I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of someone who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine. No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living well off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor, paralegal and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.

On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of someone who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine. No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living well off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor, paralegal and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you knew.

Hawke

Hawke wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.
jk

On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of someone who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine. No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living well off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor, paralegal and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the biological
imperative. You're a dead end.

On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.

On 4/5/2012 12:17 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of someone who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine. No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living well
off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor, paralegal and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the biological
imperative. You're a dead end.



It's only so obvious you wish you could belong.

Gotcha!

On 4/5/2012 12:14 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:41 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you
knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.


If only that were true. You haven't a clue.

You were born to privilege - not in dispute.

On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:14 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:41 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you
knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.


If only that were true. You haven't a clue.

You were born to privilege - not in dispute.


That concept is so far from reality it's hilarious. I only wish that
were true. Poverty is more like it.

Hawke

On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:17 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of someone
who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine. No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living well
off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor, paralegal
and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the biological
imperative. You're a dead end.



It's only so obvious you wish you could belong.

Gotcha!


Ha!, if you were lion hunting you'd be the meal.

Hawke

On 4/5/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:14 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:41 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you
knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.


If only that were true. You haven't a clue.

You were born to privilege - not in dispute.


That concept is so far from reality it's hilarious. I only wish that
were true. Poverty is more like it.

Nice try. You're living off the dividends of inherited money.

On 4/5/2012 5:37 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:17 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of someone
who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine. No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living well
off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if
your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor, paralegal
and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the
Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the biological
imperative. You're a dead end.



It's only so obvious you wish you could belong.

Gotcha!


Ha!,

Heh heh heh...

On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:14 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:41 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you
knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book
that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.


If only that were true. You haven't a clue.

You were born to privilege - not in dispute.


That concept is so far from reality it's hilarious. I only wish that
were true. Poverty is more like it.

Nice try. You're living off the dividends of inherited money.


But I'm old now.

Hawke

On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:37 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:17 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has
written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of someone
who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the
right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine.
No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living well
off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if
your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor, paralegal
and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the
Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the biological
imperative. You're a dead end.



It's only so obvious you wish you could belong.

Gotcha!


Ha!,

Heh heh heh...

Funny is how bad you want to be a member of the elite class but can't
be. Do you knock Mitt Romney for being successful? How about his sons
who he's given millions to? Is that wrong or not? You seem to think it
is for me but not for people like the Romneys. Why the double standard?

Hawke

On 4/8/2012 1:29 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:14 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:41 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you
knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book
that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.


If only that were true. You haven't a clue.

You were born to privilege - not in dispute.


That concept is so far from reality it's hilarious. I only wish that
were true. Poverty is more like it.

Nice try. You're living off the dividends of inherited money.


But I'm old now.

So? You still grew up in privilege.

On 4/8/2012 1:31 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:37 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:17 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a
silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the
offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has
written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of someone
who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the
right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine.
No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living
well
off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if
your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor, paralegal
and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the
Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a
dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the biological
imperative. You're a dead end.



It's only so obvious you wish you could belong.

Gotcha!


Ha!,

Heh heh heh...

Funny is how bad you want to be a member of the elite class but can't
be.

You didn't earn your privileged status.

On 4/8/2012 1:49 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:29 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:14 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:41 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican
view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though you
knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book
that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.


If only that were true. You haven't a clue.

You were born to privilege - not in dispute.


That concept is so far from reality it's hilarious. I only wish that
were true. Poverty is more like it.

Nice try. You're living off the dividends of inherited money.


But I'm old now.

So? You still grew up in privilege.


I wish.

Hawke

On 4/8/2012 1:49 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:31 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:37 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:17 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a
silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the
offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has
written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but
his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of
someone
who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the
right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine.
No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living
well
off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if
your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor,
paralegal
and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the
Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a
dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the biological
imperative. You're a dead end.



It's only so obvious you wish you could belong.

Gotcha!


Ha!,

Heh heh heh...

Funny is how bad you want to be a member of the elite class but can't
be.

You didn't earn your privileged status.


Don't you know half of all rich people in this country inherited their
wealth and therefore their position? People like Steve Forbes did
nothing and he's a billionaire and gets on TV to talk his rightwing
claptrap all the time. That doesn't seem to bug you a bit. Selective
outrage seem to be normal for you.

