http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...J69G_blog.html

SCHIEFFER: Well, I mean, it's very odd to me that someone would run up
a half-million-dollar bill at a jewelry store.

GINGRICH: Well, go talk to Tiffany's. All I'm telling you is we are
very frugal. We, in fact, live within our budget. We owe nothing.

Yep, this kind of stuff and all the wives make Newt an unlikely front
runner. The 'publicans had best get their **** together and soon. its
going totake a strong candidate if we don't want four more years of
Obamanomics.

Karl

On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:14:21 -0500, Karl Townsend
wrote:

Yep, this kind of stuff and all the wives make Newt an unlikely front
runner. The 'publicans had best get their **** together and soon. its
going totake a strong candidate if we don't want four more years of
Obamanomics.

Karl
================
You might find the following oped piece of interest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/2011052...iloftwolessers


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)
...............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).

On 2011-05-24, Karl Townsend wrote:
Yep, this kind of stuff and all the wives make Newt an unlikely front
runner. The 'publicans had best get their **** together and soon. its
going totake a strong candidate if we don't want four more years of
Obamanomics.

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

I do mean this quite seriously.

A long time ago, I actually admired Newt.

i

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-24, Karl Townsend wrote:
Yep, this kind of stuff and all the wives make Newt an unlikely front
runner. The 'publicans had best get their **** together and soon. its
going totake a strong candidate if we don't want four more years of
Obamanomics.

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

I do mean this quite seriously.

A long time ago, I actually admired Newt.

i

I:
My filters prevented seeing transactions under the
title of your former thread but I am sure you pointed
out one of the first Soviet announcements after Sputnik
traveled to orbit was that it failed to find heaven. So,
I look foward to your report if you keep the h word
out of it.

On Newt, he's running for Newt, without any chance
of winning, with every chance of adding to what
passes for fame in this country and vast improvement
in his speaking fees. When the news reported that
he divorced his first wife when in the hospital with
cancer and his second shortly after a diagnosis of
MS, that was enough to form a picture.

Regards,

Edward Hennessey

F. George McDuffee wrote:
You might find the following oped piece of interest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/2011052...iloftwolessers


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)

UN-FORTUNATELY you are right on the nose with that.
:-(
...lew...

On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:42:50 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-24, Karl Townsend wrote:
Yep, this kind of stuff and all the wives make Newt an unlikely front
runner. The 'publicans had best get their **** together and soon. its
going totake a strong candidate if we don't want four more years of
Obamanomics.

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

I do mean this quite seriously.

One of those would be good in the Democratic party, too.


A long time ago, I actually admired Newt.

Ditto.

--
Doubt 'til thou canst doubt no more...doubt is thought and thought
is life. Systems which end doubt are devices for drugging thought.
-- Albert Guerard

On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:24:41 -0600, Lewis Hartswick
wrote:

F. George McDuffee wrote:
You might find the following oped piece of interest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/2011052...iloftwolessers


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)

UN-FORTUNATELY you are right on the nose with that.
:-(

Which part of that? He made some good points but he's far too
radical. Read the sample pages of his book, _The Anti-American
Manifesto_ on Amazon. It'll cure you of him in short order.

I'm afraid he's right about a revolution being the only way things
will change here to any extent, and I'm amazed that it hasn't begun
yet for one of many dozens of reasons.

--
Doubt 'til thou canst doubt no more...doubt is thought and thought
is life. Systems which end doubt are devices for drugging thought.
-- Albert Guerard

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in
message ...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:14:21 -0500, Karl Townsend
wrote:

Yep, this kind of stuff and all the wives make Newt an unlikely
front
runner. The 'publicans had best get their **** together and soon.
its
going totake a strong candidate if we don't want four more years of
Obamanomics.

Karl
================
You might find the following oped piece of interest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/2011052...iloftwolessers


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)

"Colossus-The Forbin Project" was always one of my favorite movies.
It's about a computer that takes over all major governments in the
world and institutes forced peaceful prosperity with humans impotently
kicking and screaming all the way. We need better computer AIs!

