It doesn't go away by itself.
Watergate "went away" when Richard Nixon resigned the presidency in
disgrace and left town never to be heard from in an official capacity
again.
The Bush presidency is thankfully over...but the damage he and Dick
Cheney did continues to press on the nerve of the American people like
an impacted wisdom tooth. And until the questions surrounding arguably
the most arrogant and perhaps most corrupt administration in our
history are addressed, the pain won't go away.
From Nancy ("Impeachment is off the table") Pelosi to President Barack
("I want to look forward, not backward") Obama, the country is being
poorly served by their Democratic government. And on this subject
President Obama is dead wrong.
George W. Bush and his accomplices damaged this country like it's
never been damaged before. And it's not just the phony war in Iraq or
the torture memos that justified waterboarding. It's millions of
missing emails and the constant use of executive privilege and signing
statements.
It's the secretive meetings with Enron and other energy executives and
the wholesale firing of federal prosecutors. It's trying to get the
president's personal attorney seated on the Supreme Court and that
despicable Alberto Gonzales sitting in front of congressional
investigators whining, "I don't remember, I don't know, I...etc."
It's the domestic eavesdropping in violation of the FISA Court, the
rendition prisons, and the lying. It's looking the other way while the
City of New Orleans drowned and its people were left to fend for
themselves.
It's the violations of the Geneva Conventions, the soiling of our
international reputation and the shredding of the U.S. Constitution.
It's the handing over of $700 billion to the Wall Street fat cats last
fall, no questions asked. Where is that money? What was it used for?
It's the no-bid contracts to firms like Halliburton and Blackwater and
the shoddy construction and lack of oversight of reconstruction in
Iraq that cost American taxpayers untold billions.
If the Republicans were serious about restoring their reputation, they
would join the call for a special prosecutor to be appointed so that
at long last justice can be done.
It's too late for George W. Bush to resign the presidency. But it's
not too late to put the people responsible for this national disgrace
in prison.

========
I happen to agree with Jack Cafferty on this. A cleansing would be
nice. Get that much admired integrity back, and as it seems too scary
for Obama to do it, it will be left up to the people. Then kick his
ass out if he keeps criminally sheltering the evil-doers from the
previous administration.

r

Aren't you lucky that it's not your problem?

Some might consider it breach of etiquette to critique one's neighbors.

-S

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
It doesn't go away by itself.
Watergate "went away" when Richard Nixon resigned the presidency in
disgrace and left town never to be heard from in an official capacity
again.
The Bush presidency is thankfully over...but the damage he and Dick
Cheney did continues to press on the nerve of the American people like
an impacted wisdom tooth. And until the questions surrounding arguably
the most arrogant and perhaps most corrupt administration in our
history are addressed, the pain won't go away.
From Nancy ("Impeachment is off the table") Pelosi to President Barack
("I want to look forward, not backward") Obama, the country is being
poorly served by their Democratic government. And on this subject
President Obama is dead wrong.
George W. Bush and his accomplices damaged this country like it's
never been damaged before. And it's not just the phony war in Iraq or
the torture memos that justified waterboarding. It's millions of
missing emails and the constant use of executive privilege and signing
statements.
It's the secretive meetings with Enron and other energy executives and
the wholesale firing of federal prosecutors. It's trying to get the
president's personal attorney seated on the Supreme Court and that
despicable Alberto Gonzales sitting in front of congressional
investigators whining, "I don't remember, I don't know, I...etc."
It's the domestic eavesdropping in violation of the FISA Court, the
rendition prisons, and the lying. It's looking the other way while the
City of New Orleans drowned and its people were left to fend for
themselves.
It's the violations of the Geneva Conventions, the soiling of our
international reputation and the shredding of the U.S. Constitution.
It's the handing over of $700 billion to the Wall Street fat cats last
fall, no questions asked. Where is that money? What was it used for?
It's the no-bid contracts to firms like Halliburton and Blackwater and
the shoddy construction and lack of oversight of reconstruction in
Iraq that cost American taxpayers untold billions.
If the Republicans were serious about restoring their reputation, they
would join the call for a special prosecutor to be appointed so that
at long last justice can be done.
It's too late for George W. Bush to resign the presidency. But it's
not too late to put the people responsible for this national disgrace
in prison.