Hawke

On 4/8/2012 2:26 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:49 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:29 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:14 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:41 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican
view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though
you
knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book
that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.


If only that were true. You haven't a clue.

You were born to privilege - not in dispute.


That concept is so far from reality it's hilarious. I only wish that
were true. Poverty is more like it.

Nice try. You're living off the dividends of inherited money.


But I'm old now.

So? You still grew up in privilege.


I wish.

You did. Not necessarily Rockefeller privilege, but privilege all the
same. You had luxuries great and small that most people don't have
while growing up.

On 4/8/2012 2:28 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:49 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:31 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:37 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:17 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a
silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the
offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has
written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but
his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of
someone
who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the
right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine.
No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living
well
off
investments others made. You simply don't live off investments if
your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor,
paralegal
and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it
for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the
Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican
view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a
dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the
biological
imperative. You're a dead end.



It's only so obvious you wish you could belong.

Gotcha!


Ha!,

Heh heh heh...

Funny is how bad you want to be a member of the elite class but can't
be.

You didn't earn your privileged status.


Don't you know half of all rich people in this country inherited their
wealth and therefore their position?

You didn't earn yours, yet you hypocritically attack others who didn't.

On 4/8/2012 3:27 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/8/2012 2:28 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:49 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:31 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:37 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:17 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 1:30 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
I am convinced that Ptooey was born, relative to most, with a
silver
spoon in his mouth. I don't necessarily mean he was the
offspring of
0.001 percenters, just that his parents were affluent. He has
written
that he lives off investments yet is only in his early 60s, but
his
description of his working life does not paint a picture of
someone
who
made a lot of money, invested it well and now has earned the
right to
live well in an earlier retirement than most people can imagine.
No -
Ptooey definitely gives the impression of someone who is living
well
off
investments others made. You simply don't live off
investments if
your
working career was spent dabbling as a tennis instructor,
paralegal
and
other modestly paid pursuits.

Because Ptooey didn't earn his financial security, he takes it
for
granted, as do so many children of privilege. As with the
Kennedys, he
has a "I've got mine, now **** the rest of you" outlook.


That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican
view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh?

You didn't earn it. You were born to privilege. You're a
dilettante, a
dabbler, a fainéant. You weren't even able to achieve the
biological
imperative. You're a dead end.



It's only so obvious you wish you could belong.

Gotcha!


Ha!,

Heh heh heh...

Funny is how bad you want to be a member of the elite class but can't
be.

You didn't earn your privileged status.


Don't you know half of all rich people in this country inherited their
wealth and therefore their position?

You didn't earn yours, yet you hypocritically attack others who didn't.


Not quite right. I only attack the ones that are pigs. I don't begrudge
it if people get some money handed down to them from their parents when
they die. Hundreds of millions? Yeah, I've got a problem with that.
Fifty million, that's too much too. Unlike you who loves it that someone
like Steve Forbes gets billions he didn't earn. But like I said, it's
you who has the extreme positions, not me.

Hawke

On 4/8/2012 3:26 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/8/2012 2:26 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:49 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/8/2012 1:29 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 7:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 5:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/5/2012 2:24 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/5/2012 12:14 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:41 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:03 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:



That's known as the aristocratic or country club republican
view of
the
world. It must be irritating to know someone like me might be a
member
of that elite group, eh? It goes against everything you though
you
knew.

Hawke


Ahh so it is true then.

Of course it's true. I can read the Fun with Dick and Jane book
that is
Hawwke-Ptooey's life without any problem.


If only that were true. You haven't a clue.

You were born to privilege - not in dispute.


That concept is so far from reality it's hilarious. I only wish that
were true. Poverty is more like it.

Nice try. You're living off the dividends of inherited money.


But I'm old now.

So? You still grew up in privilege.


I wish.

You did. Not necessarily Rockefeller privilege, but privilege all the
same. You had luxuries great and small that most people don't have while
growing up.



Nope, sorry but I didn't. I grew up in an average white American family,
and for quite a number of years it was less than average. So as much as
you would like it, I'm not someone who had any breaks, or privileges. I
had to go without a lot as a matter of fact. I've had to scrimp and save
most of my life. I had to be fiscally conservative. I didn't have any
other choice. Besides that, my mother's side of the family came from
Nebraska. You don't get any more conservative than being from the Middle
West.


Hawke

Hawke wrote:


I didn't have any
other choice. Besides that, my mother's side of the family came from
Nebraska. You don't get any more conservative than being from the Middle
West.