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news

One of those would be good in the Democratic party, too.



I saw that discrepancy too but a lot of liberals' are "olfactory
challenged".

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.



Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

i

On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.



Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

i
================

Another Rall oped that should be of interest.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/2011051...oftheobamabots


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)
...............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).

On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:55:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:24:41 -0600, Lewis Hartswick
wrote:

F. George McDuffee wrote:
You might find the following oped piece of interest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/2011052...iloftwolessers


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)

UN-FORTUNATELY you are right on the nose with that.
:-(

Which part of that? He made some good points but he's far too
radical. Read the sample pages of his book, _The Anti-American
Manifesto_ on Amazon. It'll cure you of him in short order.

I'm afraid he's right about a revolution being the only way things
will change here to any extent, and I'm amazed that it hasn't begun
yet for one of many dozens of reasons.
===========

When you're right, you're right, even when you are [far]
left...


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)
...............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).

On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the stability, but I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't EVER be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone 30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list to get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do your own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come to the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4 coming
up.)

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in
message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would
be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the stability, but
I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty
part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the
housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't EVER be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone 30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list to
get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do your
own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come to
the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4 coming
up.)


When you're in love, the object of your affection can do no wrong.
It's not a rational state of mind to be in. It's like when my dad
suggested I stop dating girls with tattoos and drug issues and I was
blinded to the unhealthy aspects of those relationships by
infatuation. Later, I was shocked to find out he was right!
Sometimes you have to pee on the electric fence yourself, you won't
believe external wisdom.

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.

"Tom Gardner" w@w wrote in message
...

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the stability, but I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't EVER be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone 30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list to get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do your own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come to the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4 coming
up.)


When you're in love, the object of your affection can do no wrong. It's
not a rational state of mind to be in. It's like when my dad suggested I
stop dating girls with tattoos and drug issues and I was blinded to the
unhealthy aspects of those relationships by infatuation. Later, I was
shocked to find out he was right! Sometimes you have to pee on the
electric fence yourself, you won't believe external wisdom.

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics means
he will eventually find some indisputable information that will make him
rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the whole house
of cards.

I've listened to Iggy's views on the subject for years, and I get no feeling
that he's irrational about it. In fact, he's probably the most rational one
here when it comes to politics.

One irony of the righties who complain about his follow-through is that he
hasn't been nearly as liberal about his campaign promises as many expected.
He's gravitated more toward the center.

Of course, the people who complain about his economic policies are mostly
clueless malcontents who can't offer a sensible alternative to save their
lives. Like Paul Ryan, whose idea is that the solution for Medicare costs is
to let old people fend for themselves or die.

Our of curiosity, which of the characters who ran against Obama would you
have preferred to see in office? In the end, for a rational person, it comes
down to making the best selection from the field you have.

--
Ed Huntress

On 5/24/2011 2:42 PM, Ignoramus1699 wrote:
On 2011-05-24, Karl wrote:
Yep, this kind of stuff and all the wives make Newt an unlikely front
runner. The 'publicans had best get their **** together and soon. its
going totake a strong candidate if we don't want four more years of
Obamanomics.

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

I do mean this quite seriously.

A long time ago, I actually admired Newt.

i


Newt is a good example of what is wrong with republicans. What you see
is not what you get. Or more like, what they tell you is not true.
Here's Newt trying to portray himself as just one of us. He's not. He's
a spoiled, rich, elite, pretending to be a regular guy. He's far more at
home with the rich and the business community than he is with anyone
with a normal job.

His spending at Tiffany's is just one example of his opulent lifestyle.
The other day I heard that his expenses for airline travel for the year
amounted to 3 million dollars. In comparison Mitt Romney spent something
like 350,000. So here's Newt spending a half a million at Tiffany's and
three million on air travel. But Newt says he and his wife are frugal.