========
I happen to agree with Jack Cafferty on this. A cleansing would be
nice. Get that much admired integrity back, and as it seems too scary
for Obama to do it, it will be left up to the people. Then kick his
ass out if he keeps criminally sheltering the evil-doers from the
previous administration.

r

On May 19, 8:10*am, "StephenM" wrote:
Aren't you lucky that it's not your problem?

Some might consider it breach of etiquette to critique one's neighbors.

-S

That's why I always wince a little bit when someone bashes the
Canadian health care system. Especially when there aren't any Canadian
politicians running on the "We gotta fix our health care system"
platform. :-)

On May 19, 9:10*am, "StephenM" wrote:
Aren't you lucky that it's not your problem?

Some might consider it breach of etiquette to critique one's neighbors.

-S

Some might consider it breach of etiquette to invade other nations.

StephenM wrote:

Aren't you lucky that it's not your problem?

Do you even imagine that the consequences of US political decisions,
military actions, and commercial irresponsibility extend no further than
our borders?

Some might consider it breach of etiquette to critique one's neighbors.

And some seem to believe that freedom of expression applies only to
themselves.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

Robatoy wrote:
It doesn't go away by itself.
Watergate "went away" when Richard Nixon resigned the presidency in
disgrace and left town never to be heard from in an official capacity
again.
The Bush presidency is thankfully over...but the damage he and Dick
Cheney did continues to press on the nerve of the American people like
an impacted wisdom tooth. And until the questions surrounding arguably
the most arrogant and perhaps most corrupt administration in our
history are addressed, the pain won't go away.
From Nancy ("Impeachment is off the table") Pelosi to President Barack
("I want to look forward, not backward") Obama, the country is being
poorly served by their Democratic government. And on this subject
President Obama is dead wrong.
George W. Bush and his accomplices damaged this country like it's
never been damaged before. And it's not just the phony war in Iraq or
the torture memos that justified waterboarding. It's millions of
missing emails and the constant use of executive privilege and signing
statements.
It's the secretive meetings with Enron and other energy executives and
the wholesale firing of federal prosecutors. It's trying to get the
president's personal attorney seated on the Supreme Court and that
despicable Alberto Gonzales sitting in front of congressional
investigators whining, "I don't remember, I don't know, I...etc."
It's the domestic eavesdropping in violation of the FISA Court, the
rendition prisons, and the lying. It's looking the other way while the
City of New Orleans drowned and its people were left to fend for
themselves.
It's the violations of the Geneva Conventions, the soiling of our
international reputation and the shredding of the U.S. Constitution.
It's the handing over of $700 billion to the Wall Street fat cats last
fall, no questions asked. Where is that money? What was it used for?
It's the no-bid contracts to firms like Halliburton and Blackwater and
the shoddy construction and lack of oversight of reconstruction in
Iraq that cost American taxpayers untold billions.
If the Republicans were serious about restoring their reputation, they
would join the call for a special prosecutor to be appointed so that
at long last justice can be done.
It's too late for George W. Bush to resign the presidency. But it's
not too late to put the people responsible for this national disgrace
in prison.

========
I happen to agree with Jack Cafferty on this. A cleansing would be
nice. Get that much admired integrity back, and as it seems too scary
for Obama to do it, it will be left up to the people. Then kick his
ass out if he keeps criminally sheltering the evil-doers from the
previous administration.

r

Barak's too busy looking for his birth certificate.

Some might consider it breach of etiquette to critique one's neighbors.

And some seem to believe that freedom of expression applies only to
themselves.

I did not mean to imply that. (sigh.... I was trying to gentle)

I would rather see that expression take the form of constructive dialogue.

IMO, Rob's statement was not constructive.

-S

On May 19, 10:23*am, Doug Winterburn wrote:

Barak's too busy looking for his birth certificate.

Why do people keep putting legs on a dead issue?
Basically what you're saying is that no vetting was done.
Right, I forgot, there's only one party and there's no one to do any
dirt digging.
Sheesh.

R

On May 19, 10:56*am, "StephenM" wrote:
Some might consider it breach of etiquette to critique one's neighbors..

And some seem to believe that freedom of expression applies only to
themselves.

I did not mean to imply that. (sigh.... I was trying to gentle)

I would rather see that expression take the form of constructive dialogue..

