Speaking of Cabin Fever

Okay, I pull up my browser for a quick check of the news. Hit Google
News. I usually start there and then delve off into the papers that
the articles lead me to. Here's what we have for headlines today:
Pig Breaks George's Heart.... Well, my first thought is that Rush
Limbaugh won't return Bush's phone calls. I guess it was a case of
kiss and squeal. No, its George Clooney's pet pig. The pig died. The
only reason we know this is that Clooney ordered 50 lbs of sausage
casing from Cabelas.
Okay, what next? NYC Bans Trans Fats from Eateries... Okay, that's
just mean. If some transexual who has to buy its pantyhose from the
women's section wants to go out for a quick piece of Clooney's Homemade
Sausage, it has to go to New Jersey. Maybe if it ran there a few
times, it could lose enough to fit into or afford .... Hefty Fee for
Hepburn's Dress... Yes, that slinky black dress from Breakfast at
Tiffany's was yanked out of the grave and sold at auction for $922,299
or $920,000 (NZ money) or $1m (Aussie bucks) or £410,000 or £467,000
(Irish) or 807-thousand dollars or $811,390 (what Romainians think it
sold for). This exceded the auction estimate of $150,000 for this size
two number. Hmm, maybe the NYC transexual has to run say... to Ecuador
to loose enough to fit into the dress.
Then again, said NYCCT (New York City Chunky Transexual) may have
already gone to NJ as ... E. Coli Threat May Have Passed In NJ!!! Ya
eat a Clooney Homemade Sausage thats been trucked to NYC in the back of
socially responsible solar powered Volvo, sold out of the back of said
Volvo to a NYCCT thats been banned from the local restaraunts, the
first think that NYCCT is gonna do is take a dump at the rest stop on
the Jersey Turnpike.
Damn, news is just too depressing. Now how do I get the little red
balls to go over to the green side or is it the other way 'round?
Frank Reid

Frank Reid wrote:

Damn, news is just too depressing.

How many innocent people died in Iraq today? The carnage is unabated and
even increasing, but no one here seems to care or to pay attention.
We're pushing 3,000 of our troops dead, and many more grievously
wounded. Just today, there were three US soldiers killed and six wounded
in Baghdad. The number of Iraqis beheaded (the Sunnis' favorite
method) or tortured to death with drills into the skull (the Shiites'
favorite method) are beyond counting. The Baghdad morgue doesn't have
enough room for the bodies. They classify Sunni vs. Shiite by the mode
of death, and essentially throw the bodies on a pile. Maybe two
different piles.

The ignorant, incompetent assholes who've been running our country have
a lot to answer for.

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

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...

The ignorant, incompetent assholes who've been running our country have a
lot to answer for.

Then help me get rid of them by joining our movement.

We are the third party. We want a government that we can trust and that is
not the current government controlled by Democrats and Republicans.

Salvation awaits you! Join a third party!

Op

Opus wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...


The ignorant, incompetent assholes who've been running our country have a
lot to answer for.


Then help me get rid of them by joining our movement.

We are the third party. We want a government that we can trust and that is
not the current government controlled by Democrats and Republicans.

Salvation awaits you! Join a third party!

I like the Democratic Party. Good luck. You'll need it.

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

"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...

I like the Democratic Party. Good luck. You'll need it.

So you *like* the "ignorant, incompetent assholes who've been running our
country?"

Good luck. You'll need it!

Op

Opus wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...


I like the Democratic Party. Good luck. You'll need it.


So you *like* the "ignorant, incompetent assholes who've been running our
country?"

The Republicans have been running the country, totally, for at least 6
years.

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

"rw" wrote in message news:_hndh.7236
"... The ignorant, incompetent assholes who've been running our country have
a lot to answer for"

They should be tried as war criminals!
and
At the very least spend some quality jail time!
and Yes!
I do mean Bush Cheney et all !

Too bad- it won't happen!
Fred


"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Frank Reid wrote:

"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...
Opus wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...


I like the Democratic Party. Good luck. You'll need it.


So you *like* the "ignorant, incompetent assholes who've been running our
country?"

The Republicans have been running the country, totally, for at least 6
years.

See, that's the problem with you partisan types. You refuse to admit that
your party is culpable for anything beyond ignorance.

As a political party, the Democrats are just as shiftless, corrupt and
worthy of blame as the Republicans.

That both parties *main* focus, year after year, has been partisan control
of government and not bi-partisan work to improve the income, health, and
educational status of the American people is proof positive that the current
two-party system is detrimental to the well-being of Americans. By
extension, Americans have come to show, at best, a benign neglect for people
of even less means around the world. Why do you think so many people jumped
on the Bush bandwagon, and held on so tightly as it careened off a cliff to
certain death, doom and destruction.

We talk of competition in capitalist economics, yet distain competition in
out political system? Why? Because, those who have the most to gain,
monetarily, have the bullhorn and have inculcated the American people with a
myopic view of the political landscape.

Why haven't we done anything to improve our energy situation? It's not the
fault of one or the other party, it's the fault of BOTH parties. Why didn't
we, like the Brazilians, recognize the potential dangers of foreign energy
reliance, back in the 1970s? Did our elected representatives assume that a
magic pill would be developed to solve our energy needs? or did they assume
that our geo-political ties would remain unchanged forever and/or our
military would ensure the free flow of oil for the U.S. economy forever?

