its meeting in that area come Spring
> (it's obviously timed for good fishing), or we can do a bluegill clave in
> your neck of the woods. Anyone up for a mini-clave, maybe Beamoc?

Bluegills (and other similar) could be on the agenda any time during the
summer.

[Ken Fortenberry]

Dave LaCourse wrote:
> ...
> Have you tried this year's Beaujolais Nouveau yet? ...

Yes, we went to the "est Arrive" party at our local wine store back
on the third Thursday of November. We liked the 2003 so much we
came away with two cases. We think it's the best in several years.

Enjoy !

--
Ken Fortenberry

[slenon]

>yeah, after that whopper they cooked up for the >Jessica Lynch saga, could
they
>have that much bull**** left in them?
> Tom

On that matter, Tom, I agree with you. I'm sorry she was injured. I'm also
sorry that someone chose to hype the incident.

But it doesn't shake my faith in all military sources. PR people are the
same whether they wear a uniform or a suit.


--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Dave LaCourse]

Touche!

[rw]

Dave LaCourse wrote:
>
> This whole political thread has gone to the ****s. I've hurt a lot of people
> and in return have hurt by them and others, and for what? No one is going to
> change the left's or the right's ideas. It's just plain bull**** that we spend
> so much time hurting one another.
> Dave

Why should a political thread turn into hurtful round of personal
attacks and insults? It's only because some people are intolerant of
political opinions contrary to their own. By "some people" I mean, most
prominently, you and Fortenberry, one on the right and one on the left.
But you aren't unique in this ROFF venue, by any means.

To Fortenberry, anyone who doesn't agree with his quirky, leftist POV is
a "****ing asshole" (or something equivalent). To you, Dave, anyone who
criticizes this administration is unpatriotic.

Adults should be able to discuss politics civily. Retarded adolescents
can't, but I believe in redemption.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Wolfgang]

"slenon" > wrote in message
om...
> >yeah, after that whopper they cooked up for the >Jessica Lynch saga,
could
> they
> >have that much bull**** left in them?
> > Tom
>
> On that matter, Tom, I agree with you. I'm sorry she was injured. I'm
also
> sorry that someone chose to hype the incident.
>
> But it doesn't shake my faith in all military sources. PR people are the
> same whether they wear a uniform or a suit.

Not exactly. By and large, the ones in suits murder fewer children.

Wolfgang
and yes, i do understand that not everyone thinks the distinction is
valid.....or important.

[Jeff Miller]

scott - why not bring her to penns...that should provide some amusement,
if not hilarity, to lift her spirits. plus, we'll all gather to sing her
happy birthday, arrange a special party at the milheim, gift certificate
to the feathered hook... we can get axelrad to arrange a blue rock hole
event in her honor... frank reid can provide entertainment... well?

jeff

Scott Seidman wrote:

>
> Alas, Penns is off the docket for me this year. I figger if I spend one
> wife's birthday home in 5 years, that should make her feel OK. She's had
> a miserable year in terms of employment, so she's feeling pretty fragile,
> and leaving her alone on her birthday is an indignity she shouldn't have
> to put up with this year.
>

[Scott Seidman]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in news:bstjvr$1745t$1@ID-
205717.news.uni-berlin.de:

> Not exactly. By and large, the ones in suits murder fewer children.
>
> Wolfgang
> and yes, i do understand that not everyone thinks the distinction is
> valid.....or important.
>
>
>
>

Who do you think is generating the agenda for the guys in the uniforms?

Scott

[Scott Seidman]

rw > wrote in news:3ff24107$0$32298
:

> Why should a political thread turn into hurtful round of personal
> attacks and insults? It's only because some people are intolerant of
> political opinions contrary to their own.

I don't know whether I would call some of what goes on "intolerance" per
se, especially when talking about people whose personalities formed pre-
Nixon, and particularly when those people had military careers.

Me, my first political exposures were Vietnam and Watergate. My generation
is therefore highly unlikely to deify the president. I can understand when
those using somewhat older references associate the office of CIC with a
higher standard than they would with a man on the street. When discussing
political issues with people in this category, I try to remember that
attacking the administration is very close to a personal attack.
Sometimes, actually most of the time, this won't prevent me from expressing
an opinion, but I understand that the responses might become highly
charged.

From the other side, I hope that those with undying respect for the office
of President can remember that every time some of us see what we interpret
to be a grab for money or power the administration is not entitled to, or
an administration operating in secrecy, we see a little bit of the death of
this country's potential for benificience and greatness. If you want to
find someone to blame, blame Nixon for our loss of innocence.

Scott

[Wolfgang]

"Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> "Wolfgang" > wrote in news:bstjvr$1745t$1@ID-
> 205717.news.uni-berlin.de:
>
> > Not exactly. By and large, the ones in suits murder fewer
children.
> >
> > Wolfgang
> > and yes, i do understand that not everyone thinks the distinction
is
> > valid.....or important.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Who do you think is generating the agenda for the guys in the
uniforms?

Um.......hm.......o.k., I give up.

Wolfgang
who, having pondered this very question for ever so long, hopes that
it wasn't merely rhetorical.

[Scott Seidman]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in news:bsul9d$1fg14$1@ID-
205717.news.uni-berlin.de:

>
> "Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
> . 1.4...
>> "Wolfgang" > wrote in news:bstjvr$1745t$1@ID-
>> 205717.news.uni-berlin.de:
>>
>> > Not exactly. By and large, the ones in suits murder fewer
> children.
>> >
>> > Wolfgang
>> > and yes, i do understand that not everyone thinks the distinction
> is
>> > valid.....or important.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Who do you think is generating the agenda for the guys in the
> uniforms?
>
> Um.......hm.......o.k., I give up.
>
> Wolfgang
> who, having pondered this very question for ever so long, hopes that
> it wasn't merely rhetorical.
>
>
>

It's the guys in the suits, of course (or at least some of them). Another
possibility would be the original cast of "Soap".

Scott

[Wolfgang]

"Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> "Wolfgang" > wrote in news:bsul9d$1fg14$1@ID-
> 205717.news.uni-berlin.de:
>
> >
> > "Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
> > . 1.4...
> >> "Wolfgang" > wrote in news:bstjvr$1745t$1@ID-
> >> 205717.news.uni-berlin.de:
> >>
> >> > Not exactly. By and large, the ones in suits murder fewer
> > children.
> >> >
> >> > Wolfgang
> >> > and yes, i do understand that not everyone thinks the
distinction
> > is
> >> > valid.....or important.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Who do you think is generating the agenda for the guys in the
> > uniforms?
> >
> > Um.......hm.......o.k., I give up.
> >
> > Wolfgang
> > who, having pondered this very question for ever so long, hopes
that
> > it wasn't merely rhetorical.
> >
> >
> >
>
> It's the guys in the suits, of course (or at least some of them).

See, that's what I love about this place. Stick around long enough
and all of life's persisteht nagging questions will be answered.
Who'da thunk it?

> Another
> possibility would be the original cast of "Soap".

And the difference is.....?

Wolfgang

[Scott Seidman]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in news:bsulj4$1kleq$1@ID-
205717.news.uni-berlin.de:

>
> "Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
> . 1.4...
>> "Wolfgang" > wrote in news:bsul9d$1fg14$1@ID-
>> 205717.news.uni-berlin.de:
>>
>> >
> Who'da thunk it?
>
>> Another
>> possibility would be the original cast of "Soap".
>
> And the difference is.....?
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
>

Robert Guillaume had a sense of humor.

Scott

[John Dwyer]

On 31 Dec 2003 14:38:36 GMT, Scott Seidman
> wrote:

hey Scott Happy New Year
is there a meeting next wed. and if so where?

[slenon]

>We made our choices, knowin' full well that our candidate
>didn't have a snow-balls chance in hell of winnin', yet we voted for them
>nonetheless. Imagine that, there are folks that actually vote their
>conscience.
>Op

Even though I believe that Nader's candicacy helped Bush's victory, Op is
dead right in his stance. Everyone is entitled to vote their particular
conscience under the Constitution we all claim to support and wish to see
protected. If there is a viable option in a third party candidate, I look
and listen to that candidate seriously before making a ballot choice. But
if there isn't, I've been known to write in my own name for some positions.
--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[slenon]

>Not exactly. By and large, the ones in suits murder fewer children.

>Wolfgang
>and yes, i do understand that not everyone thinks the distinction is
>valid.....or important.

If we allow suits to include local business attire and customary dress, the
ones in suits are all too often the ones who start the process of war. I
have a greater appreciation of your position than you believe. And I do
acknowledge the validity and importance of the distinction.

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[slenon]

rw:
>Adults should be able to discuss politics civily. Retarded adolescents
>can't, but I believe in redemption.


Good! I've been wondering what to do with those aging books of green
stamps.

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Tim J.]

"slenon" > wrote in message
m...
> >Not exactly. By and large, the ones in suits murder fewer children.
>
> >Wolfgang
> >and yes, i do understand that not everyone thinks the distinction is
> >valid.....or important.
>
> If we allow suits to include local business attire and customary dress, the
> ones in suits are all too often the ones who start the process of war. I
> have a greater appreciation of your position than you believe. And I do
> acknowledge the validity and importance of the distinction.

Good post. Many would agree. ;-)
--
TL,
Tim
(It's a casual day at work today, so no murderous suits are in sight.)
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Dave LaCourse]

Greg Pavlov writes:

>The people who are most responsible for
> Bush's victory are Bush and Clinton. Bush,
> because he made the right moves, and Clinton
> because his personal behavior tainted Gore
> and made it difficult for Gore to build off
> his vice presidency or to involve Clinton
> in the campaign.

Which boils down to Gore ran a terrible campaign. He came off second best in
the debates, and his "re-inventing" himself made him look like a dork.
Historically, he should have won the election, being the Veep of a successful
administration. But, he blew it.
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Scott Seidman]

"Stan Gula" > wrote in
:

> "Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
> . 1.4...
>> Aberlour! Is that that reasonable and tasty single malt I found for
>> Penns I, and can never remember what it is, no matter how many times
>> I'm told? Man, this hypothyroid **** is getting old. Gotta get that
>> dose right.
>
> Yes, the Aberlour 10 has usually been a great deal. It recently went
> up localy, but the 15 was a deal and it's really, really good.
>
>> Alas, Penns is off the docket for me this year...
>
> Me too. You should come out to Western Mass. the weekend after Penns
> (week before Memorial day?). We rent a campground on the Westfield...
> I might be interested in your Beaverkill campout.


Now this sounds pretty good!! A family-friendly alternative. I'll think
about driving or flying., and I'll keep you posted for Beaverkill dates.


Scott

[Chris HIll]

Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political
analysts that know absolutely nothing except how to cut and paste tripe into
their brains and bother folks in an outdoor oriented newsgroup. Take this
a$$wipe for example, he claims the administration killed 30k salmon due to
the agricultural needs of the area. Dig down just one thin layer of
information and we see that this is a Fuc*** reservoir that was built
SPECIFICALLY for the farmer's irrigation. Natural habitat my A$$. Now why
don't you idiot leftists get a clue that the educated public isn't buying
you trash. Have I said enough? Good now if you have something to contribute
to back country discussions go for it.
Chris

"Hayduke" > wrote in message
...
>
> Sound science. This administration lies and spins like no other.
> Their reliance on politcally driven "science" led the the killing of
> over 30,000 salmon on the Klamath to appease potato farmers; an
> overturn of the snowmobile policy because the judge found their policy
> "abritrary and capricious", will see many former BLM employees
> involved in the San Rafael Swell land exchange going to prison for
> undervaluing the land to be exchanged to line their own pockets, they
> don't believe in Global Warming even though most scientists can prove
> it is happening, former EPA Chief Whitman had to guts to leave due to
> the pressure the administration placed on her to not use sound science
> in her enforcement and rulemaking, the list goes on and on.
>
> I love it. This administration will be taking a beating on their
> environmental record in this year's election - not for their
> environmental legacy but for their lying to the public with proof in
> hand.
>
> Ha!
>
> Peace
>
> On 28 Dec 2003 22:07:58 -0800, (Sportsmen
> Against Bush) wrote:
>
>
> >
> >"We'll base decisions on sound science," he said in 2001. "We'll call
> >upon the best minds of America to help us achieve an objective, which
> >is: cleaner air, cleaner water and a better use of our land."
> >
>

[Scott Seidman]

(Greg Pavlov) wrote in
:

> On 31 Dec 2003 17:26:44 GMT, (Dave LaCourse)
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Which boils down to Gore ran a terrible campaign. He came off second
>>best in the debates, and his "re-inventing" himself made him look like
>>a dork. Historically, he should have won the election, being the Veep
>>of a successful administration. But, he blew it.
>>Dave
>
> I don't think he ran a terrible campaign. And he came
> across as a "dork" in comparison to the non-threatening
> anti-intellectual Bush. Yes, the Clinton administration
> was highly successful, among the best of the last 100
> years or so, but it was tainted, with the negatives grossly
> exaggerated by the opposition.
>
> Veeps have not in general faired well in recent history:
> Nixon, Ford, Mondale, and Gore lost the first time around,
> while Truman, Johnson, and Bush I lost after the first round.
> Actually, if you think about it, the only full two-term
> presidents since Roosevelt - Eisenhower & Reagan - were also
> the only ones who were not prior Veeps.
>

Have you just wiped Clinton from your memory?? :-)

Scott

[Hayduke]

Such hatred for science, the gooney right. Karl Rove was involved in
this one, too, so Gordon Smith could get the Klamath Basin vote.

And, Mr. Hill, I lived in Malin, Oregon, so I know the issues.

Cya!

Peace

18 November 2003

For More Information Contact:
Glen Spain, PCFFA Northwest, 541-689-2000

Final US Fish & Wildlife Klamath Fish Kill Report Confirms Low Flows
as Major Factor in 2002 Lower Klamath Fish Kill
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service today released its much-awaited final
scientific assessment on the underlying causes of the disasterous
Klamath Basin September 2002 fish kill, in which more than 34,000
adult pre-spawning salmon and steelhead perished in the Klamath River.
The report confirms that near-record low flows were indeed a major
factor in those losses.

Average monthly flows from Iron Gate Dam during September 2002 were
the fifth lowest in the period from 1978 to 2002, and the lowest
levels ever seen when combined with higher than average incoming fish
runs. Near record low flows also contributed to the crowding of fish
into the lower river as well as elevated water temperatures, stressing
the fish and creating perfect conditions for an epidemic spread of
diseases (Ich and columnaris) that are always present, but which
normally cannot spread so rapidly nor with such devastating effects.

The September 2002 fish kill was the largest loss of pre-spawning
adult salmon ever recorded in the Klamath River, and one of the worst
fish kills ever seen in this country.

Water flows from the headwaters of the river to below Iron Gate Dam
are controlled entirely by the federal Bureau of Reclamation. Summer
water releases from Iron Gate Dam are frequently only whatever water
is left over after the Bureau of Reclamation first subtracts water
deliveries to Klamath Project irrigators, which can use more than half
of all the water normally flowing from the headwaters during summer
irrigation months. Much of the water released from Iron Gate Dam is
also of poor quality, including agricultural waste water return flows
from the Project.

Iron Gate Dam is at River Mile 192. It is not until the Klamath River
merges with the Trinity River inflow at River Mile 43 that any
significant amount of water is added to the main river from its
tributaries. The primary problem of low flows during September 2002
was thus at Iron Gate Dam. During that same time period, the Trinity
River inflow was among the highest it has been in many years, and at
full "Record of Decision" flows levels.

The flows through Iron Gate Dam were deliberately set unusually low in
2002 by the Bush Administration in order to assure delivery of normal
water allotments to Klamath Irrigation Project irrigators, even though
the basin was still racked with drought, and in spite of the risk to
ESA-listed coho salmon and fall chinook populations which are vitally
important to the lower river fishing-dependent economy.

"The Administration was warned by California Fish and Game Biologists,
by the Tribes' Biologists and by commercial fishermen that flows that
low would lead to disaster, and so they did," commented Glen Spain,
Northwest Regional Director of the Pacific Coast Federation of
Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA), which represents lower river and
coastal salmon fishermen. "This is just a post mortem, but it confirms
what we were telling the Administration all along. You cannot expect
fish to survive in a warm water trickle of what was once a mighty
river."

Immediate economic losses in the lower river fishing-dependent economy
resulting from the fish kill were at least $20 million in 2002 alone,
and since salmon numbers in later years depend on this year's brood
stock, the losses in 2002 will have economic ripple effects for many
years to come that will affect much of the west coast salmon fishery.
Salmon fisheries from Half Moon Bay, California to Florence, Oregon
open or close depending on the strength of Klamath River fall chinook
runs. Nearly 20 percent of that whole run was lost as a result of the
2002 fish kill, and many of the surviving wild adults spawners were
severely weakened, which means that their egg fertility levels were
also likely depressed. Juveniles smolt counts this spring, which were
the progeny of the survivors of 2002, were in fact exceedingly low.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Report confirms the findings of a similar
report by the California Department of Fish and Game, that low flows
in the Klamath River from Iron Gate Dam were a major contributing
factor in the fish kill. Low flows also lead inevitably to higher than
normal fish densities as well as higher than optimal temperatures in
the water, which all contributed to the spread of these diseases
according to the Fish and Wildlife Service Report.

Over-appropriation of limited water supplies in the Upper Basin,
primarily for commercial irrigation, have in recent years lead to less
and less water being made available to support downriver fisheries
worth literally billions of dollars to lower river and coastal
economies.

*****

For the Fish and Game Report see: http://sacramento.fws.gov.

For more information on the September 2002 fish kill and a copy of the
prior California Department of Fish and Game Report see:
http://www.klamathbasin.info/fishkill1.htm.

###




On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 09:46:18 -0800, "Chris HIll" >
wrote:

>Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political
>analysts that know absolutely nothing except how to cut and paste tripe into
>their brains and bother folks in an outdoor oriented newsgroup. Take this
>a$$wipe for example, he claims the administration killed 30k salmon due to
>the agricultural needs of the area. Dig down just one thin layer of
>information and we see that this is a Fuc*** reservoir that was built
>SPECIFICALLY for the farmer's irrigation. Natural habitat my A$$. Now why
>don't you idiot leftists get a clue that the educated public isn't buying
>you trash. Have I said enough? Good now if you have something to contribute
>to back country discussions go for it.
>Chris
>

[Lat705]

<<
I don't know. J. Edgar, Johnson, and
Kennedy all preceded Nixon, so there
was much to question. I'm not sure
what is cause and what is effect.
>>


Yes And may ond deceased grand mother once told me that they did not call the
"Roaring Twenties", the "Roaring Twenties" for nothing. The point being that
politics and politicians have never been totaly innocent (except the current
administration of course) during our history.

Lou T

[BJ Conner]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in message >...
> "slenon" > wrote in message
> om...
> > >yeah, after that whopper they cooked up for the >Jessica Lynch saga,
> could
> they
> > >have that much bull**** left in them?
> > > Tom
> >
> > On that matter, Tom, I agree with you. I'm sorry she was injured. I'm
> also
> > sorry that someone chose to hype the incident.
> >
> > But it doesn't shake my faith in all military sources. PR people are the
> > same whether they wear a uniform or a suit.
>
> Not exactly. By and large, the ones in suits murder fewer children.
>
> Wolfgang
> and yes, i do understand that not everyone thinks the distinction is
> valid.....or important.


Men in suits send soldiers to war. Did you know people on your ship
that wanted to throw kids throw kids overboard and watch em go through
the screws? I didn't know anyone who felt that way either.
We seem to have a surplus of gutless chickenhawks ready to spill
anyones blood to make their freinds in Houston money.
Read Eisenhower's quote on soldiers and peace.

[Wolfgang]

"BJ Conner" > wrote in message
om...


> Men in suits send soldiers to war.

Well dang, it's beginning to look as I may have been the only person
in this entire group who wasn't aware of that.......must be one of
those current event thingies. :(

> Did you know people on your ship
> that wanted to throw kids throw kids overboard and watch em go
through
> the screws?

Hard to say. I don't recall anyone admitting to such a desire, but
that was around thirty-two years ago.......and, if memory serves, I
was kinda drunk just about then. On the other hand, there were some
seriously ****ed up individuals on that boat......wouldn't surprise me
much if a few of them had some such ambition. Now that you've got me
thinking back to those days, I recall that I did know a good few
people who expressed a desire to perform similar acts and even several
who admitted to equally rough treatment of some folks in S.E. Asia
about that time, or in Europe or the south Pacific roughly twenty
years earlier.......um......they were mostly army or marines though,
not a suit among them.....well, not at the time they participated in
such amusements, anyway. Some of the WWII guys wore suits when I knew
them, but mostly they worked in factories and drank a lot and beat up
women and children and (if there were enough of them) ******s and
spics and wops and kikes, etc.

> I didn't know anyone who felt that way either.

Bull****. If you've been living in this country for more than a
couple of years, you've known lots.

> We seem to have a surplus of gutless chickenhawks ready to spill
> anyones blood to make their freinds in Houston money.

Well, sometimes things ARE exactly what they seem. However, in
fairness, it should be pointed out that not all of them have friends
in Houston

> Read Eisenhower's quote on soldiers and peace.

Post it....I'll read it.

Wolfgang

[slenon]

Geg Pavlov:
>Personally I think he's leaning left.

A good orthopedic surgeon can correct that.

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Chris HIll]

Fish may eventually populate (or be planted) in a body of water. It does not
give that fish, protected or not, eminent domain. Otherwise one could go
plant a protected species in a watershed for drinking water, then turn off
the faucets. Get a clue guy. Other than Kokanee, I know of no other salmon
that "lives" in a reservoir. Point is don't pollute this NG with political
crap, especially ficticous political BS.
Chris

"Greg Pavlov" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 09:46:18 -0800, "Chris HIll" >
> wrote:
>
> >Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political
> >analysts that know absolutely nothing except how to cut and paste tripe
into
> >their brains and bother folks in an outdoor oriented newsgroup. Take this
> >a$$wipe for example, he claims the administration killed 30k salmon due
to
> >the agricultural needs of the area. Dig down just one thin layer of
> >information and we see that this is a Fuc*** reservoir that was built
> >SPECIFICALLY for the farmer's irrigation. Natural habitat my A$$.
>
>
> Are you saying that the salmon lived in the reservoir ?
>
> Many happy dittos in the new year !
>
>

[Hayduke]

Mr. Hill, here is one about the San Rafael land swap for ya :) Yeah,
I've travelled almost every canyon in the Swell, too, so I know these
issues as well. Get your goat?

Peace

Interior disciplines 4 behind proposed San Rafael Swell land swap
Salt Lake Tribune ^ | 12/12/2003 | Robert Gehrke


WASHINGTON -- The Interior Department has disciplined four officials
behind a Utah land swap and reformed its land appraisal process after
an investigation revealed they concealed details that showed the
exchange would have shortchanged taxpayers.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, had singled out the actions of the
attorneys and negotiators behind a proposed land exchange in Utah's
San Rafael Swell, saying they misled Congress and top Interior
officials. He also demanded to know whether the Interior Secretary
Gale Norton considered such behavior acceptable.

"The Department of Interior is responsible for ensuring that we
present accurate facts to the Congress, decision-makers and the
public," Norton's chief of staff, Brian Waidmann, wrote Wednesday in a
reply to Grassley.

In this case, Waidmann wrote, Congress should have been provided with
a clearer picture of the value of land being exchanged. But had
members of Congress or the public read two documents -- the
legislation and the agreement spelling out the swap -- the terms of
the exchange would have been clear.

Waidmann said appropriate personnel action has been taken by the
department but did not elaborate.

The department has also sought to restructure its appraisal process to
insulate appraisers from political pressures and install more checks
on the process.

"I appreciate that the secretary has been responsive to my concerns.
I'm satisfied with the action she's taken," Grassley said. He said the
land exchanges "need more scrutiny to ensure that land valuations are
fair and accurate, and that the taxpayer doesn't get the short end of
the stick."

The Utah land swap was intended to consolidate federal land in the
scenic San Rafael Swell to make it easier for President Bush to
designate the area a national monument.

But the deal was scuttled after Bureau of Land Management appraisers
in Utah told The Associated Press last year that the deal amounted to
a giveaway of as much as $117 million in valuable federal mineral
reserves on land being turned over to the state of Utah.

Last week, a letter from the Office of Special Counsel indicated that
the case had been referred to the Justice Department for possible
prosecution.

The letter cited "evidence of criminal violations" as a grounds for
not releasing a report prepared in response to allegations raised by
BLM appraiser Kent Wilkinson.

But Mary Monahan, a spokeswoman for the office, said this week that
the report in question was the Interior Department's inspector general
report, which has been available for months.

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 09:46:18 -0800, "Chris HIll" >
wrote:

>Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political
>analysts that know absolutely nothing except how to cut and paste tripe into
>their brains and bother folks in an outdoor oriented newsgroup.

[daytripper]

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 09:46:18 -0800, "Chris HIll" > wrote:

>Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political
>analysts that know absolutely nothing except how to cut and paste tripe into
>their brains and bother folks in an outdoor oriented newsgroup. Take this
>a$$wipe for example, he claims the administration killed 30k salmon due to
>the agricultural needs of the area. Dig down just one thin layer of
>information and we see that this is a Fuc*** reservoir that was built
>SPECIFICALLY for the farmer's irrigation. Natural habitat my A$$. Now why
>don't you idiot leftists get a clue that the educated public isn't buying
>you trash. Have I said enough? Good now if you have something to contribute
>to back country discussions go for it.
>Chris

[..../]

Irony meter

No doubt rec.backcountry is proud to have a know-nothing effwit as its netcop.

[Wayne Knight]

"Guyz-N-Flyz" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>
> See, Wyanie there's the catch. You assume that folks would just vote for
> the sake of votin'.
>
> See my reply to 'tripper below:
>

Saw it bubba, but the assumption is not that ALL of them were going to vote,
but I feel pretty confident in stating that some number of them would have
voted and they would not have voted Republican.

[Enough Already]

(Sportsmen Against Bush) wrote in message >...

> Standing before a group of schoolchildren, President Bush repeated an
> oft-stated promise that his environmental policies would stand on hard
> scientific research.

Since many Republicans are Creationists it's annoying when they start
talking about biology. They'd be consistent if they'd reject all the
other science they take for granted, especially lifesaving medical
advances made possible by a true understanding of biology (not some
ancient book). Bush has made several statements indicating he believes
in supernatural origins.

To many fundamentalists, wilderness protection impedes human
"progress" (aka relentless overpopulation) and people can never take
too much from nature because a Creator gave it to us anyway. This call
to a talk show illustrates how these anti-science nuts perceive
reality:

http://enough_already.tripod.com/reagan_caller.ram
(if sound doesn't load, visit link below and click "RealAudio clip")

That particular fool actually admits resources are running out, but
listen to his disclaimer! I don't think George Bush and company see
the world too much differently. They need to stop pretending they're
on the side of real science.

E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/genesis.htm

"We don't have to protect the environment, the Second Coming is at
hand." (James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under Reagan)

[Hayduke]

Agreed. I always though it funny the idea of "christian science" as
though something based on faith can be proven by the scientific
method, taking the Bible as though it were fact and then basing
everything from that. LOL. It's a hoot, but has and will continue to
get this planet in trouble.

Peace

On 1 Jan 2004 09:31:50 -0800, (Enough
Already) wrote:


>
>Since many Republicans are Creationists it's annoying when they start
>talking about biology.

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Wayne Knight" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Guyz-N-Flyz" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> >
> > See, Wyanie there's the catch. You assume that folks would just vote
for
> > the sake of votin'.
> >
> > See my reply to 'tripper below:
> >
>
> Saw it bubba, but the assumption is not that ALL of them were going to
vote,
> but I feel pretty confident in stating that some number of them would have
> voted and they would not have voted Republican.

Ok darlin', but that still leaves several other candidates on ballots in
many states who's names weren't Gore, as well as write-ins, such as Goofy,
Donald Duck, Sparky the dog, ....etc., etc., etc............

Op --assumin' their are others out there who distrust the two major
political parties as much as I--

[Wayne Knight]

"Guyz-N-Flyz" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
>
> Ok darlin',

I love it when you talk dirty

[David Snedeker]

"Frank Church" > wrote in message
9.11...
> (Dave LaCourse) wrote in
> :
> Which speaks to the point I tried to raise some weeks back. NOTHING is
ever
> resolve in these damned political threads, but recrimination and hurt
> feelings are almost always the result. OT subjects should be allowed
within
> reason, but political posts should be banned entirely. This can't be done
> in this newsgroup, more's the pity.
>

Oh horse****. I listened to years of snickering crapola from grown men on
every aspect of Clinton's blowjob to snotty insults to his teenage daughter.
And now, with it clear that the asshole so many "conservative" clowns
insisted on voting for, though they clearly knew zip about the man, now that
this blithering asshole has engaged the best military in the World on an ill
conceived, misguided death circus guaranteed to tear this country apart,
distance us from our allies, waste our money and **** on the Constitution,
some folk want to insulate themselves from hearing about it or any
information that conflicts with everything being "A OK."

Give it a rest. Of course you don't ever want to hear about it. Tough
****.

Dave

[David Snedeker]

"Chris HIll" > wrote in message
...
> Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political

SNIPPED typical lying from the jackoff, child-molesting, nun-raping, idiot
electing, ill-numerate, snot swallowing, bugger picking, pig marrying, slime
sucking, communist peckerwood biting, seat peeing, whiners of the bed
wetting, dog kicking, Nazi purse snatching, drug addict right wing, 90 pound
weakling, Rush dittohead faction of sewer rat, lay about, ****ants.

Chris, your problem is you don't love love the Constitution.

Dave

[B J Conner]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in message
...
>
> "BJ Conner" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>
> > Men in suits send soldiers to war.
>
> Well dang, it's beginning to look as I may have been the only person
> in this entire group who wasn't aware of that.......must be one of
> those current event thingies. :(
>
> > Did you know people on your ship
> > that wanted to throw kids throw kids overboard and watch em go
> through
> > the screws?
>
> Hard to say. I don't recall anyone admitting to such a desire, but
> that was around thirty-two years ago.......and, if memory serves, I
> was kinda drunk just about then. On the other hand, there were some
> seriously ****ed up individuals on that boat......wouldn't surprise me
> much if a few of them had some such ambition. Now that you've got me
> thinking back to those days, I recall that I did know a good few
> people who expressed a desire to perform similar acts and even several
> who admitted to equally rough treatment of some folks in S.E. Asia
> about that time, or in Europe or the south Pacific roughly twenty
> years earlier.......um......they were mostly army or marines though,
> not a suit among them.....well, not at the time they participated in
> such amusements, anyway. Some of the WWII guys wore suits when I knew
> them, but mostly they worked in factories and drank a lot and beat up
> women and children and (if there were enough of them) ******s and
> spics and wops and kikes, etc.
>
> > I didn't know anyone who felt that way either.
>
> Bull****. If you've been living in this country for more than a
> couple of years, you've known lots.
>
> > We seem to have a surplus of gutless chickenhawks ready to spill
> > anyones blood to make their freinds in Houston money.
>
> Well, sometimes things ARE exactly what they seem. However, in
> fairness, it should be pointed out that not all of them have friends
> in Houston
>
> > Read Eisenhower's quote on soldiers and peace.
>
> Post it....I'll read it.
>
> Wolfgang
>
I don't know what you said, you were in the Bulgarian Coast Guard? As usual
you S/N is running less that 1dB.
Here's Ike for you.
"I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen
its brutality, its futility, its stupidity."

[David Snedeker]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
y.com...
> I don't know if I believe it or not. I called it "the story going around"
> in response to a cryptic post from Dave Snedeker, mostly, I suppose, to
> indicate that Dave is not a complete, nutcase, fruitcake whackjob. I do
> believe that ANY source is at least as credible as the US military.
>

Yeah, I ain't no complete, nutcase, fruitcake whackjob. So there.

Dave

[Strider]

On 2 Jan 2004 03:10:01 GMT, "David Snedeker"
> wrote:

>
>"Chris HIll" > wrote in message
...
>> Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political
>
>SNIPPED typical lying from the jackoff, child-molesting, nun-raping, idiot
>electing, ill-numerate, snot swallowing, bugger picking, pig marrying, slime
>sucking, communist peckerwood biting, seat peeing, whiners of the bed
>wetting, dog kicking, Nazi purse snatching, drug addict right wing, 90 pound
>weakling, Rush dittohead faction of sewer rat, lay about, ****ants.
>
>Chris, your problem is you don't love love the Constitution.
>
>Dave
>

The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.

