On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:04:36 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote:

On Aug 29, 7:05 pm, Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:28:17 -0700, Too_Many_Tools



wrote:

Buying property subject to a HOA is not for anyone that likes to do and make
things. I'd be interested to learn of any study showing percentages of
Democrats, Liberals, Republicans in HOA's compared to the DLR population as
a whole. There has to be some sort of mindset in play.

Wes

LOL...I think you just hit THE ISSUE on the head.

My guess is those individuals who need rules and favor conformity
would thrive in a HOA.

Compulsive need for cleaniness and order (everything in its place)
would be another indicator.

Any guess which political group(s) fit that description?

TMT

Based on the Lefts long history of totalitarianism and forceing of the
Nanny State..Id have to say its the Left.


What sort of neighborhoods do you think are wanted by people
touting "traditional family values'"?

Why not ask the **** herself?

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...4/123409.shtml

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refere...es&match=exact



Unless you think Stalin, Mao, Kim Dungwit and FDR were Republicans,
just to name a few....

Gunner

On Aug 30, 3:08 am, "azotic" wrote:
"nick hull" wrote in message

.. .

In article om,
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Wanna bet that there are HOAs that prohibit firearms?

Maybe there are firearms that prohibit HOAs

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

The great equalizer is gaining popularity in HOA's. Some meetings require
pocket artillery.

In Arizona, 61 year old Richard Glassel lost his home over a two year court
battle and a $1,081 legal fee regarding his landscaping.

Glassel, vowing to "get even" stormed his former Association Board Meeting
attended by 30-40 homeowners with a rifle and three handguns blazing.
Killing two Board Members and wounding three others before his rifle jammed,
Glassel was reportedly wrestled to the ground and disarmed by at least five
of the seniors attending.
...

People like that give gunowners a bad name. What's the point to
carrying a backup piece if you don't go to it immediately when
your rifle jams?

--

FF

On Aug 31, 12:25 am, Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:04:36 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt



wrote:
On Aug 29, 7:05 pm, Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:28:17 -0700, Too_Many_Tools

wrote:

Buying property subject to a HOA is not for anyone that likes to do and make
things. I'd be interested to learn of any study showing percentages of
Democrats, Liberals, Republicans in HOA's compared to the DLR population as
a whole. There has to be some sort of mindset in play.

Wes

LOL...I think you just hit THE ISSUE on the head.

My guess is those individuals who need rules and favor conformity
would thrive in a HOA.

Compulsive need for cleaniness and order (everything in its place)
would be another indicator.

Any guess which political group(s) fit that description?

TMT

Based on the Lefts long history of totalitarianism and forceing of the
Nanny State..Id have to say its the Left.

What sort of neighborhoods do you think are wanted by people
touting "traditional family values'"?

Why not ask the **** herself?

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...4/123409.shtml

That page is ostensibly written by the "NewsMax.com Staff".

I'm not a fan of NewsMax but I don't think I'd call them a ****.

The article supposedly quotes "Newsweek's Howard Fineman".
I don't know him and so am not inclined to call him a **** either.

But I note your opinion of those folks and move on...


http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refere...ple/c/hillary_...


I wouldn't call the NYT a **** either, but I'm not really surprised
that you
do.

--

FF

"Ed Huntress" wrote in news:w7JBi.333$%R1.238
@newsfe12.lga:

here in the liberal NYC suburbs, HOAs are pretty rare. There aren't any
around me. What's happened to the freewheeling, libertarian West?



We got invaded by East Coast Yuppies.

"Eregon" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote in news:w7JBi.333$%R1.238
@newsfe12.lga:

here in the liberal NYC suburbs, HOAs are pretty rare. There aren't any
around me. What's happened to the freewheeling, libertarian West?



We got invaded by East Coast Yuppies.

There are plenty of them out here and they don't seem inclined towards HOAs.
I think it's a case of some social climbing going on in flyover country.
d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:41:25 GMT, Eregon wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in news:w7JBi.333$%R1.238
:

here in the liberal NYC suburbs, HOAs are pretty rare. There aren't any
around me. What's happened to the freewheeling, libertarian West?



We got invaded by East Coast Yuppies.


Amen.