We need new ideas in our government, and they won't be forthcoming from the
Dems. or Repubs.

What was your perspective on Johnson's escalation of the Vietnam conflict,
rw? I can only assume that you were or would have been in favor of our
incursion into Vietnam, by your unwavering support for the Dems.

Hell, neither of the sons a bitches (Dems. and Repubs.) can even bring
themselves to do the most important task charged to them by the U.S.
Constitution--Declaration of War!

Op

Opus wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...

Opus wrote:

"rw" wrote in message
thlink.net...



I like the Democratic Party. Good luck. You'll need it.


So you *like* the "ignorant, incompetent assholes who've been running our
country?"

The Republicans have been running the country, totally, for at least 6
years.


See, that's the problem with you partisan types. You refuse to admit that
your party is culpable for anything beyond ignorance.

Let's see. You're trying to get me to support some third party that
doesn't exist. At least, I assume it doesn't exist because there's no
third party in the US that (a) I would even consider voting for in my
wildest nightmare, or (b) has the slightest chance of winning even a
seat in Congress. Which one were you thinking about? Lyndon LaRouche's
Labor Party? The Green Party? The Libertarian Party? They're all nut
cases AFAIC.

I think a system of two dominant parties is a very good system AS LONG
AS ONE PARTY DOESN'T GET NEARLY TOTAL CONTROL! That's what's happened in
the past six years, and that's what will change in January.

The world view and the policies of the liberal wing of the Democratic
Party suit me fine with only a few exceptions (if you don't like that,
tough), but I wouldn't want to see them in complete control of the
government. As Lord Acton said, power corrupts, and absolute power
corrupts absolutely.

There are serious problems with large numbers of relatively small
political parties. They individually lack broad support (by definition)
and tend to be focused on narrow issues. They are typically guided by a
rigid and extreme ideology. In parliamentary systems it's often
necessary to create coalitions of several parties to form a government,
and the government is then hostage to the demands of the most extreme
minority. We see this happening now in Iraq, where Al-Malaki's so-called
government can't stand up to the Shiite militias because he needs their
political support. It also happens in relatively "mature" parliamentary
democracies, as well, like Israel, where the hard-line right wing has
been able to block progress on a "land for peace" solution to the
Palestinian problem, even though a majority of Israelis support it.

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

rw wrote:
Opus wrote:
See, that's the problem with you partisan types. You refuse to admit
that your party is culpable for anything beyond ignorance.

Let's see. You're trying to get me to support some third party that
doesn't exist. ...

McDopus doesn't live in the real world. In the real world only
the people who are elected get to govern.

I rarely agree with _Chicago Tribune_ editorials, the Trib
usually comes across as a Republican mouthpiece and cheerleader,
so this one surprised hell out of me.



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...ewsopinion-hed
December 6, 2006

Obama should run

With the 2008 presidential field taking shape, the striking thing is how
little excitement most of the possible candidates are likely to evoke.

There are the polarizing figures: Hillary Rodham Clinton, Rudy Giuliani
and Newt Gingrich. There are the candidates who've been here before,
such as Sens. Joe Biden, John McCain and John Kerry. There are the
little-known politicians whose best hope may be the second spot on the
ticket, like Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and former New York Gov. George
Pataki. There are the capital veterans, including Rep. Duncan Hunter
(R-Calif.) and Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), whose importance inside
the Beltway may make them imagine they have electoral strength beyond it.

And then there is Barack Obama. It's safe to say that when he decided to
run for the Senate in 2004, he didn't imagine there would be lots of
people now urging him to seek the highest office in the land. But ever
since his electrifying address to the last Democratic convention, he has
been marked for greater things.

To run for president would be a big leap for someone who just a couple
of years ago was commuting to Springfield as a state senator. There is a
plausible case why Obama should bide his time and burnish his
credentials for the future--plausible, but not persuasive. When a leader
evokes the enthusiasm that Obama does, he should recognize that he has
something special to offer, not in 2012 or 2016, but right now.

What would he bring to the race that others don't? The most obvious is
an approach that transcends party, ideology and geography. In his
convention speech, Obama demolished the image of a nation of
irreconcilable partisan camps: "We worship an awesome God in the blue
states, and we don't like federal agents poking around in our libraries
in the red states."

No one else has shown a comparable talent for appealing to the centrist
instincts of the American people--instincts that often go unsatisfied as
each party labors to rally its most uncompromising factions. After the
divisive events of the last decade, the nation may be ready for a voice
that celebrates our common values instead of exaggerating our differences.

Any presidential race is a long shot, and there is no guarantee that
Obama could succeed. But he may never again find such favorable
circumstance.

With his unifying themes, he would raise the tone of the campaign. His
intellectual depth--he was editor of the Harvard Law Review and taught
law at the University of Chicago--and openness would sharpen the policy
debate. He could help the citizenry get comfortable contemplating
something that will happen sooner or later--a black president. His
magnetic style and optimism would draw many disenchanted Americans back
into the political process.

He and the nation have little to lose and much to gain from his candidacy.

Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune