A guy on the shore in New England, maybe Scituate Mass., showing his
house to a reporter, showed how the deck boards were ripped from the
joists by the heavy suft during the storm a few days ago, even though he
used 1 3/4" screws.

Damage to the siding, etc. too.

micky wrote:

A guy on the shore in New England, maybe Scituate Mass., showing his
house to a reporter, showed how the deck boards were ripped from the
joists by the heavy suft during the storm a few days ago, even though he
used 1 3/4" screws.

No surprise. Tons of water beating against immovable objects tend to make
them movable.

On 01/30/2015 09:47 PM, rbowman wrote:
micky wrote:

A guy on the shore in New England, maybe Scituate Mass., showing his
house to a reporter, showed how the deck boards were ripped from the
joists by the heavy suft during the storm a few days ago, even though he
used 1 3/4" screws.

No surprise. Tons of water beating against immovable objects tend to make
them movable.


Yep, when man battles the environment, man seldom wins.

I just hope there is a government program so the wealthy republican can rebuild his ocean-front home.

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 6:55:40 AM UTC-5, Environmental Whacko wrote:
On 01/30/2015 09:47 PM, rbowman wrote:
micky wrote:

A guy on the shore in New England, maybe Scituate Mass., showing his
house to a reporter, showed how the deck boards were ripped from the
joists by the heavy suft during the storm a few days ago, even though he
used 1 3/4" screws.

No surprise. Tons of water beating against immovable objects tend to make
them movable.


Yep, when man battles the environment, man seldom wins.

I just hope there is a government program so the wealthy republican can rebuild his ocean-front home.

It was MA, not many Republicans there. More likely it's the Kennedy clan.
For further proof that wealth isn't exclusive to the Republican party,
take a look at Congress. Despite the fact that there are many more
epublicans than Democrats, of the top 10 wealthiest members of Congress,
8 are Democrats, lead by Jay Rockefeller, with a net worth of $108 mil.
He's a good example and like the current Kennedy clan, he didn't earn it,
he inherited it.

On 1/31/2015 7:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 6:55:40 AM UTC-5, Environmental Whacko wrote:
On 01/30/2015 09:47 PM, rbowman wrote:
micky wrote:

A guy on the shore in New England, maybe Scituate Mass., showing his
house to a reporter, showed how the deck boards were ripped from the
joists by the heavy suft during the storm a few days ago, even though he
used 1 3/4" screws.

No surprise. Tons of water beating against immovable objects tend to make
them movable.


Yep, when man battles the environment, man seldom wins.

I just hope there is a government program so the wealthy republican can rebuild his ocean-front home.

It was MA, not many Republicans there. More likely it's the Kennedy clan.
For further proof that wealth isn't exclusive to the Republican party,
take a look at Congress. Despite the fact that there are many more
epublicans than Democrats, of the top 10 wealthiest members of Congress,
8 are Democrats, lead by Jay Rockefeller, with a net worth of $108 mil.
He's a good example and like the current Kennedy clan, he didn't earn it,
he inherited it.


Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich
man, wanting to get into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since
it is easier to get their vote.

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 6:53:57 AM UTC-6, Frank wrote:

Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich
man, wanting to get into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since
it is easier to get their vote.

Judging by that statement...you must be a Democrat by your own hypothesis.

On Friday, January 30, 2015 at 9:45:50 PM UTC-5, rbowman wrote:
micky wrote:

A guy on the shore in New England, maybe Scituate Mass., showing his
house to a reporter, showed how the deck boards were ripped from the
joists by the heavy suft during the storm a few days ago, even though he
used 1 3/4" screws.

No surprise. Tons of water beating against immovable objects tend to make
them movable.

That's not heavy surf mate. This is heavy surf:

http://bcdownload.gannett.edgesuite....=355535890 01

http://media2.wptv.com//photo/2012/1...46_320_240.JPG

On 1/31/2015 6:55 AM, Environmental Whacko wrote:


Yep, when man battles the environment, man seldom wins.