Look at Colorado for a prime example

Gunner

On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:40:32 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote:

On Aug 31, 12:25 am, Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:04:36 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt



wrote:
On Aug 29, 7:05 pm, Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:28:17 -0700, Too_Many_Tools

wrote:

Buying property subject to a HOA is not for anyone that likes to do and make
things. I'd be interested to learn of any study showing percentages of
Democrats, Liberals, Republicans in HOA's compared to the DLR population as
a whole. There has to be some sort of mindset in play.

Wes

LOL...I think you just hit THE ISSUE on the head.

My guess is those individuals who need rules and favor conformity
would thrive in a HOA.

Compulsive need for cleaniness and order (everything in its place)
would be another indicator.

Any guess which political group(s) fit that description?

TMT

Based on the Lefts long history of totalitarianism and forceing of the
Nanny State..Id have to say its the Left.

What sort of neighborhoods do you think are wanted by people
touting "traditional family values'"?

Why not ask the **** herself?

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...4/123409.shtml

That page is ostensibly written by the "NewsMax.com Staff".

I'm not a fan of NewsMax but I don't think I'd call them a ****.

The article supposedly quotes "Newsweek's Howard Fineman".
I don't know him and so am not inclined to call him a **** either.

But I note your opinion of those folks and move on...

The story of course is about Hillary **** and her running on Family
Values


http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refere...ple/c/hillary_...


I wouldn't call the NYT a **** either, but I'm not really surprised
that you
do.

See above.

Your attempt to divert from the fact that Hillary**** calls for Family
Values blows your implication out of the water.

Sucks to have that happen to you so much, doesnt it?

gunner

On Aug 30, 10:19 pm, Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:40:32 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt



wrote:

...

What sort of neighborhoods do you think are wanted by people
touting "traditional family values'"?

Why not ask the **** herself?

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...4/123409.shtml

That page is ostensibly written by the "NewsMax.com Staff".

I'm not a fan of NewsMax but I don't think I'd call them a ****.

The article supposedly quotes "Newsweek's Howard Fineman".
I don't know him and so am not inclined to call him a **** either.

But I note your opinion of those folks and move on...

The story of course is about Hillary **** and her running on Family
Values


The story of course does not include any statement by
any Clinton on any subject.



http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refere...ple/c/hillary_...

I wouldn't call the NYT a **** either, but I'm not really surprised
that you
do.

See above.

Yes. You implied that one could go to that page to see what
Hilary Clinton had to say about family values. There were no
statements on that pages by Hillary Clinton on any subject.


Your attempt to divert from the fact that Hillary**** calls for Family
Values blows your implication out of the water.

The webpage you cite does not include any statements by
Hillary Clinton on any subject.


Sucks to have that happen to you so much, doesnt it?


I've gotten quite used to people referring to webpages that don't
support what they have to say. That is why I often go to the
trouble to actually read what is cited.

--

FF

Gunner wrote in
:

snip


Ooo...I like it!

Oh..toss in Clothing Optional..and Ill go for it.

Gunner

Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill

On Aug 31, 1:08 pm, Bill wrote:
Gunner wrote :

snip



Ooo...I like it!

Oh..toss in Clothing Optional..and Ill go for it.

Gunner

Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

...

http://groups.google.com/groups/sear...ng&qt_s=Search

--

FF

On Aug 31, 12:18 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in oglegroups.com...

On Aug 30, 9:12 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
HOAs are intended for 'Politically Correct' morons, of course.

Wrong. They are for people who DON'T want to associate with
anyone who don't live up to their expectations of wha their neighbors
should be like.

Politically correct morons love to associate with people they think
of as inferior--it makes them feel superior.

That's some weird stuff, Fred. Is it the result of some bad experience or
something?

BTW, here in the liberal NYC suburbs, HOAs are pretty rare. There aren't any
around me. What's happened to the freewheeling, libertarian West?


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...6?dmode=source

I think PeteC hit the nail on the head:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...6?dmode=source

The object of an HOA is to suppress diversity. Not necessarily
the superficial kinds like ethnic diversity, but real diversity.

--

FF

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Aug 31, 12:18 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in
oglegroups.com...

On Aug 30, 9:12 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
HOAs are intended for 'Politically Correct' morons, of course.

Wrong. They are for people who DON'T want to associate with
anyone who don't live up to their expectations of wha their neighbors
should be like.

Politically correct morons love to associate with people they think
of as inferior--it makes them feel superior.