IMO, Rob's statement was not constructive.


What WILL be constructive is to send the message that when something
is illegal, it IS illegal regardless of whether you're the President
or not.
Thousands died based on lies. Torture. On and on.. and NOBODY is
accountable????

A cleansing is in order.

RicodJour wrote:
On May 19, 10:23 am, Doug Winterburn wrote:
Barak's too busy looking for his birth certificate.

Why do people keep putting legs on a dead issue?
Basically what you're saying is that no vetting was done.
Right, I forgot, there's only one party and there's no one to do any
dirt digging.
Sheesh.

R
Speaking of dead issues, since Robo was slinging ****, game on...

A quick drive by here on my part as I am off to the hospital once more
to be the advocate for my aged father against Medicare/Medicaid and
the hospital system. My mom can't do it because she is starting to
have signs of Alzheimer's.

I am sure this topic and the usual self righteous politicos here will
beat this thread to death while swinging the sword of their version of
the truth.

Probably a little name calling along the way.

Accusations of fealty will be made.

Questions of intelligence concerning other posters that don't agree
with ones that KNOW they are "the light..." they are "the way" will
arise.

Credentials of posters will be questioned.

Sources of information will be questioned and then approved by some,
then dismissed out of hand by others.

All the normal guys that post little concerning woodworking will be
here in force, since it is likely this may be the only venue they can
express their political views with such gusto without someone telling
them to shut up.

In the end, if the goal is achieved, There will be a large foamy pile
of pointless blather describing how screwed up the USA is, and who the
fault lies with.... at least in this thread.

Can't you guys just copy and paste your old responses? Wouldn't it
save time? Isn't this horse (and its variants) dead enough for a
woodworking venue?

Exercising my right to free speech as a tax paying American citizen,
this just makes me tired.

I don't know what the point is to it.

Robert

On May 19, 11:53*am, "
wrote:
A quick drive by here on my part as I am off to the hospital once more
to be the advocate for my aged father against Medicare/Medicaid and
the hospital system. *My mom can't do it because she is starting to
have signs of Alzheimer's.

I am sure this topic and the usual self righteous politicos here will
beat this thread to death while swinging the sword of their version of
the truth.

Probably a little name calling along the way.

Accusations of fealty will be made.

Questions of intelligence concerning other posters that don't agree
with ones that KNOW they are "the light..." they are "the way" will
arise.

Credentials of posters will be questioned.

Sources of information will be questioned and then approved by some,
then dismissed out of hand by others.

All the normal guys that post little concerning woodworking will be
here in force, since it is likely this may be the only venue they can
express their political *views with such gusto without someone telling
them to shut up.

In the end, if the goal is achieved, There will be a large foamy pile
of pointless blather describing how screwed up the USA is, and who the
fault lies with.... at least in this thread.

Thanks for spoiling the surprise ending, Robert!

Hope everything goes (relatively) smoothly with your folks.

R

StephenM wrote:
Some might consider it breach of etiquette to critique one's neighbors.
And some seem to believe that freedom of expression applies only to
themselves.

I did not mean to imply that. (sigh.... I was trying to gentle)

I would rather see that expression take the form of constructive dialogue.

IMO, Rob's statement was not constructive.

Rob is a **** stirrer, no question about it - but it's worth noticing
that he seems to expect us to live up to our own highest standards, and
he's inclined to wax impatient when he perceives that we've forgotten
what those are, or when he thinks we've become too lazy or too "busy" to
do more than pay lip service to our principles.

I've found that even when I don't agree with what he says, it's worth at
least asking: "What would lead him to say /that/?"

I suspect that "constructive" is a fairly subjective catagorization, and
that a gentle general discussion is an iffy proposition in a large forum
with a multitude of (sometimes very strong) opinions and very different
life experiences. If I had to choose one over the other, I think I'd go
with constructive.

FWIW, I think robatoy /was/ trying to be constructive, but if you see it
differently why not ask him (directly) where he's coming from? You might
also find it interesting to ask to what extent he considers himself a
stakeholder in the conduct of US politics...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

I've found that even when I don't agree with what he says, it's worth at
least asking: "What would lead him to say /that/?"