I just hope there is a government program so the wealthy republican can
rebuild his ocean-front home.

What about the wealthy democrats that have homes on the shore? Wonder
if the Kennedy compound was damaged.

On 1/31/2015 7:53 AM, Frank wrote:

Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich man, wanting to get into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since it is easier to get their vote.

And yet the intelligent Republi****s can't seem to produce a winable presidential candidate.

Sara Paylin wrote in news:54ccec69$0$19851$c3e8da3
:

On 1/31/2015 7:53 AM, Frank wrote:

Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich man, wanting to get
into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since it is easier to get their vote.

And yet the intelligent Republi****s can't seem to produce a winable presidential candidate.

Apparently, your awareness of politics began only six years ago.

On 01/31/2015 10:25 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Sara Paylin wrote in news:54ccec69$0$19851$c3e8da3
:

On 1/31/2015 7:53 AM, Frank wrote:

Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich man, wanting to get
into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since it is easier to get their vote.

And yet the intelligent Republi****s can't seem to produce a winable presidential candidate.

Apparently, your awareness of politics began only six years ago.


FWIW, the last republican president was "appointed" by the supreme court. LOL!

In article ,
Environmental Whacko wrote:

On 01/31/2015 10:25 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Sara Paylin wrote in
news:54ccec69$0$19851$c3e8da3
:

On 1/31/2015 7:53 AM, Frank wrote:

Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich
man, wanting to get
into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since it is easier to get
their vote.

And yet the intelligent Republi****s can't seem to produce a winable
presidential candidate.

Apparently, your awareness of politics began only six years ago.


FWIW, the last republican president was "appointed" by the supreme court.
LOL!

And yet every attempt by the news media and others to "count" the vote
all came out with him still winning FL. And you also forget he won the
next election rather handily.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 12:16:28 PM UTC-5, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
Environmental Whacko wrote:

On 01/31/2015 10:25 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Sara Paylin wrote in
news:54ccec69$0$19851$c3e8da3
:

On 1/31/2015 7:53 AM, Frank wrote:

Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich
man, wanting to get
into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since it is easier to get
their vote.

And yet the intelligent Republi****s can't seem to produce a winable
presidential candidate.

Apparently, your awareness of politics began only six years ago.


FWIW, the last republican president was "appointed" by the supreme court.
LOL!

And yet every attempt by the news media and others to "count" the vote
all came out with him still winning FL. And you also forget he won the
next election rather handily.
--

+1

On 1/31/2015 9:11 AM, bob_villa wrote:
On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 6:53:57 AM UTC-6, Frank wrote:

Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich
man, wanting to get into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since
it is easier to get their vote.

Judging by that statement...you must be a Democrat by your own hypothesis.


Not anymore but I was one when this dawned on me.

A black co-worker friend told me that he became a registered Republican
and became active in the party so he could be appointed to the city
school board by the Republican governor. I never knew what his true
politics were.

It is stupid to assume that one's wealth sets their political preference
when running for office. When seeking office they take the easiest path
and yes I think it is easier to fool Democrats.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 13:55:17 -0500, Frank
wrote:

It is stupid to assume that one's wealth sets their political preference
when running for office. When seeking office they take the easiest path
and yes I think it is easier to fool Democrats.

G

_Watters' World Asks Passersby About a Bizarre, Fictitious Super Bowl_

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/01/30/watters-world-asks-passersby-about-bizarre-fictitious-super-bowl

https://tinyurl.com/o577p2g

On 01/31/2015 11:51 AM, Environmental Whacko wrote:
On 01/31/2015 10:25 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Sara Paylin wrote in news:54ccec69$0$19851$c3e8da3
:

On 1/31/2015 7:53 AM, Frank wrote:

Since Democrats are generally less intelligent than Republicans, a rich man, wanting to get
into politics, may choose to run as a Democrat since it is easier to get their vote.

And yet the intelligent Republi****s can't seem to produce a winable presidential candidate.