Oh another one on a platter.

You think there are no liberals in Nebraska, or Kansas or...., and
that there is NO one more conservative than the most liberal Nebraskan
in say Orange County or Rural Oregon?




Hawke
jk

On 4/8/2012 10:32 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:


I didn't have any
other choice. Besides that, my mother's side of the family came from
Nebraska. You don't get any more conservative than being from the Middle
West.

Oh another one on a platter.

You think there are no liberals in Nebraska, or Kansas or...., and
that there is NO one more conservative than the most liberal Nebraskan
in say Orange County or Rural Oregon?



I've told you repeatedly that I know politics. So obviously I know there
are all kinds no matter where you go. But there is a fundamental
difference between people that hail from Nebraska compared to those
coming from NY city.

I know me. I know where I came from and I know where I fit in
politically. Like I said, socially liberal, fiscally conservative. That
gives one a pretty good idea where I stand. Hint, it's not way out of
the mainstream either like being a libertarian is.

Hawke

Hawke wrote:
On 4/8/2012 10:32 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:


I didn't have any
other choice. Besides that, my mother's side of the family came from
Nebraska. You don't get any more conservative than being from the Middle
West.

You think there are no liberals in Nebraska, or Kansas or...., and
that there is NO one more conservative than the most liberal Nebraskan
in say Orange County or Rural Oregon?

I've told you repeatedly that I know politics. So obviously I know there
are all kinds no matter where you go.

"So obviously you know" this? even though it contradicts your
absolutist statement. Either you "don't get any more conservative
than being from Nebraska", or "they have all kinds every where". The
two are mutually exclusive.

But even if your thesis were true, that fact that your mothers family
were from there is ABOLOUTELY meaningless. It doesn't make you or here
conservative or liberal.

But there is a fundamental
difference between people that hail from Nebraska compared to those
coming from NY city.
Yes there is! They have different zip codes. I would say different
accents, but there are also so many WITHIN NYC that it is fairly
meaningless, just like your statement is.
jk

On 4/11/2012 11:13 AM, jk wrote:
wrote:
On 4/8/2012 10:32 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:


I didn't have any
other choice. Besides that, my mother's side of the family came from
Nebraska. You don't get any more conservative than being from the Middle
West.

You think there are no liberals in Nebraska, or Kansas or...., and
that there is NO one more conservative than the most liberal Nebraskan
in say Orange County or Rural Oregon?

I've told you repeatedly that I know politics. So obviously I know there
are all kinds no matter where you go.

"So obviously you know" this? even though it contradicts your
absolutist statement. Either you "don't get any more conservative
than being from Nebraska", or "they have all kinds every where". The
two are mutually exclusive.

Obviously I made the mistake of expecting that you would understand that
nothing anyone says is absolute. When you hear someone say everyone
loves America you should understand that doesn't mean literally
"everyone". I guess you don't. Because the truth is they do have all
kinds everywhere including Nebraska but it's also true you don't get any
more conservative than being from Nebraska. Most educated people would
understand my point. You didn't. See why I question your IQ/education?
You misunderstand what an ordinary person should understand.





But even if your thesis were true, that fact that your mothers family
were from there is ABOLOUTELY meaningless. It doesn't make you or here
conservative or liberal.

It means what it means any time anyone says I'm from the Midwest or I'm
from some other region of the country. Each region has certain
characteristics that apply to it. Being from the Midwest implies
conservatism. Most Americans understand that is what it means when you
say that. You don't?



But there is a fundamental
difference between people that hail from Nebraska compared to those
coming from NY city.


Yes there is! They have different zip codes. I would say different
accents,

If you don't know it's a lot more than that you're very ignorant.

but there are also so many WITHIN NYC that it is fairly
meaningless, just like your statement is.


I understand why you see it as meaningless.
Clearly, you didn't understand it. But I'm not surprised because you
continue to demonstrate your penchant for misinterpreting or
misconstruing much of what is written. That is only one reason I
question your level of education. Because you misapprehend what is
written so frequently.

Hawke

On 4/11/2012 3:12 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/11/2012 11:13 AM, jk wrote:
wrote:
On 4/8/2012 10:32 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:


I didn't have any
other choice. Besides that, my mother's side of the family came from
Nebraska. You don't get any more conservative than being from the
Middle
West.

