OK, so this time, I'm smirking a bit...

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:03:23 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

DaveS wrote:
Rick, after 8+ years of your political ****, ass kissing each and
every move of Bush/Cheney and the Greed Interregnum, ignoring the
substance of every move of these clowns against the Constitutional
foundations of the country, putting the most ridiculous
interpretations on the most despicable venal moves and defending
slavishly each and every theft of taxpayer money and trust. . . why in
heaven's name do you think you have any credibility whatsoever in
pretending that yours is an objective or useful assessment of Obama?

The thing most people get, which apparently you do not yet
understand, is that the people, the voters have decided that the
choices you advocated were incompetent crooks and the voters decided
to give the "Ds" a chance to clean up the mess that your team created,
and the mess that you are unwilling to take any responsibility for.
The least you could do is to re-examine your thinking and consider
where you went wrong. Do that for a bit, and maybe you would have some
credibility in this off topic area. Until that happens your stuff
reads "stubborn loser/learning unlikely."

Well and rightly said

Actually, incorrectly said. I defended Bush and/or Cheney on a limited few
things, particularly the Katrina response and "weapons of mass destruction" in
Iraq, both about which I had direct, personal knowledge (not to mention, since
Saddam had undeniably _used_ such weapons, it's pretty hard to say they didn't
exist). Further, I did say, and still feel, that Bush was a better choice than
either Gore or Kerry (but I never said, nor have I ever felt, that he was the
best possible choice).

but our friend Rick Bean Dean lost all
credibility a long time. It was Rick who assured us that Obama
and his team were naifs, babes in the woods, inexperienced,
amateur neophytes who had no chance in hell against the Clinton,
heir apparent juggernaut. Obama trounced them and won the
Democratic nomination going away.

Er, nope.

It was Rick who told us in no uncertain terms that Obama and his
team were rank amateurs who hadn't the sense or experience to
take on the best of the best of the GOP. Obama won in an electoral
landslide.

Er, nope. That was his now-Veep and his now-Secretary of State and her husband
that saying stuff like that...

And "an electoral landslide"...hmmm....aren't you among those who claim Gore
really won...? IAC, an "electoral landslide" is meaningless in practical terms
- every eligible voter in the US could vote, and a very small fraction of the
popular votes could create "an electoral landslide," or, a relative few could
vote in certain areas and the winner of an "electoral landslide" could lose the
popular vote by 30-plus%.

IIRC, I called the popular vote within a point or two - it was, what 53-46, and
again, IIRC, I predicted 51 to 49, plus or minus a point or two, with minority
voters being a wild card. And no, I didn't pick McCain as the certain winner.

Now it's Rick Bean Dean spouting the same old bull****, (he's
really big on bull**** ;-), about how Obama and his team have no
smarts, experience, common sense or savvy. Yeah, your label fits
perfectly, "stubborn loser/learning unlikely". As for credibility,
well maybe if you borrow the tinfoil hood when the antenna works. ;-)

HTH,
R

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
DaveS wrote:
Rick, after 8+ years of your political ****, ass kissing each and
every move of Bush/Cheney and the Greed Interregnum, ignoring the
substance of every move of these clowns against the Constitutional
foundations of the country, putting the most ridiculous
interpretations on the most despicable venal moves and defending
slavishly each and every theft of taxpayer money and trust. . . why in
heaven's name do you think you have any credibility whatsoever in
pretending that yours is an objective or useful assessment of Obama?

The thing most people get, which apparently you do not yet
understand, is that the people, the voters have decided that the
choices you advocated were incompetent crooks and the voters decided
to give the "Ds" a chance to clean up the mess that your team created,
and the mess that you are unwilling to take any responsibility for.
The least you could do is to re-examine your thinking and consider
where you went wrong. Do that for a bit, and maybe you would have some
credibility in this off topic area. Until that happens your stuff
reads "stubborn loser/learning unlikely."
Well and rightly said

Actually, incorrectly said. ...