That's the problem with all the republicans. They want to portray
themselves as representing average Americans when in reality their
policies are harmful to ordinary people. Policies like getting rid of
Medicare and substituting a voucher to buy insurance with. That isn't
going to help granny. It will help the insurance company. So will the
subsidies to oil companies they just kept in place, and so will the
watered down regulations on Wall Street they forced on us.

The problem is that the hypocrisy Newt demonstrates goes with the entire
republican party. They pretend to be on your side while at the same time
they are stabbing you in the back. You know, like when Newt was having
an affair while savaging Clinton for fooling around with Monica
Lewinsky. How anyone can follow people like this is really amazing.

Hawke

On 5/24/2011 4:46 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

I do mean this quite seriously.

One of those would be good in the Democratic party, too.

Your problem is that there are people like that in the Democratic party
but you're simply incapable or recognizing them even when they are right
in front of you.



A long time ago, I actually admired Newt.

Ditto.

All this demonstrates is how lousy you are at judging someone's
character. I'm sure you admire plenty of other republicans who are
exactly the same as Gingrich.

Hawke

On 5/24/2011 6:42 PM, Ignoramus1699 wrote:
On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardnerw@w wrote:

lid wrote in message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.



Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

i


That's what's wrong with the right wingers. They don't recognize quality
in anyone that's not in their party. They think douche bag republicans
like Newt have character but can't see anything positive in Obama.

How can you reason with people like that? It's impossible.

Hawke

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.


Iggy is one of the few rational democrats on this NG. I too was a
democrat until the gov'ment took too much of my hard earned money. I
even voted for McGovern instead of tricky Dick. But only cause I
thought he was a crook.

Karl

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in
message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would
be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the stability, but
I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty
part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the
housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't EVER be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone 30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list to
get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do your
own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come to
the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4 coming
up.)


When you're in love, the object of your affection can do no wrong.
It's not a rational state of mind to be in. It's like when my dad
suggested I stop dating girls with tattoos and drug issues and I was
blinded to the unhealthy aspects of those relationships by
infatuation. Later, I was shocked to find out he was right!
Sometimes you have to pee on the electric fence yourself, you won't
believe external wisdom.

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.



Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

i

On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.

Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.

Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

i

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on
that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that
will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then
the
whole house of cards.

Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does
not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will
easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and
counterfeit
chain emails.

Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?

--

Ahhh, the magic question! Myself, I assume all news sources have an
axe to grind therefore one must read the same story from at least two
or three sources. I do recognize the fact that the MSM will only take
you down one carefully prepared road. I implied that Ig didn't get
the whole story, maybe he does and rejects different things than I
reject. Obama is no mystery, he's said from the get-go where he
stands and what he's going to do. He's perfectly honest and energy
prices HAVE skyrocketed, just like he said they must to further his
agenda. He said that wealth redistribution was his goal and he's
following through. He said he would stand with the Muslims, just ask
Israel. He told the unions that "WE" are going to the White House.

I don't hate or even dislike Obama but I disagree his fringe liberal
agenda. His handling of economic issues are reprehensible. I'm not
alone! Only 29% feel that Obama's on the right track. Now you know
that includes an awful lot of people that voted for him now disagree
with his agenda and methods. So, why do the 71% of citizens feel that
Obama's wrong? What do the 29% see that the 71% don't? What news is
the 29% rejecting that the 71% are not? These numbers aren't
Republican vs. Democrat, to hang on to Obama's agenda shows a certain
stubbornness that transcends logic for somebody that isn't a member of
the fringe left. But, if you are on the fringe left, relish this
administration, they are a dream come true! Just look at the usual
fringe left suspects here.