That's some weird stuff, Fred. Is it the result of some bad experience or
something?

BTW, here in the liberal NYC suburbs, HOAs are pretty rare. There aren't
any
around me. What's happened to the freewheeling, libertarian West?


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...6?dmode=source

I think PeteC hit the nail on the head:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...6?dmode=source

The object of an HOA is to suppress diversity. Not necessarily
the superficial kinds like ethnic diversity, but real diversity.

Those postings, in light of what you said above, is why I said this is
"weird stuff." What PeteC is saying is that people associate in "enclaves"
of the like-minded. What you said above is that "PC morons associate with
people they think of as inferior."

These two statements are exact opposites. Now you say PeteC "hit the nail on
the head." But the nail he hit was the opposite of the nail you aimed at.

Is that something you care to explain, or shall we just chalk it up to
general enthusiasm for any kind of bitterness and antagonism toward people
who aren't part of your...enclave?

--
Ed Huntress

On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:52:02 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote:

On Aug 30, 10:19 pm, Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:40:32 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt



wrote:

...

What sort of neighborhoods do you think are wanted by people
touting "traditional family values'"?

Why not ask the **** herself?

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...4/123409.shtml

That page is ostensibly written by the "NewsMax.com Staff".

I'm not a fan of NewsMax but I don't think I'd call them a ****.

The article supposedly quotes "Newsweek's Howard Fineman".
I don't know him and so am not inclined to call him a **** either.

But I note your opinion of those folks and move on...

The story of course is about Hillary **** and her running on Family
Values


The story of course does not include any statement by
any Clinton on any subject.



http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refere...ple/c/hillary_...

I wouldn't call the NYT a **** either, but I'm not really surprised
that you
do.

See above.

Yes. You implied that one could go to that page to see what
Hilary Clinton had to say about family values. There were no
statements on that pages by Hillary Clinton on any subject.


Your attempt to divert from the fact that Hillary**** calls for Family
Values blows your implication out of the water.

The webpage you cite does not include any statements by
Hillary Clinton on any subject.


Sucks to have that happen to you so much, doesnt it?


I've gotten quite used to people referring to webpages that don't
support what they have to say. That is why I often go to the
trouble to actually read what is cited.


So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?

Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.

Unless..you are against family values?

Gunner

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:08:22 -0500, Bill wrote:

Gunner wrote in
:

snip


Ooo...I like it!

Oh..toss in Clothing Optional..and Ill go for it.

Gunner

Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill


Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Gunner

"Gunner" wrote in message
news

So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?

Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.

Unless..you are against family values?

Whose family? Larry Craig's?

--
Ed Huntress

Gunner wrote in
:

snip
Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill


Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Gunner


Well, I figured if you're gonna go starkers around the neighborhood then
you might want to do it whole hog.

Maybe a long welding bib style tie up would help.

Oh and don't forget the work boots.....

Ow, I just hurt my brain with that image......


Bill

Fred the Red Shirt wrote in
oups.com:
snip
Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places
you REALLY don't want burned.......

...

http://groups.google.com/groups/sear...ng&qt_s=Search

--

FF


I like the thread marked, Things not to do while naked, number 3 is Bath
the cat.

Bill

On Aug 31, 4:53 pm, Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:52:02 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt



wrote:
On Aug 30, 10:19 pm, Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:40:32 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt

wrote:

...

What sort of neighborhoods do you think are wanted by people
touting "traditional family values'"?

Why not ask the **** herself?

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...4/123409.shtml

That page is ostensibly written by the "NewsMax.com Staff".

I'm not a fan of NewsMax but I don't think I'd call them a ****.

The article supposedly quotes "Newsweek's Howard Fineman".
I don't know him and so am not inclined to call him a **** either.

But I note your opinion of those folks and move on...

The story of course is about Hillary **** and her running on Family
Values

The story of course does not include any statement by
any Clinton on any subject.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refere...ple/c/hillary_...

I wouldn't call the NYT a **** either, but I'm not really surprised
that you
do.

See above.

Yes. You implied that one could go to that page to see what
Hilary Clinton had to say about family values. There were no
statements on that pages by Hillary Clinton on any subject.

Your attempt to divert from the fact that Hillary**** calls for Family
Values blows your implication out of the water.