Strider

[daytripper]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 04:41:49 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>On 2 Jan 2004 03:10:01 GMT, "David Snedeker"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Chris HIll" > wrote in message
...
>>> Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political
>>
>>SNIPPED typical lying from the jackoff, child-molesting, nun-raping, idiot
>>electing, ill-numerate, snot swallowing, bugger picking, pig marrying, slime
>>sucking, communist peckerwood biting, seat peeing, whiners of the bed
>>wetting, dog kicking, Nazi purse snatching, drug addict right wing, 90 pound
>>weakling, Rush dittohead faction of sewer rat, lay about, ****ants.
>>
>>Chris, your problem is you don't love love the Constitution.
>>
>>Dave
>>
>
>The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
>tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.

Why do you hate America?

/daytripper (go ahead, make a list)

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 05:00:24 GMT, daytripper
> wrote:

>On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 04:41:49 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>>On 2 Jan 2004 03:10:01 GMT, "David Snedeker"
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Chris HIll" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Typical lying from the looney left. Just like all these wannabe political
>>>
>>>SNIPPED typical lying from the jackoff, child-molesting, nun-raping, idiot
>>>electing, ill-numerate, snot swallowing, bugger picking, pig marrying, slime
>>>sucking, communist peckerwood biting, seat peeing, whiners of the bed
>>>wetting, dog kicking, Nazi purse snatching, drug addict right wing, 90 pound
>>>weakling, Rush dittohead faction of sewer rat, lay about, ****ants.
>>>
>>>Chris, your problem is you don't love love the Constitution.
>>>
>>>Dave
>>>
>>
>>The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
>>tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
>
>Why do you hate America?
>
>/daytripper (go ahead, make a list)

When are you going to stop beating your wife?

Strider

[Wolfgang]

"B J Conner" > wrote in message
...

> I don't know what you said...

No ****.

Wolfgang

[Jeff Miller]

Strider wrote:

> The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
> tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
>

ok, finally, it appears i have found someone who can provide details...
i think i understand the tofu-sucking part... i've not ever seen tofu to
my knowledge, nor seen anyone suck it, but i suspect it would be
something i could recognize. anyway, what's the definition you believe
accurately identifies a "liberal"?... and can you identify those *******
"liberals" you claim are engaged in redefining the Constitution? thanks!!

jeff (poltically struggling with all such stuff ever since atomic-based
Coordinated Universal Time was implemented in 1972, superseding the
astronomically determined Greenwich Mean Time.)

[Francis Reid]

> jeff (poltically struggling with all such stuff ever since atomic-based
> Coordinated Universal Time was implemented in 1972, superseding the
> astronomically determined Greenwich Mean Time.)

In that case, how 'bout "leap second sucking conservatives?" I mean, we
need some consistency here. Since 1999, we've lost the leap second.
Hmmm, conservatives rise to power, leap second disappears.
Coincidence? I don't think so. I think the neo-cons are cooking the
atomic clock in their favor. They don't want the tofu-sucking liberals
to have one more second to prove the conspiracy theories right.
Frank Reid (who's seen a tofu in his cross hairs but could kill
something that ugly)

[Francis Reid]

> Frank Reid (who's seen a tofu in his cross hairs but COULDN'T kill
> something that ugly)

[Mike Connor]

"Francis Reid" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> > Frank Reid (who's seen a tofu in his cross hairs but COULDN'T kill
> > something that ugly)

If it´s in your cross-hairs just fall in and drown it! :)

TL
MC

[Francis Reid]

> > > Frank Reid (who's seen a tofu in his cross hairs but COULDN'T kill
> > > something that ugly)
> =

> If it=B4s in your cross-hairs just fall in and drown it! :)

It was kinda grey and bloated looking, something like a drowned corpse. =

Is twice-drowned tofu like twice-baked potato? We'll ask Danl, he's an
Awnoldstanian and they are over-run with tofus on the left coast.
Frank Reid (thinking that Mike may be insinuating something about me and
drowning)

[David Snedeker]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...

> >Chris, your problem is you don't love love the Constitution.
> >Dave

> The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
> tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
> Strider

See, there you go again, mistaking a body part for food. Get it right fella:
Most people like sex and food, out in the open. But many Dittoheads like
hillbilly heroin and closet sex with their sisters or anonymous partners
they pick up in the park.

No **** "Strider," why is it that the wussy faction of wingnut
chickenhawkdom just loves these masculine nicknames, then when you meet them
they more frequently than not want to suck on the ol meat biscuit? I don't
want to point fingers but everyone Ive heard use the "tofu sucking" gambit
has been a deviate. Just a hint. Give up this fixation on "tofu," pray for
the President's soul, and try to follow a "straight" path if you know what I
mean.

Dave
Trying to be helpful

[Strider]

On 2 Jan 2004 19:58:23 GMT, "David Snedeker"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>
>> >Chris, your problem is you don't love love the Constitution.
>> >Dave
>
>> The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
>> tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
>> Strider
>
>See, there you go again, mistaking a body part for food. Get it right fella:
>Most people like sex and food, out in the open. But many Dittoheads like
>hillbilly heroin and closet sex with their sisters or anonymous partners
>they pick up in the park.
>
> No **** "Strider," why is it that the wussy faction of wingnut
>chickenhawkdom just loves these masculine nicknames, then when you meet them
>they more frequently than not want to suck on the ol meat biscuit? I don't
>want to point fingers but everyone Ive heard use the "tofu sucking" gambit
>has been a deviate. Just a hint. Give up this fixation on "tofu," pray for
>the President's soul, and try to follow a "straight" path if you know what I
>mean.
>
>Dave
>Trying to be helpful
>
Quit eating tofu. It's rotting your brain and you didn't have a whole
lot to begin with.

"Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
Winston Churchill"

Strider

[Mike Connor]

"Francis Reid" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> > > Frank Reid (who's seen a tofu in his cross hairs but COULDN'T kill
> > > something that ugly)
>
> If it´s in your cross-hairs just fall in and drown it! :)

It was kinda grey and bloated looking, something like a drowned corpse.
Is twice-drowned tofu like twice-baked potato? We'll ask Danl, he's an
Awnoldstanian and they are over-run with tofus on the left coast.
Frank Reid (thinking that Mike may be insinuating something about me and
drowning)

Once upon a time, my late wife decided that we needed to eat more "healthy"
stuff, and brought home a bag of tofu. ( There are a more than
insignificant number of nutcases extant, who consider such depressingly
defeatist insults and abject apologies for food "healthy", and have the
monumetal cheek to write books about it). Some apparently exist on
"Multi-vitamin"-juice, tofu, and wild rice. You can recognise them by the
smell.

It was a most peculiar colour, a sort of very unhealthy looking greyish
off-white, ( although it was more or less motionless, apart from a light but
disturbing oily sheen, evocative of old sump-oil in a muddy puddle, which
induced more than a touch of queasiness in the casual observer, except when
poked, upon which stimulation it displayed a most upsetting tendency to
"wobble"), it also tasted more or less as it looked. My wife, indefatigable
as she was, tried a number of recipes, fried, boiled, steamed, grilled,
tossed ( my favourite, and into the bloody garden, where even the cat
learned to fear it!), with various sauces and a host of "healthy"
ingredients.

This in no way improved the flavour, or the texture, which was somewhat
reminiscent of rubbery white china clay which has "gone off". ( You don´t
want to know how I know what white china clay tastes like!). You can tell it
has "gone off" by the fine coating of blueish grey hairs covering the
surface. ( The clay, not the tofu), Which doubtless some inventive, well
loved, but very badly fed soul has already tried to use as dubbing. Some
folks are simply unaware of the bounds of decency. Belly lint, sock fluff,
and jockey short scrapings, being of course well within such bounds.

Practically the only solution I found for the problem, was a bottle of
brandy, before I even attempted to consume the aforementioned abominations.
Another bottle immediately afterwards also helped to reduce the trauma
"after the fact". Best of all, was two bottles, one before, and one after
one had tossed the objectionable ordure in question into the rhododendrons.
( They have barely recovered in the meantime, although the cat is thriving!
I suspect he merely batted the stuff around for a while).

Personally, I would nevertheless have preferred the clay! Even with the
hairs.

Should you by any chance be one of those unfortunates who do not know what
love is, here is a perfect definition. Somebody who will eat the most
outlandish and disgusting material, or even in point of fact, tofu, of his
own free will, and simply to please his wife! Even though perfectly
reasonable comestibles are freely available at the time.

Having been the subject of various such experiments over the years, (
memorable were the "dried mashed potatoes with margarine", quite apart from
the immutable scars on my young palate, have you seen how margarine is made?
Or, horror of horrors! Smelled it ?). I am now resigned to the fact that I
will eventually die in a most unhealthy condition, possibly due to a surfeit
of garlic sausage, prawns Provencal in Irish butter with fresh herbs,
"Praguer Braten" (with crust), "Schweine Medaillons mit Waldpilze in Caramel
Soese", lobster thermidore, "Schwarwalder Kirschkuchen" with fresh cream,
coupled with copious quantities of white cider, single malt, port wine,
brandy, and coffee. Perhaps even the cheese and biscuits, or the after
dinner cigar. I will most certainly not die of a "surfeit of lampreys",
notwithstanding the fact that I am an angler, and indeed "a very honest
man", as they are in fact on a par with tofu, as far as the taste is
concerned. This however, would still be eminently preferable to dying
"healthy", due to a surfeit of tofu, assuming one had the stomach to eat
enough of the awful muck in the first place.

Anything grey and bloated looking, in one´s cross-hairs, or indeed in any
other hairs, must be dealt with immediately! If you decide to shoot it,
then aim carefully! You could of course simply try the time-honoured
method, rub twice daily with turpentine, take a course of penicillin, and
drink plenty of orange juice. I believe Laudanum was also at one time highly
recommended. This may however have deleterious effects on your casting
accuracy.

It occurred to me that you may simply have dropped something nasty ( tofu,
margarine, or some equally inedible mass, in your lap), before shooting
this, observe it carefully. If it moves, shoot it, if it does not move, then
simply scrape it off, and put it carefully on the side of your plate. This
may of course be a considerable faux pas, if some kind soul has merely
offered you a piece of really good cheese. There is no need to shoot this,
just close your mouth quickly, savour the flavour, and try to ignore the
obnoxious aroma. It helps ( at least a little) to hold your breath as well.
( If you decide to shoot it, this is also very good advice).

More or less all of the above also applies to cheap mozzarella, soya bean
"meat" ( Yeuchhhh!), nut cutlets, practically all manky Danish, Swedish, or
similar "rotten fish" ( regardless of the language, spelling, or age of the
can in question), that comes in cans, haggis, ( which smells like the
insides of an old bagpipe, which has not been "fed" regularly, and tastes
even worse), Swiss "Vergorene" milk drinks, (including the alcoholic type,
even though you never get drunk, as one sip is already more than any
sensible person can stomach!), and English white sliced bread.

Far be it from me to insinuate anything at all. As a rule, I just come
straight out and make a Pratt of myself. To date, this has not resulted in
my timely immortalisation, nay almost canonisation, for various acrobatic
and obviously impressive displays of involuted and ostensibly involuntary
submersion, ( which indeed, I hope someday to personally witness!). So
don´t drown just yet, I would like to live to see it, which of course
somewhat precludes your own demise.

If I were you, I would leave out the bloody tofu as well! Fairly shot, or
otherwise!

TL
MC

[Charlie Choc]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 21:12:27 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>If I were you, I would leave out the bloody tofu as well! Fairly shot, or
>otherwise!
>
Many of the meals I had in Japan included a cube of tofu. When I was
done eating, the tofu had not been disturbed in any way. <g>
--
Charlie...

[Warren]

wrote...
> Many of the meals I had in Japan included a cube of tofu. When I was
> done eating, the tofu had not been disturbed in any way. <g>

I would sooner starve to death than eat a piece of tofu. I'll fight
ANYBODY that tries to feed me tofu. A good thrashing is far better
than eating tofu! <g>

Last week I was visiting the toads (nickname for parental units since
you need to kiss their arses to turn them into something nice:-) for
Xmas. My younger brother and his wife were also there and she is a
full on vegan; really, really nice girl other than being a tofu
sucking vegan. I was reaching into the fridge and talking to my
brother's friend who stopped by and mistakenly grabbed the tofu
instead of the prime rib left overs. It startled me and I yelled out
with a loud "Uhhhhhhh!" My mom asked what happened and I told her I
touched some tofu and she gave me a stern look then said "Shush!
Julie is in the next room!" I didn't need any further punishment;
touching the tofu being more than adequate.....
--
Warren (forever emotionally scarred by tofu)
(use troutbum_mt (at) yahoo to reply via email)
For Conclave Info:
http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt3/MadisonConclave.html

[Frank Reid]

<Laudanum ravings snipped>
> If I were you, I would leave out the bloody tofu as well! Fairly shot, or
> otherwise!
> TL
> MC

Living around the world has enabled me to taste some truely incredible
foods, from the sublime (black angus 1/2 lb cheeseburge in the PI, on a
sweet role, with bacon), to balut (the PI version of the 1000 year egg).
One thing I do miss is eier likor torte. Tofu, on the other, doesn't even
make good compost (kinda like twinkies and cockroaches, never degrades).
--
Frank Reid
Reverse email to reply

[Frank Reid]

> No **** "Strider," why is it that the wussy faction of wingnut
> chickenhawkdom just loves these masculine nicknames, then when you meet
them
> they more frequently than not want to suck on the ol meat biscuit?
> Dave
> Trying to be helpful

Don't be helpful, Dave. This idjit is trying to impress his pimply-faced
junior highschool friends. The guy takes his "manly name" from a fantasy
novel and hides behind it. Methinks he's been playing too much D&D.

By the way, Strider, "Don't fight a battle that you cannot win" - Tsun Su

--
Frank Reid
Reverse email to reply

[Mike Connor]

"Charlie Choc" > schrieb im
Newsbeitrag ...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 21:12:27 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> > wrote:
>
> >If I were you, I would leave out the bloody tofu as well! Fairly shot,
or
> >otherwise!
> >
> Many of the meals I had in Japan included a cube of tofu. When I was
> done eating, the tofu had not been disturbed in any way. <g>
> --
> Charlie...

Too right Charlie! I am in any case immediately suspicious of anything
which comes in "cubes", unless I have diced it myself!

Some years ago now, I had the doubtful but nevertheless vastly amusing,
indeed one might say abiding, pleasure of eating a "gourmet meal" in a very
"high class" restaurant, which shall remain nameless, in order to protect
the guilty.

The meal was memorable, indeed it is indelibly stamped in my memory. The
food was ****, but the meal was absolutely wonderful! Nevertheless, I
still thank my stars that my erstwhile employer actually paid the bill,
which was booked to my company credit card. I have it framed in a drawer
somewhere, as a constant tribute and reminder to the final fragility and
futility of human endeavour.

My company decided to invite all the technical managers and all the
technicians to a really good meal. ( Translation; "Really good"=
"ridiculously expensive"). All the guys were flown in from all over the
place. First class of course!

Several highlights of this unique experience come to mind.

Our worthy Dutch incumbent drank the finger bowl, and then asked for another
one, with an extra slice of lemon!

We were served with "Hechtbaellchen in Dillsoese". The then technical
manager for England asked for a translation, and upon being told that this
was "Pike balls in Dill sauce", expressed his disgust by saying "You mean
they cut the balls off just for this ****?". ( Obviously not an angler!).

Several of the assembled company were not at all "au fait" with the current
trends in "high society", and by about ten o´ clock in the evening, ( the
"meal" started at 20.00 hrs), were rather more than three sheets to the
wind.

This resulted in them asking for what they wanted, rather than asking for
what others might think they should order, or the most expensive item they
could find, presumably in the forlorn hope that it would be "good".

One can immediately tell when one is in a five star hotel ( even though this
experience might be a very seldom occurrence), when somebody asks for a
"Portion of chips with ketchup", and the waiter does not even blink. ( In
lesser establishments, the waiter raises at least an eyebrow!).

When one is served with freshly pressed orange juice, and the reaction is,
"Have you got any "Fanta", this stuff tastes watery, and there´s no bubbles
in it".

"French fries? What´s that, are there snails in it?. I ´m not eating any of
that slimey continental crap".

"****ing hell, I have not seen so many forks and spoons since my sister got
married!".

I made copious notes in my hotel room afterwards, shortly before my room was
invaded and the mini-bar plundered. It was a really succesful evening!

Having been self-employed for quite a number of years now, and indeed in the
meantime a "pensioner" as it were. There are some things I will always miss!

Even after all this time, I can not help occasionally engaging in pleasant
speculatory conjecture, what would have happened if they had served tofu
cubes and sushi? I reckon the fifteen mini-bars would have been empty
anyway!

Which reminds me of another most enjoyable experience at an "Empfang" in a
top Hamburg hotel, with the then American Ambassador, Richard Burt. My guys
all trooped in, amd sat at their appointed places. After interminable
speeches, the first course was served. This was raw cod slices in "American
Dressing" ( Admittedly a most unfortunate combination).

My chief technician at the time was moved to remark, at what he thought was
"sotto voce", but in reality was more like "fortissimo", "**** me gently".
"You´ld think a good restaurant would know how to cook a bit of bloody
fish!".

TL
MC

[Strider]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:08:31 -0500, "Frank Reid"
<moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:

>> No **** "Strider," why is it that the wussy faction of wingnut
>> chickenhawkdom just loves these masculine nicknames, then when you meet
>them
>> they more frequently than not want to suck on the ol meat biscuit?
>> Dave
>> Trying to be helpful
>
>Don't be helpful, Dave. This idjit is trying to impress his pimply-faced
>junior highschool friends. The guy takes his "manly name" from a fantasy
>novel and hides behind it. Methinks he's been playing too much D&D.

No hiding here, liberal. My addy's valid.
Played D&D a few times in 1991.
Been Strider since 1974 +/-.
I'm much older than you think.

>
>By the way, Strider, "Don't fight a battle that you cannot win" - Tsun Su

Good advice. Take it.
How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.

"Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
Winston Churchill"

Sir Winston was a genius.

Strider

[Mike Connor]

"Frank Reid" <moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> <Laudanum ravings snipped>
> > If I were you, I would leave out the bloody tofu as well! Fairly shot,
or
> > otherwise!
> > TL
> > MC
>
> Living around the world has enabled me to taste some truely incredible
> foods, from the sublime (black angus 1/2 lb cheeseburge in the PI, on a
> sweet role, with bacon), to balut (the PI version of the 1000 year egg).
> One thing I do miss is eier likor torte. Tofu, on the other, doesn't even
> make good compost (kinda like twinkies and cockroaches, never degrades).
> --
> Frank Reid
> Reverse email to reply
>
>

Really? I can´t think of anything more degrading! :)

Perhaps it would degrade if you actually ( shudder!!!) ate it?

Perhaps you should try the twinkies withoút the cockroaches?

TL
MC ( Gave up Laudanum after discovering single malt!) Mind you, the
effects are remarkably similar! :)

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:08:31 -0500, "Frank Reid"
> <moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:
>
> >> No **** "Strider," why is it that the wussy faction of wingnut
> >> chickenhawkdom just loves these masculine nicknames, then when you meet
> >them
> >> they more frequently than not want to suck on the ol meat biscuit?
> >> Dave
> >> Trying to be helpful
> >
> >Don't be helpful, Dave. This idjit is trying to impress his pimply-faced
> >junior highschool friends. The guy takes his "manly name" from a fantasy
> >novel and hides behind it. Methinks he's been playing too much D&D.
>
> No hiding here, liberal. My addy's valid.
> Played D&D a few times in 1991.
> Been Strider since 1974 +/-.
> I'm much older than you think.
>
> >
> >By the way, Strider, "Don't fight a battle that you cannot win" - Tsun Su
>
> Good advice. Take it.
> How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
> You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.
>
> "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
> Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
> Winston Churchill"
>
> Sir Winston was a genius.
>
> Strider

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...

>> The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
> tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
>
> Strider

You might want to check and see what good 'ol Ronnie Reagan did and what
your buddy Georgie Jr is doin' to it.

Op --death to the fascists--

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...

> Sir Winston was a genius.
>
> Strider

You misspelled "a drunk."

HTH

Op

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 21:52:43 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Sir Winston was a genius.
>>
>> Strider
>
>You misspelled "a drunk."
>
>HTH
>
>Op
>
Something you should know lot's about.

Strider

[Wolfgang]

"Warren" > wrote in message
...
> wrote...
> > Many of the meals I had in Japan included a cube of tofu. When I was
> > done eating, the tofu had not been disturbed in any way. <g>
>
> I would sooner starve to death than eat a piece of tofu. I'll fight
> ANYBODY that tries to feed me tofu. A good thrashing is far better
> than eating tofu! <g>
>
> Last week I was visiting the toads (nickname for parental units since
> you need to kiss their arses to turn them into something nice:-) for
> Xmas. My younger brother and his wife were also there and she is a
> full on vegan; really, really nice girl other than being a tofu
> sucking vegan. I was reaching into the fridge and talking to my
> brother's friend who stopped by and mistakenly grabbed the tofu
> instead of the prime rib left overs. It startled me and I yelled out
> with a loud "Uhhhhhhh!" My mom asked what happened and I told her I
> touched some tofu and she gave me a stern look then said "Shush!
> Julie is in the next room!" I didn't need any further punishment;
> touching the tofu being more than adequate.....
> --
> Warren (forever emotionally scarred by tofu)

I have never understood why parents can't be nice to a child.

Wolfgang

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 21:42:32 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>
>>> The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
>> tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
>>
>> Strider
>
>You might want to check and see what good 'ol Ronnie Reagan did and what
>your buddy Georgie Jr is doin' to it.
>
>Op --death to the fascists--
>

Reversing forty years of liberal failure?

Strider

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>
> Sir Winston was a genius.
>
> Strider

Could be, but Bill Clinton was more inventive with cigars.

TL
MC

[Mike Connor]

"Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>
> I have never understood why parents can't be nice to a child.
>
> Wolfgang
>
>

Still single eh?

TL
MC

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> Reversing forty years of liberal failure?
>
> Strider

Well you've failed your Constitutional knowledge inquiry.

Of course civil rights don't me squat to a good 'ol white boy, well until
his home and property have been seized without due process. I'm sure you'll
never have to worry about that though.

Op --no one cries like a conservative who's rights have been violated.--

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...

> Something you should know lot's about.
>
> Strider

Well, no not personally anyway. However, I do read a bit and have seen
several documentaries that have noted his penchant for alcohol.

Op --****! I too could be a genius!--

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> ...
> >
> > I have never understood why parents can't be nice to a child.
> >
> > Wolfgang
> >
> >
>
> Still single eh?
>
> TL
> MC

Childless, anyway.

Op --thank goodness for women with taste--

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 21:42:32 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >>> The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
> >> tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
> >>
> >> Strider
> >
> >You might want to check and see what good 'ol Ronnie Reagan did and what
> >your buddy Georgie Jr is doin' to it.
> >
> >Op --death to the fascists--
> >
>
> Reversing forty years of liberal failure?
>
> Strider

[Wolfgang]

"Guyz-N-Flyz" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Mike Connor" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> > ...
> > >
> > > I have never understood why parents can't be nice to a child.
> > >
> > > Wolfgang
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Still single eh?
> >
> > TL
> > MC
>
> Childless, anyway.
>
> Op --thank goodness for women with taste--

Well, actually, I'm at that age where a peephole in the front door is a very
handy thing. If whoever is standing on the stoop appears to be between the
ages of fifteen and thirty, and I don't know him or her, I pretend I'm not
home.

Wolfgang
beware of young strangers with glasses and a cheesy mustache! :(

[rw]

Strider wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:08:31 -0500, "Frank Reid"
> <moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:
>
>>By the way, Strider, "Don't fight a battle that you cannot win" - Tsun Su
>
>
> Good advice. Take it.
> How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
> You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.
>
> "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
> Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
> Winston Churchill"
>
> Sir Winston was a genius.

He must have been a plagiarist, too -- or maybe you're just a moron and
Churchill is innocent:

Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
thirty is proof of want of head. -Francois Guisot (1787-1874)

[BTW, "republican" meant something quite different in those days. It
meant more-or-less what you mean by "liberal" -- someone supporting
independence, democracy, and human rights, and opposing monarchy.]

Also:

Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
thirty is proof of want of head. -Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:12:05 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> wrote:

>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Something you should know lot's about.
>>
>> Strider
>
>Well, no not personally anyway. However, I do read a bit and have seen
>several documentaries that have noted his penchant for alcohol.
>
>Op --****! I too could be a genius!--
>
Trying to deal with liberal pond scum while in the midst of a war
likely contributed to his problem.

Strider

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:12:05 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> > wrote:
>
> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> Something you should know lot's about.
> >>
> >> Strider
> >
> >Well, no not personally anyway. However, I do read a bit and have seen
> >several documentaries that have noted his penchant for alcohol.
> >
> >Op --****! I too could be a genius!--
> >
> Trying to deal with liberal pond scum while in the midst of a war
> likely contributed to his problem.
>
> Strider

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 15:39:48 -0700, rw >
wrote:

>Strider wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:08:31 -0500, "Frank Reid"
>> <moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:
>>
>>>By the way, Strider, "Don't fight a battle that you cannot win" - Tsun Su
>>
>>
>> Good advice. Take it.
>> How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
>> You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.
>>
>> "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
>> Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
>> Winston Churchill"
>>
>> Sir Winston was a genius.
>
>He must have been a plagiarist, too -- or maybe you're just a moron and
>Churchill is innocent:
>
>Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
>thirty is proof of want of head. -Francois Guisot (1787-1874)
>
>[BTW, "republican" meant something quite different in those days. It
>meant more-or-less what you mean by "liberal" -- someone supporting
>independence, democracy, and human rights, and opposing monarchy.]
>
>Also:
>
>Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
>thirty is proof of want of head. -Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)

Proof that it took a man like Churchill to get it right.

Strider

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 15:39:48 -0700, rw >
> wrote:
>
> >Strider wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:08:31 -0500, "Frank Reid"
> >> <moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:
> >>
> >>>By the way, Strider, "Don't fight a battle that you cannot win" - Tsun
Su
> >>
> >>
> >> Good advice. Take it.
> >> How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
> >> You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.
> >>
> >> "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
> >> Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
> >> Winston Churchill"
> >>
> >> Sir Winston was a genius.
> >
> >He must have been a plagiarist, too -- or maybe you're just a moron and
> >Churchill is innocent:
> >
> >Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
> >thirty is proof of want of head. -Francois Guisot (1787-1874)
> >
> >[BTW, "republican" meant something quite different in those days. It
> >meant more-or-less what you mean by "liberal" -- someone supporting
> >independence, democracy, and human rights, and opposing monarchy.]
> >
> >Also:
> >
> >Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
> >thirty is proof of want of head. -Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)
>
> Proof that it took a man like Churchill to get it right.
>
> Strider

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:07:15 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>> Reversing forty years of liberal failure?
>>
>> Strider
>
>Well you've failed your Constitutional knowledge inquiry.
>
>Of course civil rights don't me squat to a good 'ol white boy, well until
>his home and property have been seized without due process. I'm sure you'll
>never have to worry about that though.
>
>Op --no one cries like a conservative who's rights have been violated.--
>

Not as long as Americans keep ignoring leftwing whiners.

Strider

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:07:15 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Reversing forty years of liberal failure?
> >>
> >> Strider
> >
> >Well you've failed your Constitutional knowledge inquiry.
> >
> >Of course civil rights don't me squat to a good 'ol white boy, well until
> >his home and property have been seized without due process. I'm sure
you'll
> >never have to worry about that though.
> >
> >Op --no one cries like a conservative who's rights have been violated.--
> >
>
> Not as long as Americans keep ignoring leftwing whiners.
>
> Strider

[Strider]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:01:18 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:12:05 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >"Strider" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> >> Something you should know lot's about.
>> >>
>> >> Strider
>> >
>> >Well, no not personally anyway. However, I do read a bit and have seen
>> >several documentaries that have noted his penchant for alcohol.
>> >
>> >Op --****! I too could be a genius!--
>> >
>> Trying to deal with liberal pond scum while in the midst of a war
>> likely contributed to his problem.
>>
>> Strider
>

[Strider]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:04:20 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 15:39:48 -0700, rw >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Strider wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:08:31 -0500, "Frank Reid"
>> >> <moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>By the way, Strider, "Don't fight a battle that you cannot win" - Tsun
>Su
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Good advice. Take it.
>> >> How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
>> >> You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.
>> >>
>> >> "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
>> >> Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
>> >> Winston Churchill"
>> >>
>> >> Sir Winston was a genius.
>> >
>> >He must have been a plagiarist, too -- or maybe you're just a moron and
>> >Churchill is innocent:
>> >
>> >Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
>> >thirty is proof of want of head. -Francois Guisot (1787-1874)
>> >
>> >[BTW, "republican" meant something quite different in those days. It
>> >meant more-or-less what you mean by "liberal" -- someone supporting
>> >independence, democracy, and human rights, and opposing monarchy.]
>> >
>> >Also:
>> >
>> >Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
>> >thirty is proof of want of head. -Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)
>>
>> Proof that it took a man like Churchill to get it right.
>>
>> Strider
>

[Strider]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:05:08 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:07:15 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Strider" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> Reversing forty years of liberal failure?
>> >>
>> >> Strider
>> >
>> >Well you've failed your Constitutional knowledge inquiry.
>> >
>> >Of course civil rights don't me squat to a good 'ol white boy, well until
>> >his home and property have been seized without due process. I'm sure
>you'll
>> >never have to worry about that though.
>> >
>> >Op --no one cries like a conservative who's rights have been violated.--
>> >
>>
>> Not as long as Americans keep ignoring leftwing whiners.
>>
>> Strider
>

[Strider]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:28:26 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 21:42:32 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Strider" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> >>> The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
>> >> tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
>> >>
>> >> Strider
>> >
>> >You might want to check and see what good 'ol Ronnie Reagan did and what
>> >your buddy Georgie Jr is doin' to it.
>> >
>> >Op --death to the fascists--
>> >
>>
>> Reversing forty years of liberal failure?
>>
>> Strider
>

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:01:18 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:12:05 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> >> Something you should know lot's about.
> >> >>
> >> >> Strider
> >> >
> >> >Well, no not personally anyway. However, I do read a bit and have
seen
> >> >several documentaries that have noted his penchant for alcohol.
> >> >
> >> >Op --****! I too could be a genius!--
> >> >
> >> Trying to deal with liberal pond scum while in the midst of a war
> >> likely contributed to his problem.
> >>
> >> Strider
> >
>

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:04:20 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 15:39:48 -0700, rw >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Strider wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:08:31 -0500, "Frank Reid"
> >> >> <moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>By the way, Strider, "Don't fight a battle that you cannot win" -
Tsun
> >Su
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Good advice. Take it.
> >> >> How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
> >> >> You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.
> >> >>
> >> >> "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no
heart.
> >> >> Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
> >> >> Winston Churchill"
> >> >>
> >> >> Sir Winston was a genius.
> >> >
> >> >He must have been a plagiarist, too -- or maybe you're just a moron
and
> >> >Churchill is innocent:
> >> >
> >> >Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one
at
> >> >thirty is proof of want of head. -Francois Guisot (1787-1874)
> >> >
> >> >[BTW, "republican" meant something quite different in those days. It
> >> >meant more-or-less what you mean by "liberal" -- someone supporting
> >> >independence, democracy, and human rights, and opposing monarchy.]
> >> >
> >> >Also:
> >> >
> >> >Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one
at
> >> >thirty is proof of want of head. -Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)
> >>
> >> Proof that it took a man like Churchill to get it right.
> >>
> >> Strider
> >
>

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:05:08 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:07:15 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> Reversing forty years of liberal failure?
> >> >>
> >> >> Strider
> >> >
> >> >Well you've failed your Constitutional knowledge inquiry.
> >> >
> >> >Of course civil rights don't me squat to a good 'ol white boy, well
until
> >> >his home and property have been seized without due process. I'm sure
> >you'll
> >> >never have to worry about that though.
> >> >
> >> >Op --no one cries like a conservative who's rights have been
violated.--
> >> >
> >>
> >> Not as long as Americans keep ignoring leftwing whiners.
> >>
> >> Strider
> >
>

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:28:26 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 21:42:32 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> >>> The Constitution would work just fine if it weren't for a bunch of
> >> >> tofu sucking Liberals trying to "redefine" it every other week.
> >> >>
> >> >> Strider
> >> >
> >> >You might want to check and see what good 'ol Ronnie Reagan did and
what
> >> >your buddy Georgie Jr is doin' to it.
> >> >
> >> >Op --death to the fascists--
> >> >
> >>
> >> Reversing forty years of liberal failure?
> >>
> >> Strider
> >
>

[Dan]

You guys having fun?

--

Let's adopt the following two amendments to the U.S. Constitution:

"The Congress shall have the power to declare war, and this time we
really do mean it."

"No person shall be denied life, liberty, or
property without due process of law, and this time we really do mean
it."



"Wolfgang" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Strider" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:01:18 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Strider" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:12:05 GMT, "Guyz-N-Flyz"
> > >> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >"Strider" > wrote in message
> > >> ...
> > >> >
> > >> >> Something you should know lot's about.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Strider
> > >> >
> > >> >Well, no not personally anyway. However, I do read a bit and have
> seen
> > >> >several documentaries that have noted his penchant for alcohol.
> > >> >
> > >> >Op --****! I too could be a genius!--
> > >> >
> > >> Trying to deal with liberal pond scum while in the midst of a war
> > >> likely contributed to his problem.
> > >>
> > >> Strider
> > >
> >
>
>

[Wolfgang]

"Dan" > wrote in message
...
> You guys having fun?

Huh? Who, me?

Wolfgang

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 21:12:27 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

> haggis, ( which smells like the
>insides of an old bagpipe, which has not been "fed" regularly, and tastes
>even worse),

Don't diss haggis. It's a pate' that can be delicious. Okay, maybe
it should go as a terraine instead of a pate'. My most memorable
haggis was one guaranteed to be bad. It was made by a Scot who was a
SF fan (and who wrote overblown poetry) and served at an SF convention
(think Clave with much stranger clothing and lots of teenagers). I
loved it. I'm a very picky eater. I think the list of ingredients is
what turns most people off.

However, I'll agree with you on tofu. When it was just beginning to
be hyped, I bought a 1 pound tray. I did not try several ways of
cooking it. One tiny taste of the uncooked, one large bite of the
sauteed and it went to the trash. My family got to see it, but I
refused to inflict it on them. I went back to the 'frig and got out
a new dinner menu. My only disagreement would be on the colour. I
thought it looked the way an albino with jaundice would.
--

rbc:vixen,Minnow Goddess,Willow Watcher,and all that sort of thing.
Often taunted by trout.
Only a fool would refuse to believe in luck. Only a damn fool would rely on it.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli

[Frank Reid]

> Good advice. Take it.
> How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
> You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.

Awe, see, there's your problem. One often ascribes his or her own failings
and frailties to others, because others can't possibly be, in your mind,
better than you. Try http://www.nifl.gov/
By the way, defending the Constitution is not a done by affiliation to a
single party. It is done by folks on both sides. Without liberals and
conservatives, there are no checks and balances, we have no middle, we have
one party rule. I spent too big a part of my life ensuring that doesn't
happen. Learn to live with the concept that people across the spectrum made
the Constitution and, through the history of democracy, have added to it to
make it what it is today.
--
Frank Reid
Reverse email to reply

[rw]

Strider wrote:
>
> Proof that it took a man like Churchill to get it right.

Churchill was very quotable, but he obviously stole that one. Here are
some ORIGINAL Chruchill quotes that are more apropos of current events:

There are a lot of lies going around... and half of them are true.

In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a
bodyguard of lies.

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get
its pants on.

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.

Truth is incontrovertible, ignorance can deride it, panic may resent it,
malice may destroy it, but there it is.

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick
themselves up and hurry off as if nothing has happened.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Strider]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 17:41:19 -0800, "Dan" > wrote:

>You guys having fun?

LOL. All I can assume is that it's some bizarre kind of cyber staring
match.

Strider

[Strider]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 21:33:16 -0500, "Frank Reid"
<moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:

>> Good advice. Take it.
>> How did you manage to read "The Art of War" ?
>> You must have gotten a Conservative to read the big words for you.
>
>Awe, see, there's your problem. One often ascribes his or her own failings
>and frailties to others, because others can't possibly be, in your mind,
>better than you. Try http://www.nifl.gov/
>By the way, defending the Constitution is not a done by affiliation to a
>single party. It is done by folks on both sides. Without liberals and
>conservatives, there are no checks and balances, we have no middle, we have
>one party rule. I spent too big a part of my life ensuring that doesn't
>happen. Learn to live with the concept that people across the spectrum made
>the Constitution and, through the history of democracy, have added to it to
>make it what it is today.

What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
US, I must oppose them.

Strider

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 17:41:19 -0800, "Dan" > wrote:
>
> >You guys having fun?
>
> LOL. All I can assume is that it's some bizarre kind of cyber staring
> match.
>
> Strider

Ineffably, and you are losing.

Do you possess any nickels at all? Shiney or otherwise?

TL
MC

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 17:41:19 -0800, "Dan" > wrote:
>
> >You guys having fun?
>
> LOL. All I can assume is that it's some bizarre kind of cyber staring
> match.

Staring? What is that.....some kind of joke? You think being blind is
funny?

Wolfgang

[Mike Connor]

"Guyz-N-Flyz" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
nk.net...
>
> Op --thank goodness for women with taste--
>
>

Yeah well, taste is in the tongue of the beholder ??????

TL
MC

[Mike Connor]

"Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>
> Wolfgang
> beware of young strangers with glasses and a cheesy mustache! :(
>
>

Holy ****! You need an infra red camera! ( apart from the other things you
need). I could care less about the glasses, but the cheesy moustache might
well give me food for thought, ( sort of, like, spiritual tofu), or even
pause. Then again, it might not.

Each to his own.

TL
MC

[Mike Connor]

> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 21:12:27 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> > wrote:
>
> > haggis, ( which smells like the
> >insides of an old bagpipe, which has not been "fed" regularly, and tastes
> >even worse),
>
> Don't diss haggis. It's a pate' that can be delicious. Okay, maybe
> it should go as a terraine instead of a pate'.

OK. You just never tried to shoot a haggis, ( or smelled an old, badly fed
bagpipe). No problem. The "terraine" ( sic) ( probably a French
variation) in Scotland is even worse than the terrine, ( usually
"mock-turtle"), which fortunately for all concerned,. ( and maybe even those
who are not), has no haggis in it. Basically spam soup with leeks!

I have decided to get the pipes out, and render my particular version of
"Scotland the brave". Just for me! This involves the ingestion of at least
ten single malts, and a well fed pipe. As of now, I just need to feed the
pipe, amd am ahead anyway.

It sounds bloody awful, and all present ( should anybody be unfortunate
enough to find themselves in the immediate vicinity), will concur. But after
ten single malts ( doubles of course!) nobody gives a ****. Indeed, they
might even be persuaded to eat haggis!

Paté ????????

That sort of stuff is only made from goose livers, by garlic lovers.

TL
MC

[Frank Reid]

> What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
> population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
> US, I must oppose them.

If true, i.e. the liberals are part of what makes this country great, then
this leads me to believe you don't like that dualism formed by the
conjunction of the two, as you continually denigrate it. By extension, you
don't like the rule of law, formed by that dualism. That rule of law is
based upon the Constitution. Why do you hate America so much?
Secondly, who is willing to cede our sovereignty and how? Could it be
bowing to international pressure on steel prices (George Jr.)? Having NATO
troops stationed on US soil (Ronny)? Using the United Nations to bolster
our own forces (including Russian ships to haul our troops)(George Sr.)?
Face it, its an international world. Oh, and by the way, the Democratic
party (those pesky liberals) are not a small segment, but close to 50% of
the voting population.

[Hayduke]

Well said, Frank.

Peace

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 21:33:16 -0500, "Frank Reid"
<moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:

>
>Awe, see, there's your problem. One often ascribes his or her own failings
>and frailties to others, because others can't possibly be, in your mind,
>better than you. Try http://www.nifl.gov/
>By the way, defending the Constitution is not a done by affiliation to a
>single party. It is done by folks on both sides. Without liberals and
>conservatives, there are no checks and balances, we have no middle, we have
>one party rule. I spent too big a part of my life ensuring that doesn't
>happen. Learn to live with the concept that people across the spectrum made
>the Constitution and, through the history of democracy, have added to it to
>make it what it is today.

[rb608]

"Frank Reid" <moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote in message
> By the way, defending the Constitution is not a done by affiliation to a
> single party. It is done by folks on both sides. Without liberals and
> conservatives, there are no checks and balances, we have no middle, we
have
> one party rule.

Amen bro. As a card-carrying member of the ACLU, I am astounded almost
daily by those who profess to love this great country, yet think that armed
force from abroad is the only threat to our liberty.

> I spent too big a part of my life ensuring that doesn't
> happen.

And if I haven't yet said so, thank you.

> Learn to live with the concept that people across the spectrum made
> the Constitution and, through the history of democracy, have added to it
to
> make it what it is today.

Ain't that cool.

Joe F.

[Hayduke]

Let me play on your words :)

When I see a small segment of the population, notably wealthy
conservatives who believe they compose a silent majority, willing to
cede the sovereignty of the US and liberty of the masses at the
expense and detriment of future generations, I must oppose them.

Wow.

Peace

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 03:12:06 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
>population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
>US, I must oppose them.
>
>Strider

[Strider]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 22:39:35 -0500, "Frank Reid"
<moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:

>> What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
>> population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
>> US, I must oppose them.
>
>If true, i.e. the liberals are part of what makes this country great, then
>this leads me to believe you don't like that dualism formed by the
>conjunction of the two, as you continually denigrate it. By extension, you
>don't like the rule of law, formed by that dualism. That rule of law is
>based upon the Constitution. Why do you hate America so much?
>Secondly, who is willing to cede our sovereignty and how? Could it be
>bowing to international pressure on steel prices (George Jr.)? Having NATO
>troops stationed on US soil (Ronny)? Using the United Nations to bolster
>our own forces (including Russian ships to haul our troops)(George Sr.)?
>Face it, its an international world. Oh, and by the way, the Democratic
>party (those pesky liberals) are not a small segment, but close to 50% of
>the voting population.
>

Ah, Frank, you are getting the bull**** engine going again.

BTW. Liberals don't even make up half of the Democrat voters.

Here is something I found you need to know. Americans are no longer
quite as subject to leftwing lies as we once were.

"The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form of law
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie"

Strider

[Mike Connor]

"Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...

"There are more questions than answers,. the more I find, the less I
know.......,"

I know the feeling, it is nevertheless more than somewhat troubling that you
just can´t be bothered! The brief was ( remember? all that long time ago)

"Educate the ignorant masses". You can not simply give up because you
failed! This is tantamount to treason!

Carry on like this, and people will think you are a conservative, or a
liberal, or a "commie". Or that your newsreader is ****ed!

You are probably right, and "it don´t make no never mind anyway".

Happy new year anyway.

TL
MC

[rb608]

"rw" > wrote in message
> Churchill was very quotable, but he obviously stole that one. Here are
> some ORIGINAL Chruchill quotes that are more apropos of current events:

Churchill is often given credit for that "yes, but tomorrow I'll be sober"
quote (also attributed to W.C. Fields). Is that one really his?

I know he gets credit for the exchange, "If you were my husband, I'd give
you poison." "If I were your husband, I'd drink it." Can't remember the
exact quotes or the woman's name.

Joe F.

[Hayduke]

ROFLMAO

Too much. Go back to school and learn the art of elementary logic and
reasoning, Strider. At least, try to bring some factual information
to the newsgroup for discussion.

LOL

Peace
>
>Ah, Frank, you are getting the bull**** engine going again.
>
>BTW. Liberals don't even make up half of the Democrat voters.
>
>Here is something I found you need to know. Americans are no longer
>quite as subject to leftwing lies as we once were.
>
>"The methodology of the left has always been:
>
>1. Lie
>2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
>3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
>4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
>5. The lie will then be made into some form of law
>6. Then everyone must conform to the lie"
>
>Strider

[Strider]

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 04:16:47 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 17:41:19 -0800, "Dan" > wrote:
>>
>> >You guys having fun?
>>
>> LOL. All I can assume is that it's some bizarre kind of cyber staring
>> match.
>>
>> Strider
>
>Ineffably, and you are losing.
>
>Do you possess any nickels at all? Shiney or otherwise?
>
>TL
>MC
>
Who made you the refree?

Strider

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 19:49:23 -0800, Hayduke > wrote:

>ROFLMAO
>
>Too much. Go back to school and learn the art of elementary logic and
>reasoning, Strider. At least, try to bring some factual information
>to the newsgroup for discussion.
>
>LOL
>
>Peace

Factual info is of no use to liberals.

Strider

>>
>>Ah, Frank, you are getting the bull**** engine going again.
>>
>>BTW. Liberals don't even make up half of the Democrat voters.
>>
>>Here is something I found you need to know. Americans are no longer
>>quite as subject to leftwing lies as we once were.
>>
>>"The methodology of the left has always been:
>>
>>1. Lie
>>2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
>>3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
>>4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
>>5. The lie will then be made into some form of law
>>6. Then everyone must conform to the lie"
>>
>>Strider

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>

Ah yes, " whether ´ tis nobler in the mind..............."

Or just cross post the crap, and **** up everybody else?

A terrible quandary.

You have my eternal sympathy. ( at least as long as I live).

TL
MC

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 19:45:25 -0800, Hayduke > wrote:

>Let me play on your words :)
>
>When I see a small segment of the population, notably wealthy
>conservatives who believe they compose a silent majority, willing to
>cede the sovereignty of the US and liberty of the masses at the
>expense and detriment of future generations, I must oppose them.
>
>Wow.
>
>Peace

Are you also opposed to wealthy liberals who also pretend to know
what's best for us peons?

Strider
>
>On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 03:12:06 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>>What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
>>population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
>>US, I must oppose them.
>>
>>Strider

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> BTW. Liberals don't even make up half of the Democrat voters.
>
> Here is something I found you need to know. Americans are no longer
> quite as subject to leftwing lies as we once were.
>
> "The methodology of the left has always been:
>
> 1. Lie
> 2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
> 3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
> 4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
> 5. The lie will then be made into some form of law
> 6. Then everyone must conform to the lie"
>
> Strider

Americans? Jesus H. Christ. Some of you dumb *******s even believe you have
a monopoly on lies.

Left? Right? Centre? It all depends where you happen to be sitting at the
time, and who is shooting at you.

Luckily for most of of us non-Americans, ( at least without oil), your aim
is about on a par with your intelligence.

MC

[Mike Connor]

"Hayduke" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> Let me play on your words :)
>
> When I see a small segment of the population, notably wealthy
> conservatives who believe they compose a silent majority, willing to
> cede the sovereignty of the US and liberty of the masses at the
> expense and detriment of future generations, I must oppose them.
>
> Wow.
>
> Peace
>
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 03:12:06 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
> >What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
> >population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
> >US, I must oppose them.
> >
> >Strider
>

"Silent majority" ??????????.

There is no such thing as a silent majority. It is a contradiction in
terms. Most political majorities, ( those who win), are around about
fifteen to twenty percent of the total possible, and are anything but
silent. "Vociferous" would be an understatement.

All you need is time and money, and a lot of dumb arseholes who are willing
to support you, even when you bull****.

What a terrible waste of resources, and not only in America.

It is quite immaterial which particular label your arsehole of choice
happens to be wearing at the time, ( this too is variable).

Thinking is going out of fashion it seems.

MC

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> Who made you the refree?
>
> Strider

I suppose you mean "referee"?

Well my dear old geranium, I, just like you, can post any old **** here,
and nobody can say me nay. My opinion is at least as worthless as yours, if
not more so, and I also enjoy the considerable advantages that I can
spell, and don´t give a **** what you think or write anyway.

Are you really going to be silly enough to try and convince me otherwise?

I just love complicated exercises in futility.

Good luck!

MC

[daytripper]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 03:57:22 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
>population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
>US, I must oppose them.

Hey - effwit moron. Care to enlighten the world on how "liberals" want to cede
"sovereignty"? Wait - are you one of those ****wits that's convinced there's a
Trilateral Commission plotting a OneWorld future?

Geeze....You'd think the right could come up with someone with a couple of
functional brain cells...

Anyway, let's talk about "ceding". Let's talk about ceding *freedom*. You
should enjoy this topic - when it comes to ceding freedom, you "conservatives"
<cough> are always in the lead.

You think Joe McCarthy was a liberal? Even worse - do you think he was right?

Ever hear of Ashcroft (you know - the conservative guy that couldn't beat a
dead person for the Senate?) and the "Patriot Acts" that in one swoop have
lowered the standard of freedom in this country?