I used to be very liberal and in many ways I still am but the only
label that I'll wear is "Capitalist". The world has proven that
Socialism and Marxism and Communism never works. So, why do people
keep trying? Republicans suck in general but Democrats suck a bit
more. It's what we're stuck with. Can anybody say that this country
isn't in serious trouble? And both the R's and the D's are culpable
and enrich themselves at the expense of the future of the country and
the world.

Ignoramus23924 wrote:
Oh!
So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.
Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

i

I just found out there is no easy way to get a text listing of my bookmarks.

There were 24 news sources in there- 4 of them are local sources like
the Hondo Herald (my folks live there)
So 20 are the major league guys.

4 of those are overseas.

They include ABC,CBS, MSNBC, Fox, Dig, Economist, Scientific American, Voice of
America (my uncle), Chicago Sun Times, New Your Times, Washington Post and Wired
- just to name a few domestic ones.


Read one source, you get one read on things...





--

Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~sv_temptress

On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:02:42 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.

Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

With the exception of Google, you're leaning a bit left there. The
Post was nicknamed the "Pravda on the Potomac." You might try a
subscription to the Washington Times for a bit of balance; y'know, see
what and how the other half thinks and get some added perspective.

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:02:42 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.

Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

With the exception of Google, you're leaning a bit left there. The
Post was nicknamed the "Pravda on the Potomac." You might try a
subscription to the Washington Times for a bit of balance; y'know, see
what and how the other half thinks and get some added perspective.


Larry, you are stuck in this "right wing", "left wing" mentality,
instead of looking at the substance of things. This mentality is not
unusual, but it is not helpful.

I suggest reconsidering the way you read news, staying generally away
from any editorials and opinions, of any kind, and reading more facts
instead, to make your own conclusions.

Then think about what exactly is the implication of

1) Buying so much jewelry from Tiffany as to incur a revolving loan of
500,000 USD

and

2) Accepting an unusually advantageous loan terms that Tiffany is not
offering to the general public, amounting to an advantage of $100,000
per year based on the 500k balance.

and

3) While at the same time being in a position to influence legislation
that affects Tiffany's.

Approximately 15 years ago I admired Newt Gingrich, but many nasty
facts came to my attention since then.

i

On 2011-05-26, CaveLamb wrote:
Ignoramus23924 wrote:
Oh!
So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.
Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

i

I just found out there is no easy way to get a text listing of my bookmarks.

There were 24 news sources in there- 4 of them are local sources like
the Hondo Herald (my folks live there)
So 20 are the major league guys.

4 of those are overseas.

They include ABC,CBS, MSNBC, Fox, Dig, Economist, Scientific American, Voice of
America (my uncle), Chicago Sun Times, New Your Times, Washington Post and Wired
- just to name a few domestic ones.


Read one source, you get one read on things...

Great list. Try Google news, it is really great, you can define your
own categories.

i

On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:00:15 -0500, Ignoramus31410
wrote:

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:02:42 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.

Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

With the exception of Google, you're leaning a bit left there. The
Post was nicknamed the "Pravda on the Potomac." You might try a
subscription to the Washington Times for a bit of balance; y'know, see
what and how the other half thinks and get some added perspective.


Larry, you are stuck in this "right wing", "left wing" mentality,
instead of looking at the substance of things. This mentality is not
unusual, but it is not helpful.

I suggest reconsidering the way you read news, staying generally away
from any editorials and opinions, of any kind, and reading more facts
instead, to make your own conclusions.

Then think about what exactly is the implication of

1) Buying so much jewelry from Tiffany as to incur a revolving loan of
500,000 USD

and

2) Accepting an unusually advantageous loan terms that Tiffany is not
offering to the general public, amounting to an advantage of $100,000
per year based on the 500k balance.

and

3) While at the same time being in a position to influence legislation
that affects Tiffany's.

Approximately 15 years ago I admired Newt Gingrich, but many nasty
facts came to my attention since then.

i

That shows greed, a very common affliction of nearly all pols. Now
divorcing wives when they become seriously ill shows heartless; a
truly terrible weakness.