The webpage you cite does not include any statements by
Hillary Clinton on any subject.

Sucks to have that happen to you so much, doesnt it?

I've gotten quite used to people referring to webpages that don't
support what they have to say. That is why I often go to the
trouble to actually read what is cited.

So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?


So, are you denying that you suggested one could go to that
page to read her own words?

Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.


I strongly suggest you take a class in remedial writing.

--

FF

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:51:19 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote:

On Aug 31, 12:18 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in oglegroups.com...

On Aug 30, 9:12 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
HOAs are intended for 'Politically Correct' morons, of course.

Wrong. They are for people who DON'T want to associate with
anyone who don't live up to their expectations of wha their neighbors
should be like.

Politically correct morons love to associate with people they think
of as inferior--it makes them feel superior.

That's some weird stuff, Fred. Is it the result of some bad experience or
something?

BTW, here in the liberal NYC suburbs, HOAs are pretty rare. There aren't any
around me. What's happened to the freewheeling, libertarian West?


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...6?dmode=source

I think PeteC hit the nail on the head:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...6?dmode=source

The object of an HOA is to suppress diversity. Not necessarily
the superficial kinds like ethnic diversity, but real diversity.
The object of an HOA is to turn non directors into sheeple.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:00:03 -0500, Bill wrote:

Gunner wrote in
:

snip
Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill


Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Gunner


Well, I figured if you're gonna go starkers around the neighborhood then
you might want to do it whole hog.

Maybe a long welding bib style tie up would help.

Oh and don't forget the work boots.....

Ow, I just hurt my brain with that image......


Bill

Carrhart thong and lumberjack boots?

Gunner

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:57:02 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
news

So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?

Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.

Unless..you are against family values?

Whose family? Larry Craig's?


Oh..Bill and Hillary Clintons of course. Obamas wife commented on
them in fact....

Gunner

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:41:06 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote:


Sucks to have that happen to you so much, doesnt it?

I've gotten quite used to people referring to webpages that don't
support what they have to say. That is why I often go to the
trouble to actually read what is cited.

So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?


So, are you denying that you suggested one could go to that
page to read her own words?

Of course I didnt suggest that. Seems your Bushophobia is rather
tragicly progressed well into the terminal stage.

Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.


I strongly suggest you take a class in remedial writing.

Why? Because I called you a buffoon?

Gunner


--

FF

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:57:02 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
news

So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?

Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.

Unless..you are against family values?

Whose family? Larry Craig's?


Oh..Bill and Hillary Clintons of course. Obamas wife commented on
them in fact....

Gunner

What's the conservative's line on Obama's wife? I take it, then, she's
considered an unimpeachable authority?

Is she any better than the liars who were on Richard Scaife's payroll, the
ones from whom you believe everything bad said about the Clintons? What's
the going rate for cooking up an anti-Clinton lie these days? Have you been
offered any money in that regard?

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 23:11:54 -0700, Gunner
wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:00:03 -0500, Bill wrote:
Gunner wrote in
m:

snip
Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Well, I figured if you're gonna go starkers around the neighborhood then
you might want to do it whole hog.

Maybe a long welding bib style tie up would help.

Oh and don't forget the work boots.....

Ow, I just hurt my brain with that image......

Carrhart thong and lumberjack boots?

"I'm a Lumberjack and I'm OK
I sleep all night and I work all day.
I cut down trees, I wear high heels, Suspendies and a bra.
I wish I'd been a girly, Just like my dear Papa..."

(This part of the thread is already heading straight into the
gutter, I might as well give it a good hard push.)

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 23:11:54 -0700, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:00:03 -0500, Bill wrote:

Gunner wrote in
m:

snip
Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Well, I figured if you're gonna go starkers around the neighborhood then
you might want to do it whole hog.

Maybe a long welding bib style tie up would help.

Oh and don't forget the work boots.....

Ow, I just hurt my brain with that image......

Carrhart thong and lumberjack boots?

Eek! That made me pucker pucker, mate. Has this thread entered
Senator Craig's territory yet?

---
Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing.
This is the ultimate.
--Chuang-tzu (369 BC - 286 BC)

On Aug 31, 2:00 pm, Bill wrote:
Gunner wrote :

snip

Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill

Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Gunner

Well, I figured if you're gonna go starkers around the neighborhood then
you might want to do it whole hog.