You carry an almanac?

You like quotes, how about this one: "Those who would trade safety for freedom
deserve neither."

Do you have the first clue who said that? He wrote some fairly important
documents, apparently you've never read any of them.

Frankly, it doesn't surprise me such a clueless nitwit is hiding in
rec.backcountry - that group seriously needs to take out the trash...

/daytripper (You disappointed that Rudolf was captured, too?)

[Hayduke]

Believe me, Mike. I do not believe in a silent majority. I was
playing on Strider's idiotic words.

Back in the Nixon days, he kept on referring to a "silent majority" to
further his legislative agenda. Frequently on American talk radio,
chiefly the Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reily show, and also in
conservative print media, the conservatives refer to a silent majority
to justify their policies.

So, I'm with you. I agree that it is a contradiction of terms. It is
something that the conservatives here in the US use, as "fact" to
continue to degrade our country and world.

Peace

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 05:08:54 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:


>
>"Silent majority" ??????????.
>
>There is no such thing as a silent majority. It is a contradiction in
>terms. Most political majorities, ( those who win), are around about
>fifteen to twenty percent of the total possible, and are anything but
>silent. "Vociferous" would be an understatement.
>
>All you need is time and money, and a lot of dumb arseholes who are willing
>to support you, even when you bull****.
>
>What a terrible waste of resources, and not only in America.
>
>It is quite immaterial which particular label your arsehole of choice
>happens to be wearing at the time, ( this too is variable).
>
>Thinking is going out of fashion it seems.
>
>MC
>

[Kevin Vang]

In article >, Mike-
says...
>
> > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> ...
> > On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 21:12:27 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > haggis, ( which smells like the
> > >insides of an old bagpipe, which has not been "fed" regularly, and tastes
> > >even worse),
> >
> > Don't diss haggis. It's a pate' that can be delicious. Okay, maybe
> > it should go as a terraine instead of a pate'.
>
> OK. You just never tried to shoot a haggis, ( or smelled an old, badly fed
> bagpipe). No problem. The "terraine" ( sic) ( probably a French
> variation) in Scotland is even worse than the terrine, ( usually
> "mock-turtle"), which fortunately for all concerned,. ( and maybe even those
> who are not), has no haggis in it. Basically spam soup with leeks!
>
> I have decided to get the pipes out, and render my particular version of
> "Scotland the brave".
>
> It sounds bloody awful,


You must be playing it correctly then.

Kevin

[Mike Connor]

"Hayduke" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> >
>
<SNIP>

Remarkably kind of you, nice that you are "with me", ( although it will do
neither you nor I any good), and I have nothing against your support.
Unfortunately, it is quite wasted, as I was quite serious when I said that I
did not give a ****. I really don´t. I know very little about American
politics, (at least in modern times), and my ambitions in this regard are
more than modest, in fact, non-existent.

I hope to have a reasonably happy life, with enough to eat and drink, a bit
of fishing now and again, maybe get to know a nice lady ( again, although I
consider it unlikely, no man can be so lucky more thn once in his life, but
hope still springs eternal), have a drink, go for a dance, touch someone I
love, enjoy myself, etc etc etc. Fill in the blanks as you please. I doubt
they will differ much from my wishes and hopes, certainly not in substance.

Who rules the world, is a matter of complete indifference to me. In fact, I
have nothing but contempt for anybody who wishes to. As long as they leave
me in peace. They can do or think as they like, It has very little bearing
on my existence, and in a remarkably short space of time, they will be just
as dead as I.

What "strider" or all these other silly buggers have to say, is of
absolutely no consequence. Anybody who gets that excited about ideology or
party politics, irrespective of which, or where, is to be pitied. Argument
or discussion is totally superfluous. You are not going to convince him. and
he is not going to convince you, so why waste the time and effort?

If you enjoy attempting to score points, or "scintillating" as a wit, then
go ahead. Why not? There are doubtless worse ways of spending time and
effort.

Basically, I am here ( wherever "here" happens to be) to discuss
fly-fishing. Eveything else is either a bonus, or a pain in the arse.

Not a big deal really.

It is of course nice when somebody agrees with you. However meaningless it
might be

TL
MC

[Tim J.]

"daytripper" wrote...
> Strider > wrote:
> >What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
> >population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
> >US, I must oppose them.
>
> Hey - effwit moron. Care to enlighten the world on how "liberals" want to cede
> "sovereignty"? Wait - are you one of those ****wits that's convinced there's a
> Trilateral Commission plotting a OneWorld future?
>
> Geeze....

I'll take brain cells for $1,000, Alex.

The answer is:
> You'd think the right could come up with someone with a couple of
> functional brain cells...

Ding! Who are the ones that aren't cross-posting their political views to
recreation groups in Usenet?

;-)
--
TL,
Tim
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Mike Connor]

"Kevin Vang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>> >
> > It sounds bloody awful,
>
>
> You must be playing it correctly then.
>
> Kevin

My mother always referred to it as "cat-strangling", and banned me to the
back garden. My mother had taste!

The main reason for my learning to play guitar.

TL
MC

[B J Conner]

Tis only 23 more days until you can find a burns supper in your neighbohood
(Minneapolis is not all Swedes and such.) In general I don't care for
scotch that much but a sip or two can make haggis tollerable. For an
evenign of a good man reciting the Bard I would eat a spam/tofu meatloaf.
Here be a line for ya:
"But mark the Rustic, haggis-fed,
The trembling earth resounds his tread."


> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 21:12:27 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> > wrote:
>
> > haggis, ( which smells like the
> >insides of an old bagpipe, which has not been "fed" regularly, and tastes
> >even worse),
>
> Don't diss haggis. It's a pate' that can be delicious. Okay, maybe
> it should go as a terraine instead of a pate'. My most memorable
> haggis was one guaranteed to be bad. It was made by a Scot who was a
> SF fan (and who wrote overblown poetry) and served at an SF convention
> (think Clave with much stranger clothing and lots of teenagers). I
> loved it. I'm a very picky eater. I think the list of ingredients is
> what turns most people off.
>
> However, I'll agree with you on tofu. When it was just beginning to
> be hyped, I bought a 1 pound tray. I did not try several ways of
> cooking it. One tiny taste of the uncooked, one large bite of the
> sauteed and it went to the trash. My family got to see it, but I
> refused to inflict it on them. I went back to the 'frig and got out
> a new dinner menu. My only disagreement would be on the colour. I
> thought it looked the way an albino with jaundice would.
> --
>
> rbc:vixen,Minnow Goddess,Willow Watcher,and all that sort of thing.
> Often taunted by trout.
> Only a fool would refuse to believe in luck. Only a damn fool would rely
on it.
>
> http://www.visi.com/~cyli

[B J Conner]

Here's a quote that fits oru friend from rec.outdoors or what ever. I don't
know the source but the truth of it scares me.
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups."


"rw" > wrote in message
m...
> Strider wrote:
> >
> > Proof that it took a man like Churchill to get it right.
>
> Churchill was very quotable, but he obviously stole that one. Here are
> some ORIGINAL Chruchill quotes that are more apropos of current events:
>
> There are a lot of lies going around... and half of them are true.
>
> In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a
> bodyguard of lies.
>
> A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get
> its pants on.
>
> However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the
results.
>
> Truth is incontrovertible, ignorance can deride it, panic may resent it,
> malice may destroy it, but there it is.
>
> Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick
> themselves up and hurry off as if nothing has happened.
>
> --
> Cut "to the chase" for my email address.
>

[daytripper]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:35:42 GMT, "Tim J." >
wrote:

>
>"daytripper" wrote...
>> Strider > wrote:
>> >What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
>> >population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
>> >US, I must oppose them.
>>
>> Hey - effwit moron. Care to enlighten the world on how "liberals" want to cede
>> "sovereignty"? Wait - are you one of those ****wits that's convinced there's a
>> Trilateral Commission plotting a OneWorld future?
>>
>> Geeze....
>
>I'll take brain cells for $1,000, Alex.
>
>The answer is:
>> You'd think the right could come up with someone with a couple of
>> functional brain cells...
>
>Ding! Who are the ones that aren't cross-posting their political views to
>recreation groups in Usenet?
>
>;-)

<beeep> "Sorry contestant, but Slider's one of your good ol' boys."

Unless you're representin' the Libertarians now, Timmay ;-) you're gonna have
to disown him.

/daytripper (that shouldn't take much effort, i think...)

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 04:37:49 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>
> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...


>The "terraine" ( sic) ( probably a French
>variation) in Scotland is even worse than the terrine,

Oops. No, probably I confabulated a word again. It's not quite
dyslexia. More lack of attention.
--

rbc:vixen,Minnow Goddess,Willow Watcher,and all that sort of thing.
Often taunted by trout.
Only a fool would refuse to believe in luck. Only a damn fool would rely on it.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli

[Jeff Miller]

Strider wrote:


> What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
> population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
> US, I must oppose them.
>

indeed!! let's round the notable *******s up, ship em all to the
stockade in guantanamo bay or wherever our conservative leaders are
holding enemy combatants, strip em of all their constitutional rights,
no lawyers, no public trials, never to be heard from again... waddayasay
striker my man? you got a list yet?!!

jeff

[Tim J.]

"daytripper" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:35:42 GMT, "Tim J." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"daytripper" wrote...
> >> Strider > wrote:
> >> >What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
> >> >population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
> >> >US, I must oppose them.
> >>
> >> Hey - effwit moron. Care to enlighten the world on how "liberals" want to
cede
> >> "sovereignty"? Wait - are you one of those ****wits that's convinced
there's a
> >> Trilateral Commission plotting a OneWorld future?
> >>
> >> Geeze....
> >
> >I'll take brain cells for $1,000, Alex.
> >
> >The answer is:
> >> You'd think the right could come up with someone with a couple of
> >> functional brain cells...
> >
> >Ding! Who are the ones that aren't cross-posting their political views to
> >recreation groups in Usenet?
> >
> >;-)
>
> <beeep> "Sorry contestant, but Slider's one of your good ol' boys."
>
> Unless you're representin' the Libertarians now, Timmay ;-) you're gonna have
> to disown him.

He's not one of mine, whatever that is. I have no problem disowning the views of
folk on either side of the isle when they start drooling. I also feel no need to
admonish them or rush to their aid after they've stuck their foot firmly in
their mouth.
--
TL,
Tim
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
> Luckily for most of of us non-Americans, ( at least without oil), your aim
> is about on a par with your intelligence.

HEAR, HEAR! Thank you Mr. Connor.

Op --an ugly Amerikan liberal, I think--

> MC
>
>
>

[Frank Reid]

> Ah, Frank, you are getting the bull**** engine going again.

Ah, anything that opposes your "world view," no matter how valid, is
obviously "bull****."

> BTW. Liberals don't even make up half of the Democrat voters.

BTW. Liberal is often the catch phrase for Democrat, as much as
conservative is for Republican. Granted, there are "liberal Democrats and
conservative Republicans" but that is pretty much newspeak tautology.
<further survivalist neocon ranting snipped>

By the way, could you please (and I ask here politely as opposed to
degenerating into childish schoolyard vitriol), address my points re the
"sovereignty" issues I pointed out? See, Sun Tsu pointed out "If you know
yourself but do not know your enemy, you will sometimes meet with victory,
sometimes with defeat. If you know your enemy but do not know yourself, you
will sometimes meet with victory, sometimes with defeat. But if you know
yourself and you know your enemy, you will be victorious on a hundred
occasions." As a someone sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution
against all enemies, foreign and domestic, I think it would be appropriate
if I "knew" my enemy. Since you seem so opposed to the pluralism of our
present form of government, that enemy sounds like you.
--
Frank Reid
Reverse email to reply

[slenon]

Frank Reid:
> to balut (the PI version of the 1000 year egg).

How many of these little delicacies did you down, sir? After how many prior
drinks?

I do believe that this bar appetizer was truly the most disgusting thing
I've ever downed, including c-rats, MRE's LRRPS, and assorted campfire
specials.

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Frank Reid]

> How many of these little delicacies did you down, sir? After how many
prior
> drinks?

One. I was stuck with 4 other guys in a trike sidecar (half hanging out the
"window"). My buddies paid the ladie to give me one, i.e. she knocked the
top off, held it under my nose, and when I opened my mouth to gag, she
dumped it in (my arms were being held behind me). I did get revenge as I
ralphed on her, her basket, and three of the four guys in the sidecar. By
the way, this was after about 15 San Miguels, so even so ****-faced I
couldn't feel my feet, I know bad juju when I taste it.

--
Frank Reid
Reverse email to reply

[Dave LaCourse]

Frank Reid writes:

> By
>the way, this was after about 15 San Miguels, so even so ****-faced I
>couldn't feel my feet, I know bad juju when I taste it.

Fifteen San Miguels means means you won't have a normal bm for *at least* 15
days. Talk about bad juju. Wonderful beer when you're drunk. But, there's a
**** in every bottle.
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Hayduke]

Peace.

Some of us, here, like myself, are trying to do what we can to protect
those flyfishing places here in the US for you to come and enjoy. I
here partly to "give 'em hell", partly for entertainment, and mostly
to let those that would destroy our environment here and around the
world know that folks like me exist and will be fighting against them.

Good luck with your catch.



On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 06:27:56 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

[Mike Connor]

"Hayduke" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> Peace.
>
> Some of us, here, like myself, are trying to do what we can to protect
> those flyfishing places here in the US for you to come and enjoy. I
> here partly to "give 'em hell", partly for entertainment, and mostly
> to let those that would destroy our environment here and around the
> world know that folks like me exist and will be fighting against them.
>
> Good luck with your catch.
>
>
>
> On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 06:27:56 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> > wrote:
>
>

Oh I appreciate your efforts, and applaud your motives, even though I will
never fish in any of those places. My only problem with the whole thing is
that arguing politics on a newsgroup like ROFF ( the group I subscribe to),
is unlikely to save anything at all. Although it may occasionally be
entertaining.

For many people who subscribe to specific newsgroups, the constant, (
arguably "off-topic"), cross-posting, is merely an expensive nuisance. They
are forced to download and pay for something they do not want. The noise to
signal ratio is sometimes very high indeed.

There are plenty of political forums, where those of like mind, and opposing
opinions, can batter away at each other to their heart´s content, without
bothering anybody else. Unfortunately, it seems to be in the nature of the
beast, that many feel called upon to foist their opinions on others,
irrespective of the other´s wishes. This is most unfortunate.

Lastly, environmental destruction is a result of our society. There is not
much anybody can do about it, without making sweeping changes to society,
and hardly anybody who is even remotely well situated ( read, practically
all of the western world),wants this.

Nevertheless, I wish you luck in your endeavours.

MC

[daytripper]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 13:14:56 GMT, "Tim J." >
wrote:

>
>"daytripper" > wrote in message
...
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:35:42 GMT, "Tim J." >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"daytripper" wrote...
>> >> Strider > wrote:
>> >> >What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
>> >> >population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
>> >> >US, I must oppose them.
>> >>
>> >> Hey - effwit moron. Care to enlighten the world on how "liberals" want to
>cede
>> >> "sovereignty"? Wait - are you one of those ****wits that's convinced
>there's a
>> >> Trilateral Commission plotting a OneWorld future?
>> >>
>> >> Geeze....
>> >
>> >I'll take brain cells for $1,000, Alex.
>> >
>> >The answer is:
>> >> You'd think the right could come up with someone with a couple of
>> >> functional brain cells...
>> >
>> >Ding! Who are the ones that aren't cross-posting their political views to
>> >recreation groups in Usenet?
>> >
>> >;-)
>>
>> <beeep> "Sorry contestant, but Slider's one of your good ol' boys."
>>
>> Unless you're representin' the Libertarians now, Timmay ;-) you're gonna have
>> to disown him.
>
>He's not one of mine, whatever that is. I have no problem disowning the views of
>folk on either side of the isle when they start drooling. I also feel no need to
>admonish them or rush to their aid after they've stuck their foot firmly in
>their mouth.

Nicely done!

/daytripper (See, I knew that wouldn't be hard ;-)

[slenon]

Frank Reid:
>One.

Bad juju, indeed. I must admit I admire your revenge. I merely managed to
soil my own shoes and socially disgrace myself. Beats me how one can begin
to consume something that foul without being three sheets in the wind.

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[slenon]

>Fifteen San Miguels means means you won't have a normal bm for *at least*
15
>days. Talk about bad juju. Wonderful beer when you're drunk. But,
there's a
>**** in every bottle.
>Dave

That's prime beer compared to the popskull stuff from Vietnam, Bau Mi Bau
(33 beer). Rumor had it each bottle had some formaldehyde to kill the
nasties from the local water. Made you long for San Miguels or even
Falstaff.


--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Strider]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:16:03 GMT, (Greg Pavlov)
wrote:

>On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 00:03:21 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>>>Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
>>>thirty is proof of want of head. -Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)
>>
>>Proof that it took a man like Churchill to get it right.
>>
>>Strider
>
>
> He *does* fit in with your democratic tendencies,
> doesn't he ? You must have been dittoing up and
> down with excitement when you saw that Chruchill
> had said the following:
>
> “I have always said that I hoped if Great Britain were beaten
> in a war we should find a Hitler who would lead us back to
> our rightful place among nations.”
>
> And you must have loved reading his praises for Mussolini
> and Hitler in the early thirties. But what do you think
> of Churchill's 1945 assessment of the Soviets ?
>
> "Marshal Stalin and the Soviet leaders wish to live in honorable
> friendship and equality with the Western democracies. I feel
> also that their word is their bond. I know of no government that
> stands in its obligations, even in its own despite, more solidly
> than the Russian Soviet government. I decline absolutely to embark
> here on a discussion about Russian good faith."
>
>
>
He was wrong. He learned. So should you.

Strider

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:16:03 GMT, (Greg Pavlov)
> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 00:03:21 GMT, Strider > wrote:
> >
> >>>Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at
> >>>thirty is proof of want of head. -Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)
> >>
> >>Proof that it took a man like Churchill to get it right.
> >>
> >>Strider
> >
> >
> > He *does* fit in with your democratic tendencies,
> > doesn't he ? You must have been dittoing up and
> > down with excitement when you saw that Chruchill
> > had said the following:
> >
> > "I have always said that I hoped if Great Britain were beaten
> > in a war we should find a Hitler who would lead us back to
> > our rightful place among nations."
> >
> > And you must have loved reading his praises for Mussolini
> > and Hitler in the early thirties. But what do you think
> > of Churchill's 1945 assessment of the Soviets ?
> >
> > "Marshal Stalin and the Soviet leaders wish to live in honorable
> > friendship and equality with the Western democracies. I feel
> > also that their word is their bond. I know of no government that
> > stands in its obligations, even in its own despite, more solidly
> > than the Russian Soviet government. I decline absolutely to embark
> > here on a discussion about Russian good faith."
> >
> >
> >
> He was wrong. He learned. So should you.
>
> Strider

Thus demonstrating that unintentional ironic humor is STILL among usenet's
most charming attributes. :)

Wolfgang

[George Cleveland]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 21:48:10 GMT, Strider > wrote:
*Buncha dead guy quotes snipped (none of whom were socialists, by the
way).*

I think these two get closer to the heart of the matter.

"The man who is a pessimist before 48 knows too much; if he is an optimist
after it, he knows too little."
- Mark Twain's Notebook, 1902-1903

And to follow in the same vein:

"The optimist thinks that this is the best of all possible worlds; the
pessimist knows it." -- J. Robert Oppenheimer


g.c.

[Strider]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 20:44:37 -0800, Hayduke > wrote:

>Believe me, Mike. I do not believe in a silent majority. I was
>playing on Strider's idiotic words.
>
>Back in the Nixon days, he kept on referring to a "silent majority" to
>further his legislative agenda. Frequently on American talk radio,
>chiefly the Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reily show, and also in
>conservative print media, the conservatives refer to a silent majority
>to justify their policies.
>
>So, I'm with you. I agree that it is a contradiction of terms. It is
>something that the conservatives here in the US use, as "fact" to
>continue to degrade our country and world.
>
>Peace

Well, if not a silent majority, certainly a ****ed off majority. Have
you noticed that the predominately leftwing Dems have lost control of
the Presidency, the House of Rep, the Senate, the Governorships?

Not too bad for what you consider a few rightwing fringers.

Strider

>
>On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 05:08:54 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>"Silent majority" ??????????.
>>
>>There is no such thing as a silent majority. It is a contradiction in
>>terms. Most political majorities, ( those who win), are around about
>>fifteen to twenty percent of the total possible, and are anything but
>>silent. "Vociferous" would be an understatement.
>>
>>All you need is time and money, and a lot of dumb arseholes who are willing
>>to support you, even when you bull****.
>>
>>What a terrible waste of resources, and not only in America.
>>
>>It is quite immaterial which particular label your arsehole of choice
>>happens to be wearing at the time, ( this too is variable).
>>
>>Thinking is going out of fashion it seems.
>>
>>MC
>>

[Strider]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 06:42:06 -0500, Jeff Miller
> wrote:

>
>
>Strider wrote:
>
>
>> What you say is true, however, when I see a small segment of the
>> population, notably liberals, willing to cede the sovereignty of the
>> US, I must oppose them.
>>
>
>indeed!! let's round the notable *******s up, ship em all to the
>stockade in guantanamo bay or wherever our conservative leaders are
>holding enemy combatants, strip em of all their constitutional rights,
>no lawyers, no public trials, never to be heard from again... waddayasay
>striker my man? you got a list yet?!!
>
>jeff

I'd settle for just exposing them for what they are, leftwing
socialists, and relegating them to the trash bin of US politics.

Or we could send them to France.

Strider

[Hayduke]

What a goof. Yeah, Bush won the popular vote (rolls eyes).

Strider, consider whoever is in office having won a PLURALITY of
votes, not a majority of the population eligible to vote.

I suppose, too, that you are one of those that believe that the
majority should always get what they want? Believe it or not, that is
anti-american and against our constitution. You see, this country was
set up to protect the minority, no matter who that may be - which is
not the "left" or progressive side of our society IHMO. Ever read
Federalist #10 written by Madison?

A representative democracy is what we are. Flawed, no doubt, as I
believe a parlamentary system would be much more democratic, but hey,
it is what we got.

Peace

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:56:52 GMT, Strider > wrote:


>
>Well, if not a silent majority, certainly a ****ed off majority. Have
>you noticed that the predominately leftwing Dems have lost control of
>the Presidency, the House of Rep, the Senate, the Governorships?
>
>Not too bad for what you consider a few rightwing fringers.
>
>Strider
>

[Frank Reid]

> I could go on, Frank, but digging through this leftwing socialist crap
> nauseates me.
>
> Strider

Awe, but instead of quoting others, why not rub 1 and 1/2 brain cells
together and answer the ones that I mentioned? Its not giving money to
others, but cases of national sovereignty policy under Reagan, Bush and
Bush. I noted very specific issues, some would say were in the top ten
sovereignty points in the last 20 years and you still ignore them. Is
giving up our sovereignty ok if done by a Republican?
Frank

[Hayduke]

Wow. Another thoughtful post from the gooney right (rolling eyes yet
again - they are starting to hurt).

Peace

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:58:49 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>I'd settle for just exposing them for what they are, leftwing
>socialists, and relegating them to the trash bin of US politics.
>
>Or we could send them to France.
>
>Strider

[Strider]

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:06:09 -0500, "Frank Reid"
<moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:

>> I could go on, Frank, but digging through this leftwing socialist crap
>> nauseates me.
>>
>> Strider
>
>Awe, but instead of quoting others, why not rub 1 and 1/2 brain cells
>together and answer the ones that I mentioned? Its not giving money to
>others, but cases of national sovereignty policy under Reagan, Bush and
>Bush. I noted very specific issues, some would say were in the top ten
>sovereignty points in the last 20 years and you still ignore them. Is
>giving up our sovereignty ok if done by a Republican?
>Frank
>

Nope, but in any election, it's a choice of lesser evils. I haven't
seen an awfully lot of Republicans carping because we didn't get
France & Germany's permission to finally get rid of Saddam.

Left to the Dem politicians, the US would be subservient to the
European Union.

I'm glad to see that I can annoy you with a few quotes and cites from
other leftwing socialists. Have fun stewing in your own feces.

Strider

[Strider]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:05:15 -0800, Hayduke > wrote:

>What a goof. Yeah, Bush won the popular vote (rolls eyes).
>
>Strider, consider whoever is in office having won a PLURALITY of
>votes, not a majority of the population eligible to vote.

I didn't say otherwise. I do note that the last President elected by a
majority was Reagan.
>
>I suppose, too, that you are one of those that believe that the
>majority should always get what they want? Believe it or not, that is
>anti-american and against our constitution. You see, this country was
>set up to protect the minority, no matter who that may be - which is
>not the "left" or progressive side of our society IHMO. Ever read
>Federalist #10 written by Madison?

I'm quite familiar with our Constitutional Republic form of government
and the wisdom of protecting the minority. As you will note, I was
responding to certain jabs concerning the "silent majority".

Strider

>
>A representative democracy is what we are. Flawed, no doubt, as I
>believe a parlamentary system would be much more democratic, but hey,
>it is what we got.
>
>Peace
>
>On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:56:52 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Well, if not a silent majority, certainly a ****ed off majority. Have
>>you noticed that the predominately leftwing Dems have lost control of
>>the Presidency, the House of Rep, the Senate, the Governorships?
>>
>>Not too bad for what you consider a few rightwing fringers.
>>
>>Strider
>>

[Strider]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:07:59 -0800, Hayduke > wrote:

>Wow. Another thoughtful post from the gooney right (rolling eyes yet
>again - they are starting to hurt).
>
>Peace

Thanks for your words of wisdom from the loony left.

Strider

>
>On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:58:49 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>>I'd settle for just exposing them for what they are, leftwing
>>socialists, and relegating them to the trash bin of US politics.
>>
>>Or we could send them to France.
>>
>>Strider

[Wolfgang]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...
> ...In California the Left pretty much runs the government. First off,
> California is in the hole by about 38 billion dollars. An amount that
> is greater than the deficit for all the other states in the union
> combined....

Hm.....I don't suppose anyone has mentioned to you that, 38 billion in the
hole or not, California can still afford to buy, outright, any of about
eighty percent of the nations on Earth?

And speaking of orifices and matters fiduciary, I'll bet a shiny new nickel
that you haven't got a clue what is being done to you in this thread.
Remember that last prostate exam? Remember how good that felt? Well, your
doctor has got a latex allergy........and that weren't no finger!

And you owe me a nickel. :)

Wolfgang

[Wolfgang]

"Charles M. Kozierok" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Strider > wrote:
> } On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:07:59 -0800, Hayduke > wrote:
> }
> } >Wow. Another thoughtful post from the gooney right (rolling eyes yet
> } >again - they are starting to hurt).
> } >
> } >Peace
> }
> } Thanks for your words of wisdom from the loony left.
> }
> } Strider
>
> What exactly is it that you guys think you are accomplishing with this
> "debate" (using the term loosely?)
>
> I highly doubt you are changing anyone's minds with ranting and
> name-calling.

Ah, a newby! :)

No one but an abject fool believes he is accomplishing anything in these
"debates". That is to say, most of them, like you, believe they are saving
the world. O.k., here's the drill:

1. Go back to the beginning of the thread.
2. Remember that the "person" who initiated it.....an individual who goes
by various names including "Muskie" and "Mikey", is employed by an agency
dedicated to the complete annihilation of the the out of doors and everyone
and everything in it.
3. Complain to his ISP.

This will, when enough complaints are lodged, result in his service being
discontinued. In the long run, this will do no one any good whatsoever, as
he will certainly come back under a new user name and with a new ISP but it
will, in the interim, allow you to maintain the illusion that you have once
again saved the world.

4. Everyone is Happy!, Happy!, Happy! :)

Have a nice life.

Wolfgang

> peace,

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 01:41:06 GMT, (Greg Pavlov)
wrote:

>On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 16:07:42 -0600, "Wolfgang" >
>wrote:
>
>>> He was wrong. He learned. So should you.
>>>
>>> Strider
>>
>>Thus demonstrating that unintentional ironic humor is STILL among usenet's
>>most charming attributes. :)
>>
>
> Irony requires some intelligence.
>
> Churchill is like the Bible: you can find a quote to
> support any position. And if you're not sure if you
> can think straight, you run around to find quotes to
> validate yourself.

Perhaps Sir Winston grew a brain as he matured.

One can only wish other liberals could do the same.

Strider

[Frank Reid]

> I could go on, Frank, but digging through this leftwing socialist crap
> nauseates me.
>
> Strider

Awe, but instead of quoting others, why not rub 1 and 1/2 brain cells
together and answer the ones that I mentioned? Its not giving money to
others, but cases of national sovereignty policy under Reagan, Bush and
Bush. I noted very specific issues, some would say were in the top ten
sovereignty points in the last 20 years and you still ignore them. Is
giving up our sovereignty ok if done by a Republican?
Frank

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
> Perhaps Sir Winston grew a brain as he matured.

> Strider

Yes well, could you hurry up and mature?

MC

[Strider]

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 04:23:47 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
><SNIP>
>> Perhaps Sir Winston grew a brain as he matured.
>
>> Strider
>
>Yes well, could you hurry up and mature?
>
>MC
>
From an asshole who trims posts without noting it.

Strider

[Hayduke]

Aren't you anal retentive.

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 04:58:08 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>From an asshole who trims posts without noting it.
>
>Strider

[daytripper]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 04:58:08 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 04:23:47 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>><SNIP>
>>> Perhaps Sir Winston grew a brain as he matured.
>>
>>> Strider
>>
>>Yes well, could you hurry up and mature?
>>
>>MC
>>
>From an asshole who trims posts without noting it.
>
>Strider

No. To a loser nitwit who can't read <SNIP>

/daytripper (lmao! rec.backcountry must be so proud of you! :-P)

[Kevin Vang]

In article >,
says...
>
>
> No. To a loser nitwit who can't read <SNIP>
>
> /daytripper (lmao! rec.backcountry must be so proud of you! :-P)
>


Man, I hope you know a wholesaler who can give you a good
discount for bulk quantities of cluebats.

Kevin
winter's just hardly got started...

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
> From an asshole who trims posts without noting it.
>
> Strider

Just exactly what part of "<SNIP>" did you fail to understand?

And you want to discuss politics?!!! Oh dear.

MC

[Tom Littleton]

Strider observes:
>In California the Left pretty much runs the government. First off,
>California is in the hole by about 38 billion dollars.

a sum accumulated after the economy went sour. Bad management, to be sure.
Now, which group is overseeing the half-
a-trillion dollar deficit which is growing by the day for the Federal
Government?
Tom

[Tom Littleton]

Mike Connor asks of Strider:
>And you want to discuss politics?!!! Oh dear.

As you have no doubt elucidated, he doesn't want to "discuss" anything. Ranting
and then branding those who disagree with the rants hardly count as discussion.
God Help America, we seem to be full of Strider-like idiots! He might find the
following observations, which I read recently, enlightening:
1.86 percent of the American public
polled in 2002 "agree with the Goals
of the Civil Rights movement
2.Consistently, 83 percent of Americans
agree with the goals of the
environmental movement.
3. 86 percent of Americans polled want
federal safety regulations for handguns
4. A consistent majority of Americans
think abortion choice should be legal
5. 80 percent think Health insurance
should be provided equally to all.
6. 62 percent think non-violent offenders
should not be jailed.
I could add a few other catagories to the list, but post it to assure our
friends around the world that America, despite a loud minority of ignorant,
conservative boobs, has a pretty progressive populace. It is just that we have
a very slow reacting political system(by design). Things will change, and when
they do, we won't have to resort to throwing out the rule book and removing
everyone's civil rights to change them......
Tom

[Frank Reid]

> >In California the Left pretty much runs the government. First off,
> >California is in the hole by about 38 billion dollars.
>
> a sum accumulated after the economy went sour. Bad management, to be sure.
> Now, which group is overseeing the half-
> a-trillion dollar deficit which is growing by the day for the Federal
> Government?

Tom, when you take a warning shot across the bow, you're not supposed to hit
the wheel house.
--
Frank Reid
Reverse email to reply

[vincent p. norris]

>"Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
>Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. -
>Winston Churchill"

Always clever with words, he was just trying to justify his own
erratic behavior.

vince

[Tom Littleton]

Frank advises:
>Tom, when you take a warning shot across the bow, you're not supposed to hit
>the wheel house.

probably solid military advice from an expert. What I learned on the streets
and in the bars was go for a quick knockout.
It's easier on all concerned.....
Tom

[Strider]

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 11:14:31 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
><SNIP>
>> From an asshole who trims posts without noting it.
>>
>> Strider
>
>Just exactly what part of "<SNIP>" did you fail to understand?
>
>And you want to discuss politics?!!! Oh dear.
>
>MC
>
Sorry. I missed the <snip> you are just an asshole.