Apparently, your awareness of politics began only six years ago.


FWIW, the last republican president was "appointed" by the supreme court. LOL!

Now that Mitt **** his magic underwear, it looks like Dubya's brother will get his ass kicked by Hillary.

On 1/31/2015 3:05 PM, Chaussette Pantin wrote:


Now that Mitt **** his magic underwear, it looks like Dubya's brother
will get his ass kicked by Hillary.


I don't see Jeb getting the job even if he is the best candidate. I
think the electorate has had enough Bushes for a while, be that good or
bad.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 15:35:14 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/31/2015 3:05 PM, Chaussette Pantin wrote:


Now that Mitt **** his magic underwear, it looks like Dubya's brother
will get his ass kicked by Hillary.


I don't see Jeb getting the job even if he is the best candidate. I
think the electorate has had enough Bushes for a while, be that good or
bad.

Did I miss something? I'm not familiar with either Jeb or Hillary
announcing they WILL run. Lord knows we don't need Bill Clinton as
our nation's "first husband".

Hillary would need to run far left of Warren, if Warren runs as our
first native American ... Jeb is to liberal for many conservatives.

On 1/31/2015 2:35 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/31/2015 3:05 PM, Chaussette Pantin wrote:


Now that Mitt **** his magic underwear, it looks like Dubya's brother
will get his ass kicked by Hillary.


I don't see Jeb getting the job even if he is the best candidate. I
think the electorate has had enough Bushes for a while, be that good or
bad.


I think that the same could be said of the Clintons; but then, "what
does it matter now?"

Unfortunately, I don't see any shining stars on the horizon. The
Republicans can't stay out of the bedroom nor let us make our own
decisions. The Democrats want to control everything else and make
certain that everyone gets a free lunch.

Bottom line? We are well and truly f**ked.

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 2:30:33 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 13:55:17 -0500, Frank
wrote:

It is stupid to assume that one's wealth sets their political preference
when running for office. When seeking office they take the easiest path
and yes I think it is easier to fool Democrats.

G

_Watters' World Asks Passersby About a Bizarre, Fictitious Super Bowl_

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/01/30/watters-world-asks-passersby-about-bizarre-fictitious-super-bowl

https://tinyurl.com/o577p2g

Yes, but he didn't ask those idiots if they were Republicans or
Democrats. He should have.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 14:33:21 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/o577p2g

Yes, but he didn't ask those idiots if they were Republicans or
Democrats. He should have.

I thought it was obvious. I've been wrong befo last time I was just
mistaken. Back to heavy surf. Consider how the Grand Canyon was formed
by a river. Water is corrosive.

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 5:40:36 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 14:33:21 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/o577p2g

Yes, but he didn't ask those idiots if they were Republicans or
Democrats. He should have.

I thought it was obvious.

Now Oren, there you go again.....

But seriously, I've never seen a study done where they asked basic
questions to determine one's competence in basic history, civics,
current affairs, etc and then gave the overall results for those
that said they were Democrats versus Republicans. Have you? I only
know what I think they would find. IMO, they should have a pop
quiz before you can vote. If you're too dumb to know what's going
on, you have no basis to make informed decisions and shouldn't be voting.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 15:02:46 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 5:40:36 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 14:33:21 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/o577p2g

Yes, but he didn't ask those idiots if they were Republicans or
Democrats. He should have.

I thought it was obvious.

Now Oren, there you go again.....


Oh my.

But seriously, I've never seen a study done where they asked basic
questions to determine one's competence in basic history, civics,
current affairs, etc and then gave the overall results for those
that said they were Democrats versus Republicans. Have you? I only
know what I think they would find. IMO, they should have a pop
quiz before you can vote. If you're too dumb to know what's going
on, you have no basis to make informed decisions and shouldn't be voting.

I've been reading (wink) that immigrants, seeking citizenship in
America can pass the citizenship test when ordinary Americans cannot.

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-6, Oren wrote:

I've been reading (wink) that immigrants, seeking citizenship in
America can pass the citizenship test when ordinary Americans cannot.

http://www.test-guide.com/free-citiz...ice-tests.html

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 15:37:09 -0800 (PST), bob_villa
wrote:

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-6, Oren wrote:

I've been reading (wink) that immigrants, seeking citizenship in
America can pass the citizenship test when ordinary Americans cannot.

http://www.test-guide.com/free-citiz...ice-tests.html

Some states are proposing students pass a civics class, take an exam
before they graduate high school. I learned about sex, but it wasn't
in a class room.

Why are schools not teaching American values? Like the Constitution? I
know it does infuriate liberals. because basket weaving is more
important, right?

On 1/31/2015 7:01 PM, Oren wrote:

Why are schools not teaching American values? Like the Constitution? I
know it does infuriate liberals. because basket weaving is more
important, right?


More likely rain forests, and why Republican
policies are ruining the Earth.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 19:27:51 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 1/31/2015 7:01 PM, Oren wrote:

Why are schools not teaching American values? Like the Constitution? I
know it does infuriate liberals. because basket weaving is more
important, right?


More likely rain forests, and why Republican
policies are ruining the Earth.


Hornswoggle. I don't buy into that notion.

trader_4 wrote:

It was MA, not many Republicans there.

Charlie Baker became a Democrat when I wasn't looking? I lived in MA for a
couple of years in the early '70s. During that time I voted for Edward
Brooke for US Senator. He had two things going for him. He was a Republican
and was the first African American Senator since the Reconstruction. I
believe that could be further qualified as the first African American
Senator that was actually elected by popular vote.

Then there was Mittins... I think there must be one or two Republicans in
the state.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 06:55:31 -0500, Environmental Whacko
wrote:

On 01/30/2015 09:47 PM, rbowman wrote:
micky wrote:

A guy on the shore in New England, maybe Scituate Mass., showing his
house to a reporter, showed how the deck boards were ripped from the
joists by the heavy suft during the storm a few days ago, even though he
used 1 3/4" screws.

No surprise. Tons of water beating against immovable objects tend to make
them movable.


Yep, when man battles the environment, man seldom wins.

I just hope there is a government program so the wealthy republican can rebuild his ocean-front home.

I agree, although this house did not look expensive. He had 6 feet of
space between his house and the one next to his. It was a rectangular
box, going up about 2 floors plus the roof, with old-fashioned siding,
real clapboard or an old version of T1-11. The deck was not very big,
and since he knew the length of the screws, I figured he built it
himself. I'm guessing built in the '20's or '30's before tourists had
gotten past Cape Cod

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 15:35:14 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/31/2015 3:05 PM, Chaussette Pantin wrote:


Now that Mitt **** his magic underwear, it looks like Dubya's brother
will get his ass kicked by Hillary.


I don't see Jeb getting the job even if he is the best candidate. I
think the electorate has had enough Bushes for a while, be that good or
bad.

It's quite amazing. There hasn't been a winning Republican ticket
without a Bush on it since 1972. 42 years.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 09:40:49 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/31/2015 6:55 AM, Environmental Whacko wrote:


Yep, when man battles the environment, man seldom wins.

I just hope there is a government program so the wealthy republican can
rebuild his ocean-front home.

What about the wealthy democrats that have homes on the shore? Wonder
if the Kennedy compound was damaged.

If it's a compound, it might be ionized.

It was hard to tell with the camera angle etc. but it looked like this
guy was maybe only 20 feet from the water. It may have been an old
house in the old part Scituate. Not the earliest part if that is
downtown, which iiuc the map correctly is set back from the water,
behind the bay, but on the shore close to the town.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 21:06:33 -0500, micky
wrote:

It's quite amazing. There hasn't been a winning Republican ticket
without a Bush on it since 1972. 42 years.

After Nixon seems a problem.

Democrats have controlled congress for more the 60 years. See any
problem with that?