Mr. Snedeker's version sounds correct to me.

but our friend Rick Bean Dean lost all
credibility a long time. It was Rick who assured us that Obama
and his team were naifs, babes in the woods, inexperienced,
amateur neophytes who had no chance in hell against the Clinton,
heir apparent juggernaut. Obama trounced them and won the
Democratic nomination going away.

Er, nope.

Obama didn't win the Democratic nomination ? Obviously one of
us is misinformed.

It was Rick who told us in no uncertain terms that Obama and his
team were rank amateurs who hadn't the sense or experience to
take on the best of the best of the GOP. Obama won in an electoral
landslide.

Er, nope. That was his now-Veep and his now-Secretary of State and her husband
that saying stuff like that...

And "an electoral landslide"...hmmm....aren't you among those who claim Gore
really won...? IAC, an "electoral landslide" is meaningless in practical terms

Well, Obama is President of the United States ... in practical terms.

That is to say, Obama is President of the United States on *this*
planet. Your planet may vary.

HTH

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Apr 11, 6:05*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:03:23 -0500, Ken Fortenberry





wrote:
DaveS wrote:
Rick, after 8+ years of your political ****, ass kissing each and
every move of Bush/Cheney and the Greed Interregnum, ignoring the
substance of every move of these clowns against the Constitutional
foundations of the country, putting the most ridiculous
interpretations on the most despicable venal moves and defending
slavishly each and every theft of taxpayer money and trust. . . why in
heaven's name do you think you have any credibility whatsoever in
pretending that yours is an objective or useful assessment of Obama?

The thing most people get, which apparently you do not yet
understand, *is that the people, the voters have decided that the
choices you advocated were incompetent crooks and the voters decided
to give the "Ds" a chance to clean up the mess that your team created,
and the mess that you are unwilling to take any responsibility for.
The least you could do is to re-examine your thinking and consider
where you went wrong. Do that for a bit, and maybe you would have some
credibility in this off topic area. Until that happens your stuff
reads "stubborn loser/learning unlikely."

Well and rightly said

Actually, incorrectly said. *I defended Bush and/or Cheney on a limited few
things, particularly the Katrina response and "weapons of mass destruction" in
Iraq, both about which I had direct, personal knowledge (not to mention, since
Saddam had undeniably _used_ such weapons, it's pretty hard to say they didn't
exist). *Further, I did say, and still feel, that Bush was a better choice than
either Gore or Kerry (but I never said, nor have I ever felt, that he was the
best possible choice).

but our friend Rick Bean Dean lost all
credibility a long time. It was Rick who assured us that Obama
and his team were naifs, babes in the woods, inexperienced,
amateur neophytes who had no chance in hell against the Clinton,
heir apparent juggernaut. Obama trounced them and won the
Democratic nomination going away.

Er, nope.



It was Rick who told us in no uncertain terms that Obama and his
team were rank amateurs who hadn't the sense or experience to
take on the best of the best of the GOP. Obama won in an electoral
landslide.

Er, nope. *That was his now-Veep and his now-Secretary of State and her husband
that saying stuff like that...

And "an electoral landslide"...hmmm....aren't you among those who claim Gore
really won...? *IAC, an "electoral landslide" is meaningless in practical terms
- every eligible voter in the US could vote, and a very small fraction of the
popular votes could create "an electoral landslide," or, a relative few could
vote in certain areas and the winner of an "electoral landslide" could lose the
popular vote by 30-plus%. *

IIRC, I called the popular vote within a point or two - it was, what 53-46, and
again, IIRC, I predicted 51 to 49, plus or minus a point or two, with minority
voters being a wild card. *And no, I didn't pick McCain as the certain winner.