Maybe a long welding bib style tie up would help.

Oh and don't forget the work boots.....

Ow, I just hurt my brain with that image......

Bill

Of course it would have to be all leather...black leather...with some
chains to accessorize...wait a minute....Gunner in leather and
chains....haven't we seen this movie somewhere?

TMT

On Aug 31, 2:02 pm, Bill wrote:
Fred the Red Shirt wrote groups.com:
snip

Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places
you REALLY don't want burned.......

...

http://groups.google.com/groups/sear...ng&qt_s=Search

--

FF

I like the thread marked, Things not to do while naked, number 3 is Bath
the cat.

Bill

Number two not to do while naked is drinking beer with a cat....they
always want the last can....darn animals.

TMT

On Sep 1, 7:01 am, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 23:11:54 -0700, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:





On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:00:03 -0500, Bill wrote:

Gunner wrote in
m:

snip
Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Well, I figured if you're gonna go starkers around the neighborhood then
you might want to do it whole hog.

Maybe a long welding bib style tie up would help.

Oh and don't forget the work boots.....

Ow, I just hurt my brain with that image......

Carrhart thong and lumberjack boots?

Eek! That made me pucker pucker, mate. Has this thread entered
Senator Craig's territory yet?

---
Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing.
This is the ultimate.
--Chuang-tzu (369 BC - 286 BC)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Can you imagine the problem dealing with silvers?

TTM

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 01:26:38 -0700, Bruce L. Bergman
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 23:11:54 -0700, Gunner
wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:00:03 -0500, Bill wrote:
Gunner wrote in
:

snip
Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Well, I figured if you're gonna go starkers around the neighborhood then
you might want to do it whole hog.

Maybe a long welding bib style tie up would help.

Oh and don't forget the work boots.....

Ow, I just hurt my brain with that image......

Carrhart thong and lumberjack boots?

"I'm a Lumberjack and I'm OK
I sleep all night and I work all day.
I cut down trees, I wear high heels, Suspendies and a bra.
I wish I'd been a girly, Just like my dear Papa..."

(This part of the thread is already heading straight into the
gutter, I might as well give it a good hard push.)


The spritz can filled with Astroglide was a nice touch...

G

Gunner

On Sat, 1 Sep 2007 03:22:24 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:57:02 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
news
So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?

Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.

Unless..you are against family values?

Whose family? Larry Craig's?


Oh..Bill and Hillary Clintons of course. Obamas wife commented on
them in fact....

Gunner

What's the conservative's line on Obama's wife? I take it, then, she's
considered an unimpeachable authority?

Take it up with her.

Is she any better than the liars who were on Richard Scaife's payroll, the
ones from whom you believe everything bad said about the Clintons? What's
the going rate for cooking up an anti-Clinton lie these days? Have you been
offered any money in that regard?

Why would I be? Far too many already in the Democratic Party are
willing/wanting to see the Hildabeast go down in flames.

Magazines are bidding on pictures of her going down......

Gunner

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Sep 2007 03:22:24 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:57:02 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
news
So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?

Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.

Unless..you are against family values?

Whose family? Larry Craig's?


Oh..Bill and Hillary Clintons of course. Obamas wife commented on
them in fact....

Gunner

What's the conservative's line on Obama's wife? I take it, then, she's
considered an unimpeachable authority?

Take it up with her.

Is she any better than the liars who were on Richard Scaife's payroll, the
ones from whom you believe everything bad said about the Clintons? What's
the going rate for cooking up an anti-Clinton lie these days? Have you
been
offered any money in that regard?

Why would I be?

You never know, they may have a micro-investment strategy going on. d8-)

Far too many already in the Democratic Party are
willing/wanting to see the Hildabeast go down in flames.

Magazines are bidding on pictures of her going down......

That's the magazine business. The price probably is right up there with
photos of Britney's vagina.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sep 1, 6:14 am, Gunner wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:41:06 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt

wrote:

Sucks to have that happen to you so much, doesnt it?

I've gotten quite used to people referring to webpages that don't
support what they have to say. That is why I often go to the
trouble to actually read what is cited.

So you are claiming that Hillary isnt running on or has run on a
platform of "family values"?

So, are you denying that you suggested one could go to that
page to read her own words?

Of course I didnt suggest that. Seems your Bushophobia is rather
tragicly progressed well into the terminal stage.