Karl

On 2011-05-26, Karl Townsend wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:00:15 -0500, Ignoramus31410
wrote:

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:02:42 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.

Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

With the exception of Google, you're leaning a bit left there. The
Post was nicknamed the "Pravda on the Potomac." You might try a
subscription to the Washington Times for a bit of balance; y'know, see
what and how the other half thinks and get some added perspective.


Larry, you are stuck in this "right wing", "left wing" mentality,
instead of looking at the substance of things. This mentality is not
unusual, but it is not helpful.

I suggest reconsidering the way you read news, staying generally away
from any editorials and opinions, of any kind, and reading more facts
instead, to make your own conclusions.

Then think about what exactly is the implication of

1) Buying so much jewelry from Tiffany as to incur a revolving loan of
500,000 USD

and

2) Accepting an unusually advantageous loan terms that Tiffany is not
offering to the general public, amounting to an advantage of $100,000
per year based on the 500k balance.

and

3) While at the same time being in a position to influence legislation
that affects Tiffany's.

Approximately 15 years ago I admired Newt Gingrich, but many nasty
facts came to my attention since then.

i

That shows greed, a very common affliction of nearly all pols. Now
divorcing wives when they become seriously ill shows heartless; a
truly terrible weakness.


Yep, very sad.

i

On 5/26/2011 7:00 AM, Ignoramus31410 wrote:


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

With the exception of Google, you're leaning a bit left there. The
Post was nicknamed the "Pravda on the Potomac." You might try a
subscription to the Washington Times for a bit of balance; y'know, see
what and how the other half thinks and get some added perspective.


Larry, you are stuck in this "right wing", "left wing" mentality,
instead of looking at the substance of things. This mentality is not
unusual, but it is not helpful.

I suggest reconsidering the way you read news, staying generally away
from any editorials and opinions, of any kind, and reading more facts
instead, to make your own conclusions.

Good point, there. It's not really where you get the news that matters.
After all, news is news, and opinion isn't. Didn't matter which channel
you were on when they were reporting on the tornado story, did it? Most
of what is on the news is straight reporting of every day events.

But then you have the sources that are pushing an agenda, and they are
different in that some are pushing really hard, and some hardly at all.
Fox is pushing the conservative agenda harder than anyone else, so you
can use them as a measuring stick to compare other outlets.

So it's really a matter of what you hear and what you tune out. It's
really all about your personal filter. People who only watch Fox only
allow right wing information into their heads. Anything that says Obama
is doing a good job they simply ignore. That's what it boils down to,
whether your mind is open or not. Most people have closed minds. That's
why they go to the same place for all their information. They know
exactly what they are going to get and they don't want to hear different
views. It ****es them off. In other words, it's not the station that
matters, it's the person that does.






Then think about what exactly is the implication of

1) Buying so much jewelry from Tiffany as to incur a revolving loan of
500,000 USD

and

2) Accepting an unusually advantageous loan terms that Tiffany is not
offering to the general public, amounting to an advantage of $100,000
per year based on the 500k balance.

What's worse in my view is the hypocrisy of the man. Here he sits and
claims that he's frugal. Then you find he's buying half a million
dollars worth of trinkets and baubles from Tiffany's. I'd hardly call
that being frugal.

I'd like to see how much he contributed to charity too. I'll bet it's
pitiful. Funny how we all heard how cheap Gore and Obama were in their
charitable contributions. But not a peep from anyone about the right
wingers. Does anyone spend more on themselves and less on charity than
people on the right? I doubt it.





and

3) While at the same time being in a position to influence legislation
that affects Tiffany's.

Approximately 15 years ago I admired Newt Gingrich, but many nasty
facts came to my attention since then.

That makes me wonder what was wrong with your judgment back then.
Gingrich has not changed at all since he hit Washington. He's been out
for himself from day one. Seeing the real Newt should make you question
why you would ever see this guy as a good man. The evidence clearly
shows he's anything but. How could he fool you so easily? I knew he was
a liar the first time I heard him speak.