Now it's Rick Bean Dean spouting the same old bull****, (he's
really big on bull**** ;-), about how Obama and his team have no
smarts, experience, common sense or savvy. Yeah, your label fits
perfectly, "stubborn loser/learning unlikely". As for credibility,
well maybe if you borrow the tinfoil hood when the antenna works. ;-)

HTH,
R- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

From one pain in the ass to another:
Oh Jebus man, just stop. You dig it deeper and deeper.
It comes across like the life long horse player who falls in love with
the name of a nag. The nag loses and loses, can't seem to get started,
dumps jockeys all the time. But still the old horse player bets, tells
his friends to bet, bets again and again, gives the same excuses over
and over and over. If only the World would conform things would be all
right.

Here is how things work:
You say how things are, whats going to happen.
People listen. They think, "OK, interesting opinion. Maybe he's right.
Things turn out differently.
People say, "Hummmm, well maybe next time."
And. . .
You say how things are, whats going to happen.
People listen. They think, "OK, interesting opinion. Maybe this time
he's right.
Things turn out differently.
People say, "Hummmm, well maybe there is a pattern here."
And . . .
You insist how things are, whats going to happen.
People listen. They think, "He doesn't seem to understand what's going
on."
Things turn out differently.
People say, "Hummmm, he did it again."
And
You keep insisting how things are, whats going to happen.
People listen. They think, "Not again".
Things turn out differently.
People say, "Jebus man, Stick to what you know."

Multiply by 6-8 years and 500-600 repetitions . . . .

I respect what you know about lots of stuff, and opinions are . . .
opinions, but pleeeeze do not expect to have any cred whatsoever on
your unchanged and unreconstructed opinions on where the country ought
to be politically, or how we got here, or why Obama is a piece of
****. It just does not wash.

Dave

DaveS wrote of rdean:

snip
I respect what you know about lots of stuff, and opinions are . . .
opinions, but pleeeeze do not expect to have any cred whatsoever on
your unchanged and unreconstructed opinions on where the country ought
to be politically, or how we got here, or why Obama is a piece of
****. It just does not wash.

Yeah, and it smells bad too. ;-) Rick's ridiculous notions about
Obama remind me of a classic line from Casablanca, (well, truth
is *all* the lines from Casablanca are classics).

Major rdean Strasser: You give him credit for too much cleverness.
My impression was that he's just another blundering American.

Captain Ken Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering".
I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.

Rick has it in his head that Obama is some sort of amateur politician
who blunders along from mistake to mistake. Nothing could be further
from the truth. Obama is a skilled, savvy, professional politician
surrounded by a cast of smart, pragmatic, highly experienced political
veterans.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 14:43:01 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

DaveS wrote of rdean:

snip
I respect what you know about lots of stuff, and opinions are . . .
opinions, but pleeeeze do not expect to have any cred whatsoever on
your unchanged and unreconstructed opinions on where the country ought
to be politically, or how we got here, or why Obama is a piece of
****. It just does not wash.

Yeah, and it smells bad too. ;-) Rick's ridiculous notions about
Obama remind me of a classic line from Casablanca, (well, truth
is *all* the lines from Casablanca are classics).

Major rdean Strasser: You give him credit for too much cleverness.
My impression was that he's just another blundering American.

Captain Ken Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering".
I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.

Rick has it in his head that Obama is some sort of amateur politician
who blunders along from mistake to mistake. Nothing could be further
from the truth. Obama is a skilled, savvy, professional politician
surrounded by a cast of smart, pragmatic, highly experienced political
veterans.

Geez, you two are like Izzy Mandelbaum and his daddy...except without a crepery
or a pan...

HTH,
R

wrote:

...except without a crepery
or a pan...

Umm, La Creperie. All weekend trips to the city *must* include
Sunday brunch at La Creperie. We may skip the Everest Room or
Topolobampo but we *never* skip La Creperie. It's that good.

http://www.lacreperieusa.com/menu.html

The potatoes lyonnaise are exactly perfect and without peer.
As you know, I'm damn persnickety about my potatoes lyonnaise.

--
Ken Fortenberry