In you wrote:

Why not ask the **** herself?

If, by "the **** herself" you meant Hillary Clinton then there is
a cognitive disconnect between your question and your proffered
answers as the webpages do not contain any statements from
HERSELF.
.....


Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.

I strongly suggest you take a class in remedial writing.

Why? Because I called you a buffoon?


If you would like to try a different line of work for the next
17 months or so there is an opening for USAG. It looks
like you would fit right in.

--

FF

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 07:46:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Aug 31, 2:00 pm, Bill wrote:
Gunner wrote :

snip

Ouch, imagine pouring cast iron nude, infrared heat burns in places you
REALLY don't want burned.......

Bill

Bill...optional means optional..not mandatory nekked.

Gunner

Well, I figured if you're gonna go starkers around the neighborhood then
you might want to do it whole hog.

Maybe a long welding bib style tie up would help.

Oh and don't forget the work boots.....

Ow, I just hurt my brain with that image......

Bill

Of course it would have to be all leather...black leather...with some
chains to accessorize...wait a minute....Gunner in leather and
chains....haven't we seen this movie somewhere?

TMT

OTOH...
I know what you're thinking. "Did he part off six parts or only five?" Well,
to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But
being as this is an HLV-H, the most powerful watchmakers lathe in the world,
and would tear your arm clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question: Do I
feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?


G


Mark Rand
RTFM

On Aug 31, 10:59 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in glegroups.com...



On Aug 31, 12:18 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in
oglegroups.com...

On Aug 30, 9:12 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
HOAs are intended for 'Politically Correct' morons, of course.

Wrong. They are for people who DON'T want to associate with
anyone who don't live up to their expectations of what their neighbors
should be like.

Politically correct morons love to associate with people they think
of as inferior--it makes them feel superior.

That's some weird stuff, Fred. Is it the result of some bad experience or
something?

I still don't understand your puzzlement here.


BTW, here in the liberal NYC suburbs, HOAs are pretty rare. There aren't
any
around me. What's happened to the freewheeling, libertarian West?

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...msg/8960538721...

I think PeteC hit the nail on the head:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...msg/8960538721...

The object of an HOA is to suppress diversity. Not necessarily
the superficial kinds like ethnic diversity, but real diversity.

Those postings, in light of what you said above, is why I said this is
"weird stuff." What PeteC is saying is that people associate in "enclaves"
of the like-minded. What you said above is that "PC morons associate with
people they think of as inferior."

These two statements are exact opposites.

Yes. Different people can and do behave in exactly opposite ways.
That is one thing that potentially makes them different in the first
place.
Sometimes different people do the same thing for different reasons or
different things for the same reasons.

Now you say PeteC "hit the nail on
the head." But the nail he hit was the opposite of the nail you aimed at.

Is that something you care to explain, or shall we just chalk it up to
general enthusiasm for any kind of bitterness and antagonism toward people
who aren't part of your...enclave?


Among people commonly identified as 'liberals' we have the
so-called limousine liberals, many of whom would probably
go for a gated community with an HOA.

The political demographic one supposes to be least likely to
go for an HOA would be self-identified as "Libertarian.".

--

FF

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Aug 31, 10:59 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in
glegroups.com...



On Aug 31, 12:18 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in
oglegroups.com...

On Aug 30, 9:12 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"

wrote:
HOAs are intended for 'Politically Correct' morons, of course.

Wrong. They are for people who DON'T want to associate with
anyone who don't live up to their expectations of what their
neighbors
should be like.

Politically correct morons love to associate with people they think
of as inferior--it makes them feel superior.

That's some weird stuff, Fred. Is it the result of some bad experience
or
something?

I still don't understand your puzzlement here.


BTW, here in the liberal NYC suburbs, HOAs are pretty rare. There
aren't
any
around me. What's happened to the freewheeling, libertarian West?

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...msg/8960538721...

I think PeteC hit the nail on the head:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...msg/8960538721...

The object of an HOA is to suppress diversity. Not necessarily
the superficial kinds like ethnic diversity, but real diversity.

Those postings, in light of what you said above, is why I said this is
"weird stuff." What PeteC is saying is that people associate in
"enclaves"
of the like-minded. What you said above is that "PC morons associate with
people they think of as inferior."