Hawke

On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:00:15 -0500, Ignoramus31410
wrote:

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:02:42 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-26, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.

Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

Besides hearing the hateful hissing of Republicans via the all DNC
hissing hatemail, what do you read? What are your sources for news?


I read Google News for news, mostly, and Drudge report. Also
Washington Post and New York Times. I have a few categories
pre-selected under google news.

With the exception of Google, you're leaning a bit left there. The
Post was nicknamed the "Pravda on the Potomac." You might try a
subscription to the Washington Times for a bit of balance; y'know, see
what and how the other half thinks and get some added perspective.


Larry, you are stuck in this "right wing", "left wing" mentality,
instead of looking at the substance of things. This mentality is not
unusual, but it is not helpful.

Well, if someone sees something as white and another sees it as black,
asking each party to look at the information from the others'
perspective is a good thing, IMHO. It helps you to see the reality
and brush away the spin from either side.


I suggest reconsidering the way you read news, staying generally away
from any editorials and opinions, of any kind, and reading more facts
instead, to make your own conclusions.

I offer the same suggestion to you.


Then think about what exactly is the implication of

1) Buying so much jewelry from Tiffany as to incur a revolving loan of
500,000 USD

Dubious, indeed.


and

2) Accepting an unusually advantageous loan terms that Tiffany is not
offering to the general public, amounting to an advantage of $100,000
per year based on the 500k balance.

Ah, but it -is- available to the highrollers from all walks of life.
Did you read the reply from Tiffany? key phrase "Time Zero Accounts"
and there are many of them, not just Newt's.

If anyone buys a metric ****load of anything from a company, the
company usually gives them all the associated freebies. Vegas comps
their highrollers with free $5,000/night suites.


and

3) While at the same time being in a position to influence legislation
that affects Tiffany's.

What legislation is coming out which changed jewelery regs, Ig?


Approximately 15 years ago I admired Newt Gingrich, but many nasty
facts came to my attention since then.

Ditto. I wouldn't vote for him today, but I'm proud of what he has
done in the past. He's far too humanly frail in the present. And as a
CONgresscritter, I don't trust him (along with the other 554)

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:30:01 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:14:21 -0500, Karl Townsend
wrote:

Yep, this kind of stuff and all the wives make Newt an unlikely front
runner. The 'publicans had best get their **** together and soon. its
going totake a strong candidate if we don't want four more years of
Obamanomics.

Karl
================
You might find the following oped piece of interest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/2011052...iloftwolessers


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)

Excellent article

Which is why we have had some good Presidents..and a raft of poor ones.

Reagan, versus Carter for example...for those of you who remember the
times and the candidates

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in
message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person would
be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the stability, but
I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty
part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the
housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't EVER be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone 30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list to
get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do your
own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come to
the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4 coming
up.)


When you're in love, the object of your affection can do no wrong.
It's not a rational state of mind to be in. It's like when my dad
suggested I stop dating girls with tattoos and drug issues and I was
blinded to the unhealthy aspects of those relationships by
infatuation. Later, I was shocked to find out he was right!
Sometimes you have to pee on the electric fence yourself, you won't
believe external wisdom.

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then the
whole house of cards.



Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and counterfeit
chain emails.

i

And you guys were bragging bout Iggys openmindedness....chortle...

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in
message
...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in
message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person
would
be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking
too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the stability,
but
I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty
part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the
housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't EVER
be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone 30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first
campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list
to
get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do your
own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come
to
the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw
him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4
coming
up.)


When you're in love, the object of your affection can do no wrong.
It's not a rational state of mind to be in. It's like when my dad
suggested I stop dating girls with tattoos and drug issues and I
was
blinded to the unhealthy aspects of those relationships by
infatuation. Later, I was shocked to find out he was right!
Sometimes you have to pee on the electric fence yourself, you
won't
believe external wisdom.