Sometimes, it's not just the message that matters, but the messenger too. I
am proud to be a citizen of the US of A. We are not a perfect people, but we
do have a system which provides for self-correction.

Analogy: You have a 10-year old son who got into some trouble with some of
his friends; and some vandalism was perpatrated and the guity were delivered
home by the local constable. Would you appreciate an otherwise uninvolved
neighbor who interjected himself into the situation to dictate exactly what
punishment should be meated out for your boy?

A neighbor is entitled to his opinion but he would be well served to tread
lightly on internal family issues if he hopes to be invited to the next
BBQ,.

-Steve

wrote in message
...
A quick drive by here on my part as I am off to the hospital once more
to be the advocate for my aged father against Medicare/Medicaid and
the hospital system. My mom can't do it because she is starting to
have signs of Alzheimer's.


You are doing the work of a Saint Robert, while probably not immediately
rewarded, you are recognized.

StephenM wrote:

I think it's fair to assume that Rob was not directly affected by:

I think it's foolish to make unnecessary, uninformed assumptions.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

HeyBub wrote:

I'll grant you the Bush administration was arrogant - they all are
(see "Jane's Law"). But corrupt? Hardly. In the entire eight years of
the Bush administration, ONE person was convicted of impropriety, and
that for testimony about a crime that never happened.

As a matter of contrast:
Forty-seven individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton
machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of
these occurring during the Clinton administration itself. There were
in addition 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons were
imprisoned.

===============
Jury Convicts Fund-Raiser Hsu

"[May 19 - NEW YORK] Norman Hsu, a former top fund-raiser for the Democratic
Party and convicted Ponzi scheme operator, was found guilty Tuesday of
illegally funneling tens of thousands of dollars to candidates for federal
office by pressuring investors to donate to his favored candidates."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124274534722334937.html

HeyBub wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
I'll grant you the Bush administration was arrogant - they all are
(see "Jane's Law"). But corrupt? Hardly. In the entire eight years of
the Bush administration, ONE person was convicted of impropriety, and
that for testimony about a crime that never happened.

As a matter of contrast:
Forty-seven individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton
machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of
these occurring during the Clinton administration itself. There were
in addition 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons were
imprisoned.

===============
Jury Convicts Fund-Raiser Hsu

"[May 19 - NEW YORK] Norman Hsu, a former top fund-raiser for the Democratic
Party and convicted Ponzi scheme operator, was found guilty Tuesday of
illegally funneling tens of thousands of dollars to candidates for federal
office by pressuring investors to donate to his favored candidates."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124274534722334937.html




Thank you for bringing some sense into this discussion. Now we need to
list the people that are being investigated today and those that Bama
brought into his staff that should be investigated. Chuck

wrote:

A quick drive by here on my part as I am off to the hospital once
more
to be the advocate for my aged father against Medicare/Medicaid and
the hospital system. My mom can't do it because she is starting to
have signs of Alzheimer's.

My heart goes out to all of you whose parents are being beset by the
ravages of old age.

I was very fortunate, my mother made it to 103, physically shot, but
mentally very sharp, when she just gave up and accepted the
inevitable.

She simply decided it was no longer worth the fight.

She would often comment about how the "younger generation", including
nieces and nephews, was falling apart.

Lew

Chuck writes:
HeyBub wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
I'll grant you the Bush administration was arrogant - they all are
(see "Jane's Law"). But corrupt? Hardly. In the entire eight years of
the Bush administration, ONE person was convicted of impropriety, and
that for testimony about a crime that never happened.

As a matter of contrast:
Forty-seven individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton
machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of
these occurring during the Clinton administration itself. There were
in addition 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons were
imprisoned.

===============
Jury Convicts Fund-Raiser Hsu

"[May 19 - NEW YORK] Norman Hsu, a former top fund-raiser for the Democratic
Party and convicted Ponzi scheme operator, was found guilty Tuesday of
illegally funneling tens of thousands of dollars to candidates for federal
office by pressuring investors to donate to his favored candidates."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124274534722334937.html




Thank you for bringing some sense into this discussion. Now we need to
list the people that are being investigated today and those that Bama
brought into his staff that should be investigated. Chuck

Sense? What the **** does some fundraiser have to do with anything? He's
not an elected politician. He broke the law and will pay for it and good
riddance.

The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the reputation of
the United States in the rest of the world and squandered fifty years of
global good-will (and even envy) towards the United States of America, which
once was the greatest country on the planet. In this category, Bush, Cheney,
Gonzales, Rove and others.

The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the financial
system of the United States. The repeal of Glass-Steigel. Insufficient
oversight of wall street investment products (CDO's and other leveraged
transactions). Insufficient anti-trust oversight. Allowing too much
consolidation (this has been a problem since the Reagan Administration).
Greenspan, Bernenke, and the Bush Treasury and SEC appointees and a
handful of democrats.

The Bush Doctrine must be repudiated now, and for all time.

scott

Scott Lurndal wrote:
Chuck writes:
HeyBub wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
I'll grant you the Bush administration was arrogant - they all are
(see "Jane's Law"). But corrupt? Hardly. In the entire eight years of
the Bush administration, ONE person was convicted of impropriety, and
that for testimony about a crime that never happened.

As a matter of contrast:
Forty-seven individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton
machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of
these occurring during the Clinton administration itself. There were
in addition 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons were
imprisoned.
===============
Jury Convicts Fund-Raiser Hsu

"[May 19 - NEW YORK] Norman Hsu, a former top fund-raiser for the Democratic
Party and convicted Ponzi scheme operator, was found guilty Tuesday of
illegally funneling tens of thousands of dollars to candidates for federal
office by pressuring investors to donate to his favored candidates."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124274534722334937.html



Thank you for bringing some sense into this discussion. Now we need to
list the people that are being investigated today and those that Bama
brought into his staff that should be investigated. Chuck

Sense? What the **** does some fundraiser have to do with anything? He's
not an elected politician. He broke the law and will pay for it and good
riddance.

But in so doing helped elect a vile and revolting administration.

The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the reputation of
the United States in the rest of the world and squandered fifty years of
global good-will (and even envy) towards the United States of America, which
once was the greatest country on the planet. In this category, Bush, Cheney,
Gonzales, Rove and others.

Wow, based on the first couple sentences, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Durbin,
and Kennedy lept to mind.


The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the financial
system of the United States. The repeal of Glass-Steigel. Insufficient

Barney Frank was central certainly.

oversight of wall street investment products (CDO's and other leveraged
transactions). Insufficient anti-trust oversight. Allowing too much

Anti-trust? Really. The only monopolies that have lasted any length
of time I am aware of are the ones *government* granted: The Public
Futilities.

consolidation (this has been a problem since the Reagan Administration).
Greenspan, Bernenke, and the Bush Treasury and SEC appointees and a
handful of democrats.

The Bush Doctrine must be repudiated now, and for all time.


It already has been. It's been replaced with a limp wristed form
of Marxism. I'm sure you're very happy.


scott


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

On May 19, 3:11*pm, Tom Watson wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 13:57:06 -0500, Swingman wrote:
wrote:

I don't know what the point is to it.

Just to stir some ****, per usual.

He's just trying to beat LRod's record but he don't have a shot.

Being Canuckistani, he don't know how to fish for bottom feeders.

His stinkbait recipe ain't nearly stinky enough.

He'll snag some suckers but the real stuck-way-down-in-the-mud
shovelmouths will just wait for a real meal.


HA! You just wait and see..... there is NO way Daneliuk can resist
this ****...oh wait... SNAGGGGGG..bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz(drag
being tightened...)

Scott,


You make it sound like the Dems had nothing to do with our current financial
situation. There is a long list of Dems that had a part in the
destruction...... Carter, Clinton, Barney, Dodd and many more.

Both parties are full of greedy selfish ****ers.


cm


The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the financial
system of the United States. The repeal of Glass-Steigel. Insufficient
oversight of wall street investment products (CDO's and other leveraged
transactions). Insufficient anti-trust oversight. Allowing too much
consolidation (this has been a problem since the Reagan Administration).
Greenspan, Bernenke, and the Bush Treasury and SEC appointees and a
handful of democrats.

The Bush Doctrine must be repudiated now, and for all time.

scott

cm wrote:
Scott,


You make it sound like the Dems had nothing to do with our current financial
situation. There is a long list of Dems that had a part in the
destruction...... Carter, Clinton, Barney, Dodd and many more.

Both parties are full of greedy selfish ****ers.



As is the general population at-large...

cm


The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the financial
system of the United States. The repeal of Glass-Steigel. Insufficient
oversight of wall street investment products (CDO's and other leveraged
transactions). Insufficient anti-trust oversight. Allowing too much
consolidation (this has been a problem since the Reagan Administration).
Greenspan, Bernenke, and the Bush Treasury and SEC appointees and a
handful of democrats.

The Bush Doctrine must be repudiated now, and for all time.

scott




--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

On May 19, 6:05*pm, (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
Chuck writes:
HeyBub wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
I'll grant you the Bush administration was arrogant - they all are
(see "Jane's Law"). But corrupt? Hardly. In the entire eight years of
the Bush administration, ONE person was convicted of impropriety, and
that for testimony about a crime that never happened.

As a matter of contrast:
Forty-seven individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton
machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of
these occurring during the Clinton administration itself. There were
in addition 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons were
imprisoned.

===============
Jury Convicts Fund-Raiser Hsu

"[May 19 - NEW YORK] Norman Hsu, a former top fund-raiser for the Democratic
Party and convicted Ponzi scheme operator, was found guilty Tuesday of
illegally funneling tens of thousands of dollars to candidates for federal
office by pressuring investors to donate to his favored candidates."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124274534722334937.html

Thank you for bringing some sense into this discussion. Now we need to
list the people that are being investigated today and those that Bama
brought into his staff that should be investigated. * Chuck

Sense? *What the **** does some fundraiser have to do with anything? *He's
not an elected politician. * He broke the law and will pay for it and good
riddance.

The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the reputation of
the United States in the rest of the world and squandered fifty years of
global good-will (and even envy) towards the United States of America, which
once was the greatest country on the planet. *In this category, Bush, Cheney,
Gonzales, Rove and others.

The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the financial
system of the United States. * The repeal of Glass-Steigel. * Insufficient
oversight of wall street investment products (CDO's and other leveraged
transactions). * *Insufficient anti-trust oversight. *Allowing too much
consolidation (this has been a problem since the Reagan Administration).
Greenspan, Bernenke, and the Bush Treasury and SEC appointees and a
handful of democrats.

The Bush Doctrine must be repudiated now, and for all time.

scott

THIS!

On Tue, 19 May 2009 15:44:26 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:



HA! You just wait and see..... there is NO way Daneliuk can resist
this ****...oh wait... SNAGGGGGG..bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz(drag
being tightened...)


Best wishes to you but LRod snagged a gaudy 300+ and him de current
champ of the fishing rodeo.


I'm thinking that a thread about how gay shellac is might have some
legs.




Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message
m...

The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the reputation of
the United States in the rest of the world and squandered fifty years of
global good-will (and even envy) towards the United States of America,
which
once was the greatest country on the planet. In this category, Bush,
Cheney,
Gonzales, Rove and others.

You do know that "our"destroyed reputation is a simple declaration without
much if any foundation.....While the Bush administration was being pillared
for bringing the right to vote to 50 million people our two most vocal
international critics (France and Germany) voted out their Bush critics and
voted in pro Bush conservative administrations. It bears noting as well that
well prior to the imagined Bush scourge we had repeated attacks on military
installations/assets, embassies and the WTC. For those historically
challenged the Ugly American made a pretty big splash in the 60's(1958
book)... American criticism is nothing new.

Now if you truly want to be concerned about our international reputation....
our current giant deficits and massive foreign borrowing will seriously
worry the financial world.......Rod

Scott Lurndal wrote:
Chuck writes:
HeyBub wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
I'll grant you the Bush administration was arrogant - they all are
(see "Jane's Law"). But corrupt? Hardly. In the entire eight years
of the Bush administration, ONE person was convicted of
impropriety, and that for testimony about a crime that never
happened.

As a matter of contrast:
Forty-seven individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton
machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of
these occurring during the Clinton administration itself. There
were in addition 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons
were imprisoned.

===============
Jury Convicts Fund-Raiser Hsu

"[May 19 - NEW YORK] Norman Hsu, a former top fund-raiser for the
Democratic Party and convicted Ponzi scheme operator, was found
guilty Tuesday of illegally funneling tens of thousands of dollars
to candidates for federal office by pressuring investors to donate
to his favored candidates."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124274534722334937.html




Thank you for bringing some sense into this discussion. Now we need
to list the people that are being investigated today and those that
Bama brought into his staff that should be investigated. Chuck

Sense? What the **** does some fundraiser have to do with anything?
He's not an elected politician. He broke the law and will pay for
it and good riddance.

That's a fair point. Hsu was NOT part of the Clinton administration,
although he had close ties to it. Hillary had to refund $800,000 that Hsu
collected for her.


The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the
reputation of the United States in the rest of the world and
squandered fifty years of global good-will (and even envy) towards
the United States of America, which once was the greatest country on
the planet. In this category, Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Rove and
others.

Some say that, sure. Many of us don't give a **** about "global good will."
We view it as a fiction. Countries (and people) do what is in their best
interest. Oh, all other things being equal, we'll support our "friends." But
all other things are seldom equal and it is foolish to think other countries
will do the right thing just because they like us. If they DO like us or our
actions (as the 30 million in Iraq and Afghanistan), that's a plus. But it's
certainly not a REASON to do something.



The folks who need investigating are those who destroyed the financial
system of the United States. The repeal of Glass-Steigel.
Insufficient oversight of wall street investment products (CDO's and
other leveraged transactions). Insufficient anti-trust oversight.
Allowing too much consolidation (this has been a problem since the
Reagan Administration). Greenspan, Bernenke, and the Bush Treasury
and SEC appointees and a
handful of democrats.

The Bush Doctrine must be repudiated now, and for all time.


Maybe. Maybe not.

Just what IS the "Bush Doctrine?" But I see your overall point.

Looking at the Bush years realistically, aside from no terrorist attacks
against the U.S. or U.S. interests abroad in seven years, 23 consecutive
quarters of economic growth (a record), low unemployment, low inflation, and
liberating 20-odd million people from tyranny, exactly what has the "Bush
Doctrine" done for anybody?

Eh? EH?

cm wrote:
Scott,


You make it sound like the Dems had nothing to do with our current
financial situation. There is a long list of Dems that had a part in
the destruction...... Carter, Clinton, Barney, Dodd and many more.

Both parties are full of greedy selfish ****ers.


Greed is good. It's the sometimes bad results from greed that are
inconvenient.

On Tue, 19 May 2009 18:46:22 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

In article , Tom Watson
wrote:

I'm thinking that a thread about how gay shellac is might have some
legs.

Just the blonde shellac, Tom. Just the blonde.


Just to bring this back to the usual political scientology:

If Hillary had been elected, would it have been the Blonde leading The
Blonde?

Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

On Tue, 19 May 2009 17:19:39 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:



It already has been. It's been replaced with a limp wristed form
of Marxism. I'm sure you're very happy.



stinkbait works.



Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

On Tue, 19 May 2009 19:04:23 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

As is the general population at-large...


I wonder if a graduate thesis could be made out of research project to
determine whether the political process concentrates the incidence of
"greedy selfish ****ers" in that portion of the population know as
"politicians". IOW, is the percentage of "greedy selfish ****ers"
greater in the subset of the population who seek public office than it
is in the population as a whole.

I have my own ideas about that, but it's not based on any scientific
research.

Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS
USA

On Tue, 19 May 2009 19:46:32 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Looking at the Bush years realistically, aside from no terrorist attacks
against the U.S. or U.S. interests abroad in seven years, 23 consecutive
quarters of economic growth (a record), low unemployment, low inflation, and
liberating 20-odd million people from tyranny, exactly what has the "Bush
Doctrine" done for anybody?


HeyBub, you'd best be careful with comments like that. You're not
properly playing to the Bush Derangement Syndrome that seems to be
fairly prevalent around here and just might get slapped down.

Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS
USA

On Tue, 19 May 2009 21:02:47 -0500, Tom Veatch wrote:

On Tue, 19 May 2009 19:04:23 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

As is the general population at-large...


I wonder if a graduate thesis could be made out of research project to
determine whether the political process concentrates the incidence of
"greedy selfish ****ers" in that portion of the population know as
"politicians". IOW, is the percentage of "greedy selfish ****ers"
greater in the subset of the population who seek public office than it
is in the population as a whole.