These two statements are exact opposites.

Yes. Different people can and do behave in exactly opposite ways.
That is one thing that potentially makes them different in the first
place.
Sometimes different people do the same thing for different reasons or
different things for the same reasons.

Now you say PeteC "hit the nail on
the head." But the nail he hit was the opposite of the nail you aimed at.

Is that something you care to explain, or shall we just chalk it up to
general enthusiasm for any kind of bitterness and antagonism toward
people
who aren't part of your...enclave?


Among people commonly identified as 'liberals' we have the
so-called limousine liberals, many of whom would probably
go for a gated community with an HOA.

The gated communities are populated with well-off people who want to keep
the rest of the world out. Most of the gated communities around here are
full of very, very conservative folks who want nothing to do with anyone who
could be called "liberal."


The political demographic one supposes to be least likely to
go for an HOA would be self-identified as "Libertarian.".

Probably. Very few conservatives are libertarian. Most -- the ones the
libertarians call "paleoconservatives," who make up the large majority of
the conservatives in the US -- want everyone else to conform to a very
narrow set of "family values," religious belief, marriage and other
behaviors. They are the opposite of "libertarian."

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 10:04:22 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote:


Of course I didnt suggest that. Seems your Bushophobia is rather
tragicly progressed well into the terminal stage.

In you wrote:

Why not ask the **** herself?

If, by "the **** herself" you meant Hillary Clinton then there is
a cognitive disconnect between your question and your proffered
answers as the webpages do not contain any statements from
HERSELF.

Neither do most court indictments. Yet they are still very real.
....


Btw..strongly suggest you take a class in remedial reading
comprehension.

I strongly suggest you take a class in remedial writing.

Why? Because I called you a buffoon?


If you would like to try a different line of work for the next
17 months or so there is an opening for USAG. It looks
like you would fit right in.

--

FF

Fat Freddy the Buffoonish is still blithering.

Shrug

Gunner

On Sun, 2 Sep 2007 19:45:46 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Probably. Very few conservatives are libertarian. Most -- the ones the
libertarians call "paleoconservatives," who make up the large majority of
the conservatives in the US -- want everyone else to conform to a very
narrow set of "family values," religious belief, marriage and other
behaviors. They are the opposite of "libertarian."

--
Ed Huntress


But are nearly identical to Liberals, except in the details of their
agendas.

Gunner

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007 19:45:46 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Probably. Very few conservatives are libertarian. Most -- the ones the
libertarians call "paleoconservatives," who make up the large majority of
the conservatives in the US -- want everyone else to conform to a very
narrow set of "family values," religious belief, marriage and other
behaviors. They are the opposite of "libertarian."

--
Ed Huntress


But are nearly identical to Liberals, except in the details of their
agendas.

'Depends on the flavor of liberals you're talking about. The center of
liberalism as we know it in the US is not really conformist. The hard left
wing, however, is.

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 3 Sep 2007 02:26:46 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007 19:45:46 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Probably. Very few conservatives are libertarian. Most -- the ones the
libertarians call "paleoconservatives," who make up the large majority of
the conservatives in the US -- want everyone else to conform to a very
narrow set of "family values," religious belief, marriage and other
behaviors. They are the opposite of "libertarian."

--
Ed Huntress


But are nearly identical to Liberals, except in the details of their
agendas.

'Depends on the flavor of liberals you're talking about. The center of
liberalism as we know it in the US is not really conformist. The hard left
wing, however, is.

ah! ...like "conservatives", there are all flavors.

Gunner

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 3 Sep 2007 02:26:46 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007 19:45:46 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Probably. Very few conservatives are libertarian. Most -- the ones the
libertarians call "paleoconservatives," who make up the large majority
of
the conservatives in the US -- want everyone else to conform to a very
narrow set of "family values," religious belief, marriage and other
behaviors. They are the opposite of "libertarian."

--
Ed Huntress


But are nearly identical to Liberals, except in the details of their
agendas.

'Depends on the flavor of liberals you're talking about. The center of
liberalism as we know it in the US is not really conformist. The hard left
wing, however, is.

ah! ...like "conservatives", there are all flavors.

Very much so. You can't even put either of them on linear scales. The
variety is all over the place, and the end positions for each tend to be
outright contradictory.

--
Ed Huntress