Strider

[rb608]

"Strider" > wrote in message
> Sorry. I missed the <snip> you are just an asshole.

Tee hee. What a maroon. :-)

Joe F.

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 17:18:25 GMT, "rb608"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > wrote in message
>> Sorry. I missed the <snip> you are just an asshole.
>
>Tee hee. What a maroon. :-)
>
>Joe F.
>

Liberals are like pond scum, green, slimy, appear where unwanted, are
of no practical use, and they interfere with the fishing.

Strider

[Hayduke]

Another thoughtful post brought to you by the hatefilled Strider.
With conservatives like this, I'm glad he and Share on on their side.

You sure are easy, my man.

Such entertainment!

peace

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 17:30:15 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>>
>
>Liberals are like pond scum, green, slimy, appear where unwanted, are
>of no practical use, and they interfere with the fishing.
>
>Strider

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:55:29 -0800, Hayduke > wrote:

>Another thoughtful post brought to you by the hatefilled Strider.
>With conservatives like this, I'm glad he and Share on on their side.
>
>You sure are easy, my man.
>
>Such entertainment!
>
>peace
>
>On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 17:30:15 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>>>
>>
>>Liberals are like pond scum, green, slimy, appear where unwanted, are
>>of no practical use, and they interfere with the fishing.
>>
>>Strider

Glad to be annoying.

Strider

[Hayduke]

You're not annoying. Your downright hillarious! Folks like you
validate everything folks think about the redneck wing of the
republican party.

Keep on, keeping on, my man!

Peace

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:20:07 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>Glad to be annoying.
>
>Strider

[daytripper]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 17:09:12 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 11:14:31 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>><SNIP>
>>> From an asshole who trims posts without noting it.
>>>
>>> Strider
>>
>>Just exactly what part of "<SNIP>" did you fail to understand?
>>
>>And you want to discuss politics?!!! Oh dear.
>>
>>MC
>>
>Sorry. I missed the <snip> you are just an asshole.

And you've proven you're still just a pitiable moron.

Go play hide and seek on the Interstate for awhile...

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Strider" > wrote in message
...

I love to read a good political argument, but I must draw the line with
someone who's debate skills equal: "I know what you are, but what am I?"
and who's only defense is to cut and paste quotes that fit his narrow view.

Best item on this five-star menu: Block Sender.

Op --plunk goes the Strider.--

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
> Sorry. I missed the <snip> you are just an asshole.
>
> Strider

In order to qualify as a functioning "asshole", varying but regular
quantities of faecal matter must be excreted. I rather fear that at least
in this respect, you are far more qualified than I could ever possibly hope
to be. Congratulations!

MC

[Frank Reid]

> Awe, but instead of quoting others, why not rub 1 and 1/2 brain cells
> together and answer the ones that I mentioned?

I guess Strider doesn't want to play. It was such fun too. Then again, I
may have been giving him the benefit of the doubt with the 1 1/2 brain cells
(unfortunately, I'm not very good at this "I know that you're one, but what
am I" stuff).
--
Frank Reid
Reverse email to reply

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:22:06 -0800, Hayduke > wrote:

>You're not annoying. Your downright hillarious! Folks like you
>validate everything folks think about the redneck wing of the
>republican party.
>
>Keep on, keeping on, my man!
>
>Peace
>
>On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:20:07 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>>Glad to be annoying.
>>
>>Strider

and you are a shining example of why liberals have become the dinosaur
of American politics.

Strider

[Strider]

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 20:03:04 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
><SNIP>
>> Sorry. I missed the <snip> you are just an asshole.
>>
>> Strider
>
>In order to qualify as a functioning "asshole", varying but regular
>quantities of faecal matter must be excreted. I rather fear that at least
>in this respect, you are far more qualified than I could ever possibly hope
>to be. Congratulations!
>
>MC
>
>
So, you are a disfunctional asshole.

Strider

[Strider]

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 14:23:16 -0500, "Frank Reid"
<moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:

>> Awe, but instead of quoting others, why not rub 1 and 1/2 brain cells
>> together and answer the ones that I mentioned?
>
>I guess Strider doesn't want to play. It was such fun too. Then again, I
>may have been giving him the benefit of the doubt with the 1 1/2 brain cells
>(unfortunately, I'm not very good at this "I know that you're one, but what
>am I" stuff).

Why should I waste time, Frank. There are plenty of indictments for
liberal lunacy. There is nothing I can say that is new.

Strider

[daytripper]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:46:11 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>Why should I waste time, Frank. There are plenty of indictments for
>liberal lunacy. There is nothing I can say that is new.
>
>Strider

<yawn> You still here?

/daytripper (so which day is Take Out The Trash Day on rec.backcountry? ;-)

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:22:39 GMT, (Greg Pavlov)
wrote:

>On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 14:23:16 -0500, "Frank Reid"
><moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf> wrote:
>
>>
>>I guess Strider doesn't want to play. It was such fun too.
>
> You were requiring him to make a leap
> from parroting to actually thinking and
> speaking for himself. It ain't gonna
> happen.

It really doesn't take a whole lot of thought. Liberals keep making
the same mistakes over and over again, keep the same rhetoric year
after year. Being a self centered, elitist lot, they tend to look
down upon us mere mortals, while pontificating ad nauseum about what's
best for us all, whether we like it or not.

No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.

Strider

[The Rolphs]

Strider wrote:

> No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
> socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.
>
>

For the record, in the twentieth century it was a close run between Hitler
and Stalin for biggest despot. Stalin was left wing. I believe you will
find that Hitler was right wing.

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:21:29 GMT, The Rolphs > wrote:

>
>
>Strider wrote:
>
>> No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
>> socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.
>>
>>
>
>For the record, in the twentieth century it was a close run between Hitler
>and Stalin for biggest despot. Stalin was left wing. I believe you will
>find that Hitler was right wing.
>
National Socialist Worker's Party.

Don't forget Mao, Pol Pot, Kim, and even good ole' Saddam.

Strider

[Mike Connor]

"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP >
> So, you are a disfunctional asshole.
>
> Strider

The word is "dysfunctional". You have already amply demonstrated what an
asshole is, so I will refrain from further attempts at clarification.

In the probably absolutely vain hope that it might work, allow me to offer
you some advice. I bear you no ill will, and yet you have gone out of your
way to gratuitously annoy and make an enemy of somebody you do not even
know, who lives half a world away, is not interested in your politics, and
has about as much interest in taking humorous jabs at you, apart from the
admittedly minimal entertainment value thereby engendered, as he has in
poking a dead scorpion with a stick.

This is a silly thing to do, does not bode well for a career in politics,
sensible discussion, or even normal human intercourse.

Doubtless a fair contingent of those in the newsgroup to which you actually
subscribe, and more or less all those in the groups you crosspost to, have
come to the meanwhile inevitable conclusion that you are an idiot. This
impression is unlikely to change, unless you cease such pubescent nonsense.

What people may think of you is a matter of complete indifference to me, but
it may not be to you. Furthermore, nobody is going to listen to an obvious
idiot, even on those rare occasions when he might have something sensible to
say.

Lastly, if you adhere blindly to various basis ideologies, or party
politics, regardless of the ideology or party involved, you will never learn
to think for yourself, and this will be immediately obvious to everybody
concerned. Your utterances, and indeed your person, will then be treated
with the contempt they so richly deserve.

You may respond as you please, or not, I will no longer do so. It is simply
not worth the effort involved in holding the stick.

MC

[The Rolphs]

Strider wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:21:29 GMT, The Rolphs > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Strider wrote:
> >
> >> No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
> >> socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >For the record, in the twentieth century it was a close run between Hitler
> >and Stalin for biggest despot. Stalin was left wing. I believe you will
> >find that Hitler was right wing.
> >
> National Socialist Worker's Party.

As right wing as they get, if you look at the politics.

[Strider]

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:26:40 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>
>"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
><SNIP >
>> So, you are a disfunctional asshole.
>>
>> Strider
>
>The word is "dysfunctional". You have already amply demonstrated what an
>asshole is, so I will refrain from further attempts at clarification.
>
>In the probably absolutely vain hope that it might work, allow me to offer
>you some advice. I bear you no ill will, and yet you have gone out of your
>way to gratuitously annoy and make an enemy of somebody you do not even
>know, who lives half a world away, is not interested in your politics, and
>has about as much interest in taking humorous jabs at you, apart from the
>admittedly minimal entertainment value thereby engendered, as he has in
>poking a dead scorpion with a stick.
>
>This is a silly thing to do, does not bode well for a career in politics,
>sensible discussion, or even normal human intercourse.
>
>Doubtless a fair contingent of those in the newsgroup to which you actually
>subscribe, and more or less all those in the groups you crosspost to, have
>come to the meanwhile inevitable conclusion that you are an idiot. This
>impression is unlikely to change, unless you cease such pubescent nonsense.
>
>What people may think of you is a matter of complete indifference to me, but
>it may not be to you. Furthermore, nobody is going to listen to an obvious
>idiot, even on those rare occasions when he might have something sensible to
>say.
>
>Lastly, if you adhere blindly to various basis ideologies, or party
>politics, regardless of the ideology or party involved, you will never learn
>to think for yourself, and this will be immediately obvious to everybody
>concerned. Your utterances, and indeed your person, will then be treated
>with the contempt they so richly deserve.
>
>You may respond as you please, or not, I will no longer do so. It is simply
>not worth the effort involved in holding the stick.
>
>MC
>
>
Bye bye.

Strider

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:32:03 GMT, The Rolphs > wrote:

>
>
>Strider wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:21:29 GMT, The Rolphs > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Strider wrote:
>> >
>> >> No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
>> >> socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >For the record, in the twentieth century it was a close run between Hitler
>> >and Stalin for biggest despot. Stalin was left wing. I believe you will
>> >find that Hitler was right wing.
>> >
>> National Socialist Worker's Party.
>
>As right wing as they get, if you look at the politics.
>
Looks pretty socialist to me.

Were you under the impression that leftwing socialists were all about
love, life, and singing kum-by-ya around the campfire while passing
joints?

Strider

[The Rolphs]

Second chance Strider! :-)

Strider wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:32:03 GMT, The Rolphs > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Strider wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:21:29 GMT, The Rolphs > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Strider wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
> >> >> socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >For the record, in the twentieth century it was a close run between Hitler
> >> >and Stalin for biggest despot. Stalin was left wing. I believe you will
> >> >find that Hitler was right wing.
> >> >
> >> National Socialist Worker's Party.
> >
> >As right wing as they get, if you look at the politics.
> >
> Looks pretty socialist to me.
>
> Were you under the impression that leftwing socialists were all about
> love, life, and singing kum-by-ya around the campfire while passing
> joints?
>
> Strider

[Tom Littleton]

Strider,
>No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
>socialists.

viscosity in a leader is highly overrated.....
Tom
p.s. <sigh>not much sense trying to
teach this chump political science,
spelling is proving to be a challenge...

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:01:22 GMT, daytripper
> wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:46:11 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>>
>>Why should I waste time, Frank. There are plenty of indictments for
>>liberal lunacy. There is nothing I can say that is new.
>>
>>Strider
>
><yawn> You still here?
>
>/daytripper (so which day is Take Out The Trash Day on rec.backcountry? ;-)

yup.

Strider

[daytripper]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:36:33 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:26:40 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Strider" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>><SNIP >
>>> So, you are a disfunctional asshole.
>>>
>>> Strider
>>
>>The word is "dysfunctional". You have already amply demonstrated what an
>>asshole is, so I will refrain from further attempts at clarification.
>>
>>In the probably absolutely vain hope that it might work, allow me to offer
>>you some advice. I bear you no ill will, and yet you have gone out of your
>>way to gratuitously annoy and make an enemy of somebody you do not even
>>know, who lives half a world away, is not interested in your politics, and
>>has about as much interest in taking humorous jabs at you, apart from the
>>admittedly minimal entertainment value thereby engendered, as he has in
>>poking a dead scorpion with a stick.
>>
>>This is a silly thing to do, does not bode well for a career in politics,
>>sensible discussion, or even normal human intercourse.
>>
>>Doubtless a fair contingent of those in the newsgroup to which you actually
>>subscribe, and more or less all those in the groups you crosspost to, have
>>come to the meanwhile inevitable conclusion that you are an idiot. This
>>impression is unlikely to change, unless you cease such pubescent nonsense.
>>
>>What people may think of you is a matter of complete indifference to me, but
>>it may not be to you. Furthermore, nobody is going to listen to an obvious
>>idiot, even on those rare occasions when he might have something sensible to
>>say.
>>
>>Lastly, if you adhere blindly to various basis ideologies, or party
>>politics, regardless of the ideology or party involved, you will never learn
>>to think for yourself, and this will be immediately obvious to everybody
>>concerned. Your utterances, and indeed your person, will then be treated
>>with the contempt they so richly deserve.
>>
>>You may respond as you please, or not, I will no longer do so. It is simply
>>not worth the effort involved in holding the stick.
>>
>>MC
>>
>>
>Bye bye.
>
>Strider

lmao

His last two brain cells just punted - on second down.

[Guyz-N-Flyz]

"Tom Littleton" > wrote in message
...
> Strider,
> >No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
> >socialists.
>
> viscosity in a leader is highly overrated.....
> Tom
> p.s. <sigh>not much sense trying to
> teach this chump political science,
> spelling is proving to be a challenge...

SPOLK-MU-VANG!!!!!!

Damn lucky I wasn't drinkin' anything, or you'd pay dearly Mr. Littleton!

Op --politically challenged, myself--

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:52:15 GMT, daytripper
> wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:36:33 GMT, Strider > wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:26:40 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

***snip***

>>>You may respond as you please, or not, I will no longer do so. It is simply
>>>not worth the effort involved in holding the stick.
>>>
>>>MC
>>>
>>>
>>Bye bye.
>>
>>Strider
>
>lmao
>
>His last two brain cells just punted - on second down.

I'll try to get over the rejection trauma.

BWWWWWAAAAAAA!!!!!!

Strider

[rw]

The Rolphs wrote:

>
> Strider wrote:
>
>
>>No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
>>socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.
>>
>>
>
>
> For the record, in the twentieth century it was a close run between Hitler
> and Stalin for biggest despot. Stalin was left wing. I believe you will
> find that Hitler was right wing.

Let's give poor Strider the benefit of the doubt, here. We don't really
know how he measures the viscosity of despots. It's actually a rather
sticky subject. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Charlie Wilson]

"Guyz-N-Flyz" wrote :
> Best item on this five-star menu: Block Sender.

Way ahead of you.

[Strider]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 16:21:59 -0700, rw >
wrote:

>The Rolphs wrote:
>
>>
>> Strider wrote:
>>
>>
>>>No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
>>>socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> For the record, in the twentieth century it was a close run between Hitler
>> and Stalin for biggest despot. Stalin was left wing. I believe you will
>> find that Hitler was right wing.
>
>Let's give poor Strider the benefit of the doubt, here. We don't really
>know how he measures the viscosity of despots. It's actually a rather
>sticky subject. :-)

That's what I get for using socialist spell checkers.

Strider

[[email protected]]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:38:45 GMT, Strider > wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:32:03 GMT, The Rolphs > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Strider wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:21:29 GMT, The Rolphs > wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Strider wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> No wonder the most viscous despots in the world were leftwing
>>> >> socialists. Elitism is just another form of bigotry.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >For the record, in the twentieth century it was a close run between Hitler
>>> >and Stalin for biggest despot. Stalin was left wing. I believe you will
>>> >find that Hitler was right wing.
>>> >
>>> National Socialist Worker's Party.
>>
>>As right wing as they get, if you look at the politics.
>>
>Looks pretty socialist to me.

Only in the name and in some of the original party rhetoric. I don't
recall them ever enacting anything in the way of socialist
legislation. They weren't quite right of the Spanish Fascists, but
they tried.
>
>Were you under the impression that leftwing socialists were all about
>love, life, and singing kum-by-ya around the campfire while passing
>joints?

He must be. Look at all the admiration he expresses for Stalin...

Note: Look up sarcasm


--
rbc: vixen Fairly harmless

Hit reply to email.
Though I'm very slow to respond.
http://www.visi.com/~cyli