You think there are no liberals in Nebraska, or Kansas or...., and
that there is NO one more conservative than the most liberal Nebraskan
in say Orange County or Rural Oregon?

I've told you repeatedly that I know politics. So obviously I know there
are all kinds no matter where you go.

"So obviously you know" this? even though it contradicts your
absolutist statement. Either you "don't get any more conservative
than being from Nebraska", or "they have all kinds every where". The
two are mutually exclusive.

Obviously I made the mistake of expecting that

Obviously you don't really know politics. Obviously you're an avid fan,
but not a knowledgeable fan. Obviously you're a ****wit.

Hawke wrote:

Obviously I made the mistake of expecting that you would understand that
nothing anyone says is absolute. When you hear someone say everyone
loves America you should understand that doesn't mean literally
"everyone". I guess you don't.

My understanding or your statements is mediated by your statement that
you always tell the truth and never make a false statement.

Because the truth is they do have all
kinds everywhere including Nebraska but it's also true you don't get any
more conservative than being from Nebraska.
Yes you do
Most educated people would
understand my point.
You make so many stupid statements, how is one supposed to tell when
you are "exaggerating for effect", "using hyperbole", "sticking your
foot in your mouth", or just "making ANOTHER foolish statement that
you truly believe"?




But even if your thesis were true, that fact that your mothers family
were from there is ABOLOUTELY meaningless. It doesn't make you or here
conservative or liberal.

It means what it means any time anyone says I'm from the Midwest or I'm
from some other region of the country. Each region has certain
characteristics that apply to it. Being from the Midwest implies
conservatism.
Most Americans understand that is what it means when you
say that. You don't?
That implies something about your mothers parents and the rest of her
family, not her, not you. "Most Americans understand that is what it
means when you say that. You don't?"

But there is a fundamental
difference between people that hail from Nebraska compared to those
coming from NY city.
Yes there is! They have different zip codes. I would say different
accents,

If you don't know it's a lot more than that you're very ignorant.
but there are also so many WITHIN NYC that it is fairly
meaningless, just like your statement is.
I understand why you see it as meaningless.
Clearly, you didn't understand it.
Wrong I understood it, and think it shouts out your deep seated
cultural bias.

I grew up (partially) in the Midwest / True West, and lived for an
extend period in NY. I KNOW neither area is near as monolithic as a
small town boy such as you would like to think.


That is only one reason I
question your level of education. Because you misapprehend what is
written so frequently.

If you could write what you intend, it could clear that up now
couldn't it?

jk

On 4/11/2012 10:21 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 4/11/2012 3:12 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 4/11/2012 11:13 AM, jk wrote:
wrote:
On 4/8/2012 10:32 PM, jk wrote:
wrote:


I didn't have any
other choice. Besides that, my mother's side of the family came from
Nebraska. You don't get any more conservative than being from the
Middle
West.

You think there are no liberals in Nebraska, or Kansas or...., and
that there is NO one more conservative than the most liberal Nebraskan
in say Orange County or Rural Oregon?

I've told you repeatedly that I know politics. So obviously I know
there
are all kinds no matter where you go.

"So obviously you know" this? even though it contradicts your
absolutist statement. Either you "don't get any more conservative
than being from Nebraska", or "they have all kinds every where". The
two are mutually exclusive.

Obviously I made the mistake of expecting that

Obviously you don't really know politics. Obviously you're an avid fan,
but not a knowledgeable fan. Obviously you're a ****wit.


What's obvious is your ignorance. You don't know about anything but name
calling. You keep saying I know nothing about politics. To say that
means you must know something about the subject yourself. I mean if you
don't know about politics how would you know that someone else didn't?
So you think you know politics. When are you going to show that you do?
You call names all day long and act like an ass but you never show your
expertise in politics.


When do we get to see how learned you are in the subject? You keep
making the claim you are way more knowledgeable than I am. When do you
show it? When do we get to see how much you know about politics? In
fact, when do you show us that you know anything about it? You never
have. All you do is accuse me of not knowing. I think the truth is you
don't know anything and that is why it's impossible for you to show how
much you know. I can hardly wait to see a demonstration of your
knowledge. Say, where did you learn so much about politics. You said you
learned economics in college, not politics. So how come you're an expert
in politics too? Did you get all that knowledge from watching TV? Or are
you just making it up like you always do.