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on
that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that
will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then
the
whole house of cards.



Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does
not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will
easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and
counterfeit
chain emails.

i

And you guys were bragging bout Iggys openmindedness....chortle...

Gunner

Why is anybody that disagrees with the fringe left agenda a "Hissing,
Hateful Republican"? It seems to me that anyone that disagrees with
the fringe-left agenda is simply "Not Mathematically Impaired". Maybe
I missed some math classes while earning my ME degree, it WAS a long
time ago...has math changed that much?

On 2011-05-28, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in
message
...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in
message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person
would
be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking
too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the stability,
but
I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty
part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the
housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't EVER
be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone 30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first
campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list
to
get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do your
own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come
to
the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw
him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4
coming
up.)


When you're in love, the object of your affection can do no wrong.
It's not a rational state of mind to be in. It's like when my dad
suggested I stop dating girls with tattoos and drug issues and I
was
blinded to the unhealthy aspects of those relationships by
infatuation. Later, I was shocked to find out he was right!
Sometimes you have to pee on the electric fence yourself, you
won't
believe external wisdom.

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on
that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that
will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then
the
whole house of cards.



Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does
not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will
easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and
counterfeit
chain emails.

i

And you guys were bragging bout Iggys openmindedness....chortle...

Gunner, 50% of the "hissing" and 80% of falsified chain emails that I
referred to, came from you personally. So, I find your comment above to
be slightly amusing.


Why is anybody that disagrees with the fringe left agenda a "Hissing,
Hateful Republican"? It seems to me that anyone that disagrees with
the fringe-left agenda is simply "Not Mathematically Impaired". Maybe
I missed some math classes while earning my ME degree, it WAS a long
time ago...has math changed that much?

I find notions such as "we will balance the budget by collecting less
taxes and starting more wars", to be somewhat mathematically challenged.

i

"Ignoramus21144" wrote in
message ...
On 2011-05-28, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in
message
...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardner w@w wrote:

"Ignoramus1699" wrote in
message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person
would
be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking
too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the
stability,
but
I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty
part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a
little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the
housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a
major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't
EVER
be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone
30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first
campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise
of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list
to
get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do
your
own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come
to
the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw
him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4
coming
up.)


When you're in love, the object of your affection can do no
wrong.
It's not a rational state of mind to be in. It's like when my
dad
suggested I stop dating girls with tattoos and drug issues and I
was
blinded to the unhealthy aspects of those relationships by
infatuation. Later, I was shocked to find out he was right!
Sometimes you have to pee on the electric fence yourself, you
won't
believe external wisdom.

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on
that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in
politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that
will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first
then
the
whole house of cards.



Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does
not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will
easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and
counterfeit
chain emails.

i

And you guys were bragging bout Iggys openmindedness....chortle...

Gunner, 50% of the "hissing" and 80% of falsified chain emails that
I
referred to, came from you personally. So, I find your comment above
to
be slightly amusing.


Why is anybody that disagrees with the fringe left agenda a
"Hissing,
Hateful Republican"? It seems to me that anyone that disagrees
with
the fringe-left agenda is simply "Not Mathematically Impaired".
Maybe
I missed some math classes while earning my ME degree, it WAS a
long
time ago...has math changed that much?

I find notions such as "we will balance the budget by collecting
less
taxes and starting more wars", to be somewhat mathematically
challenged.

i

Again, anybody that disagrees is a Republican...with or without
adjectives? Are the only opinions available and valid either Democrat
or Republican? Deflecting disagreements and justifying bad behavior
by citing other bad behavior is poor logic.

On Sat, 28 May 2011 15:59:47 -0500, Ignoramus21144
wrote:


And you guys were bragging bout Iggys openmindedness....chortle...

Gunner, 50% of the "hissing" and 80% of falsified chain emails that I
referred to, came from you personally. So, I find your comment above to
be slightly amusing.