On 1/31/2015 9:06 PM, micky wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 15:35:14 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/31/2015 3:05 PM, Chaussette Pantin wrote:


Now that Mitt **** his magic underwear, it looks like Dubya's brother
will get his ass kicked by Hillary.


I don't see Jeb getting the job even if he is the best candidate. I
think the electorate has had enough Bushes for a while, be that good or
bad.

It's quite amazing. There hasn't been a winning Republican ticket
without a Bush on it since 1972. 42 years.


Maybe it is the time for him. Not many other good choices.

Per Oren:
Why are schools not teaching American values? Like the Constitution? I
know it does infuriate liberals. because basket weaving is more
important, right?

I'd settle for basic arithmetic.

A close family member had to interview college graduates for a certain
position in his group.

Because they produced financial software, he decided that a litmus test
was whether or not the candidate could demonstrate an understanding of
what compound interest was.

He went through twenty-six (26 as in two-six) college graduates before
he found one.

IMHO one big reason the country is going to hell in a hand basket is
that politicians can get away with pandering to that level of ignorance.
--
Pete Cresswell

Per Unquestionably Confused:
Unfortunately, I don't see any shining stars on the horizon. The
Republicans can't stay out of the bedroom nor let us make our own
decisions. The Democrats want to control everything else and make
certain that everyone gets a free lunch.

Bottom line? We are well and truly f**ked.

I just came away from reading the December 1st New Yorker mag's article
on Angela Merkel half-wishing she'd come over here...

--
Pete Cresswell

On 1/31/2015 7:36 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 19:27:51 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 1/31/2015 7:01 PM, Oren wrote:

Why are schools not teaching American values? Like the Constitution? I
know it does infuriate liberals. because basket weaving is more
important, right?


More likely rain forests, and why Republican
policies are ruining the Earth.


Hornswoggle. I don't buy into that notion.


I don't have kids in school, but I've
heard that Common Core is not pleasing
to working Americans. I'm not sure what
that teaches.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 11:47:01 PM UTC-5, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Oren:
Why are schools not teaching American values? Like the Constitution? I
know it does infuriate liberals. because basket weaving is more
important, right?

I'd settle for basic arithmetic.

A close family member had to interview college graduates for a certain
position in his group.

Because they produced financial software, he decided that a litmus test
was whether or not the candidate could demonstrate an understanding of
what compound interest was.

He went through twenty-six (26 as in two-six) college graduates before
he found one.

IMHO one big reason the country is going to hell in a hand basket is
that politicians can get away with pandering to that level of ignorance.
--
Pete Cresswell

I agree. Another factor is that I believe ignorance plays in the
favor of one party a lot more than the other. For example, if you
understand what a deficit is, what the national debt is, what's
happened to Greece, etc, then you're going to understand why the
govt can't just be handing out money everywhere without consequences.
If you think money grows on trees, then you're likely to be all for it.

Per trader_4:
I agree. Another factor is that I believe ignorance plays in the
favor of one party a lot more than the other. For example, if you
understand what a deficit is, what the national debt is, what's
happened to Greece, etc, then you're going to understand why the
govt can't just be handing out money everywhere without consequences.
If you think money grows on trees, then you're likely to be all for it.

In this area, we have a large Amish population and my #1 daughter and
her husband deal with them quite a bit.

Mostly, Amish kids only go to school until the eighth grade and at least
some of them believe the earth is flat.

But, according to the daughter, "They know how money works."... and a
surprising number of them are quite prosperous - as in more affluent
than I could ever be.
--
Pete Cresswell

On 1/31/2015 11:46 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Because they produced financial software, he decided that a litmus test
was whether or not the candidate could demonstrate an understanding of
what compound interest was.

He went through twenty-six (26 as in two-six) college graduates before
he found one.

So he hired 25 managers to supervise and one software engineer to do the work?

micky wrote:

It's quite amazing. There hasn't been a winning Republican ticket
without a Bush on it since 1972. 42 years.

All that proves is Reagan could run with a millstone around his neck. 'Read
my lips' Bush didn't last too long on his own hook.