Hawke

On 4/12/2012 10:25 AM, jk wrote:
wrote:

Obviously I made the mistake of expecting that you would understand that
nothing anyone says is absolute. When you hear someone say everyone
loves America you should understand that doesn't mean literally
"everyone". I guess you don't.

My understanding or your statements is mediated by your statement that
you always tell the truth and never make a false statement.

That's right I do tell the truth and don't make false statements
knowingly. That has nothing to do with you not understanding colloquial
English. Or if you want to deny what is common knowledge.


Because the truth is they do have all
kinds everywhere including Nebraska but it's also true you don't get any
more conservative than being from Nebraska.


Yes you do

No you don't. Nebraska is as conservative a state as any in the union.



Most educated people would
understand my point.


You make so many stupid statements, how is one supposed to tell when
you are "exaggerating for effect", "using hyperbole", "sticking your
foot in your mouth", or just "making ANOTHER foolish statement that
you truly believe"?

You can only be pretending to be as stupid as you come across. Take the
line from George C. Scott in the movie Patton where he says all real
Americans love a scrap, or words to that effect. You wouldn't understand
what that meant. You would think, that's a lie. Or you would think, well
that's a foolish statement because I don't like to get in a scrap. Or
you would think, he just put his foot in his mouth. Bottom line is you
wouldn't understand what he meant when he said that line. You seem
unable to understand anything but the literal meaning of words and you
have no idea what language is figurative and what isn't. It's not me
that has the problem in what I write. You're just not very good at
understanding what people write unless they make it for a fourth grader.


But even if your thesis were true, that fact that your mothers family
were from there is ABOLOUTELY meaningless. It doesn't make you or here
conservative or liberal.

If you're from Nebraska the odds are you are a conservative. Just like
if you listen to Limbaugh the odds are you are a conservative.



It means what it means any time anyone says I'm from the Midwest or I'm
from some other region of the country. Each region has certain
characteristics that apply to it. Being from the Midwest implies
conservatism.
Most Americans understand that is what it means when you
say that. You don't?

That implies something about your mothers parents and the rest of her
family, not her, not you.

Really? Whey them and not us?


"Most Americans understand that is what it
means when you say that. You don't?"

But there is a fundamental
difference between people that hail from Nebraska compared to those
coming from NY city.


Yes there is! They have different zip codes. I would say different
accents,

You don't know city folks are different from country folks? You don't
know New Yorkers are different from southerners? You need to do some
learning about what it's like in different parts of the country.

If you don't know it's a lot more than that you're very ignorant.
but there are also so many WITHIN NYC that it is fairly
meaningless, just like your statement is.

It's only meaningless to someone like you. Other people know exactly
what I'm saying. It's almost like English is not your first language.
Were you born in another country?


I understand why you see it as meaningless.
Clearly, you didn't understand it.


Wrong I understood it, and think it shouts out your deep seated
cultural bias.

Nobody else would. You're just weird. You don't know that people from
California are called nuts and flakes. You don't know that New Yorkers
are pushy. You don't know that New England Yankees are frugal. Is that
what you are doing? You're saying you don't know any of the cultural
differences you find in other parts of America? Have you never been
anywhere? My cultural bias? Life is slower in the south and they drink
mint julips down there? That's my bias? I made that stuff up? Give me a
break. I think you would deny there are Mexicans in southern California
and would call that bias.



I grew up (partially) in the Midwest / True West, and lived for an
extend period in NY. I KNOW neither area is near as monolithic as a
small town boy such as you would like to think.

But you also don't have any idea what the reputation of each area is
either. You think every part of America is just like the other, no
cultural differences exist. Mississippi is just like Illinois. You find
all kinds in both states. You can't be that dumb. So you're acting dumb.




That is only one reason I
question your level of education. Because you misapprehend what is
written so frequently.

If you could write what you intend, it could clear that up now
couldn't it?


Aside from you and Dan no one has ever had trouble understanding me.
That means it's thousands of people who have no trouble and two who do.
What does your reasoning ability tell you about that? It should say you
and Dan are two very odd exceptions to the rule. EVERYBODY else knows
what I mean except you two. Lots of people disagree with what I may say
but they understand just fine. Except you two. I'd say that means the
problem is with your comprehension skills not my writing. It's not like
I'm writing for a bunch of college professors or a professional journal.
I'm giving you the easy stuff and you still don't get it half the time.
I'd say that means your IQ and your education are both in the low range
of normal.

Hawke