Son..Ive never sent you an email. So why are you lying this way?

Its not normal for Americans to lie. Now I know you came from Russia
where lying IS normal..or was for 70 yrs..but Iggy...it doesnt do your
case any good to try to pull such a transparent and utterly lame stunt.

Ive just lost a fair amount of respect for you in those two sentences
you spit out.

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On 5/28/2011 1:59 PM, Ignoramus21144 wrote:
On 2011-05-28, Tom Gardnerw@w wrote:

"Gunner wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 May 2011 17:59:02 -0500, Ignoramus23924
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardnerw@w wrote:

"Larry wrote in
message
...
On Tue, 24 May 2011 20:42:20 -0500, Ignoramus1699
wrote:

On 2011-05-25, Tom Gardnerw@w wrote:

lid wrote in
message
...

Agreed. An honest, mentally stable and intelligent person
would
be a
hugely helpful addition to the Republican party.

How about one in the Democrat party? They are quite lacking
too.

Our current president is not lacking in the above qualities.

I'll give you the intelligence, and a possible on the stability,
but
I
recommend that you stop following the party line on the honesty
part.
Jesus, Ig, read something other than DNC propaganda. Try a little
research. Our sitting President was a major factor behind the
housing
crisis. The Democratic Black Caucus, including Obama, was a major
force behind Fannie Mae giving homes to people who couldn't EVER
be
considered stable enough to make a -second- payment, let alone 30
years worth of 'em. He doesn't own up to that, either.

What substantial promises has he fulfilled since first
campaigning?
Which have shown him to be a prevaricator, such as the promise of
transparency in the Whitehouse?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ here's a list
to
get
you started (likely not unbiased.)

Damnit, Ig. Read some of the things written about him and do your
own
research via known unbiased (hard to find) sources. You'll come
to
the
same conclusions I have: I'd trust him as far as I could throw
him
(and my spine is out of place at the moment. Chiro visit #4
coming
up.)


When you're in love, the object of your affection can do no wrong.
It's not a rational state of mind to be in. It's like when my dad
suggested I stop dating girls with tattoos and drug issues and I
was
blinded to the unhealthy aspects of those relationships by
infatuation. Later, I was shocked to find out he was right!
Sometimes you have to pee on the electric fence yourself, you
won't
believe external wisdom.

Nobody will convince Ig that Obama isn't a god, he has to pee on
that
fence for himself. But, the fact that he's interested in politics
means he will eventually find some indisputable information that
will
make him rethink his positions at least a little bit at first then
the
whole house of cards.



Actually, I changed my mind many times, based on facts that became
available. If I see anything that seriously proves that Obama does
not
have the personal integrity that he has (in my opinion), I will
easily
change my mind.

So far, what I hear, is hateful hissing of Republicans and
counterfeit
chain emails.

i

And you guys were bragging bout Iggys openmindedness....chortle...

Gunner, 50% of the "hissing" and 80% of falsified chain emails that I
referred to, came from you personally. So, I find your comment above to
be slightly amusing.


Why is anybody that disagrees with the fringe left agenda a "Hissing,
Hateful Republican"? It seems to me that anyone that disagrees with
the fringe-left agenda is simply "Not Mathematically Impaired". Maybe
I missed some math classes while earning my ME degree, it WAS a long
time ago...has math changed that much?

I find notions such as "we will balance the budget by collecting less
taxes and starting more wars", to be somewhat mathematically challenged.

i


You have to be a bird brain to believe them. Remember when they said
they would cut taxes and it would lead to prosperity? They're saying the
same stuff again. They're also saying that giving seniors "premium
support" is not going to eliminate Medicare as we know it?

When are people going to wise up and understand what the republicans are
trying to do? Didn't anyone notice what having Bush and the republicans
in charge of the country for two terms did to us? Only the insane would
want more of that.

Hawke