I have my own ideas about that, but it's not based on any scientific
research.

Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS
USA




Inasmuch as philosophers only are able to grasp the eternal and
unchangeable, and those who wander in the region of the many and
variable are not philosophers, I must ask you which of the two classes
should be the rulers of our State?

And how can we rightly answer that question?

Whichever of the two are best able to guard the laws and
institutions of our State--let them be our guardians.

Very good.

Neither, I said, can there be any question that the guardian who is
to keep anything should have eyes rather than no eyes?

There can be no question of that.

And are not those who are verily and indeed wanting in the knowledge
of the true being of each thing, and who have in their souls no clear
pattern, and are unable as with a painter's eye to look at the
absolute truth and to that original to repair, and having perfect
vision of the other world to order the laws about beauty, goodness,
justice in this, if not already ordered, and to guard and preserve the
order of them--are not such persons, I ask, simply blind?

Truly, he replied, they are much in that condition.

And shall they be our guardians when there are others who, besides
being their equals in experience and falling short of them in no
particular of virtue, also know the very truth of each thing?

There can be no reason, he said, for rejecting those who have this
greatest of all great qualities; they must always have the first place
unless they fail in some other respect. Suppose, then, I said, that we
determine how far they can unite this and the other excellences.

By all means.

In the first place, as we began by observing, the nature of the
philosopher has to be ascertained. We must come to an understanding
about him, and, when we have done so, then, if I am not mistaken, we
shall also acknowledge that such a union of qualities is possible, and
that those in whom they are united, and those only, should be rulers
in the State.


Plato - The Republic






Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

"Tom Veatch" wrote:

HeyBub, you'd best be careful with comments like that.

NBD when you consider the source.

Lew

Tom Watson wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 17:19:39 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:


It already has been. It's been replaced with a limp wristed form
of Marxism. I'm sure you're very happy.



stinkbait works.



Evidently

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

wrote:

A quick drive by here on my part as I am off to the hospital once more
to be the advocate for my aged father against Medicare/Medicaid and
the hospital system. My mom can't do it because she is starting to
have signs of Alzheimer's.


Best of luck to you and best wishes that this turns out well.

I am sure this topic and the usual self righteous politicos here will
beat this thread to death while swinging the sword of their version of
the truth.


Nope, just going to point out that everybody is going to get to do that if
Obamacare is implemented. We'll have to prove that our value to society,
adjusted for our age justifies the expense for whatever treatment is being
planned. Not even speculation -- it's already in the plans and the
stimulus bill -- that little bit about "evaluating cost effective care"


.... snip
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Chuck wrote:

HeyBub wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
I'll grant you the Bush administration was arrogant - they all are
(see "Jane's Law"). But corrupt? Hardly. In the entire eight years of
the Bush administration, ONE person was convicted of impropriety, and
that for testimony about a crime that never happened.

As a matter of contrast:
Forty-seven individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton
machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of
these occurring during the Clinton administration itself. There were
in addition 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons were
imprisoned.

===============
Jury Convicts Fund-Raiser Hsu

"[May 19 - NEW YORK] Norman Hsu, a former top fund-raiser for the
Democratic Party and convicted Ponzi scheme operator, was found guilty
Tuesday of illegally funneling tens of thousands of dollars to candidates
for federal office by pressuring investors to donate to his favored
candidates."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124274534722334937.html




Thank you for bringing some sense into this discussion. Now we need to
list the people that are being investigated today and those that Bama
brought into his staff that should be investigated. Chuck

Would really like to see a very detailed investigation of the credit card
donations to the campaigns. Seems that the President's campaign had
verification turned off deliberately. This allowed people to make
unlimited numbers of donations below the reportable limits.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

On May 19, 1:57 pm, Swingman wrote:

Sorry to hear about your folks. Spent Mother's Day with Mom half
remembering that she had kids, then struggling with which ones of those
present were hers.

The lucid moments were worth it, but they are getting farther and
farther apart. All the best to both your mother and father, and you two,
to boot.

Thanks to everyone, up and down in this thread for the good wishes.
It was Friday, Saturday, and 1/2 Sunday in the hosptal. Got Dad home
late Sunday, he fell flat on his back, tangled up in his walker, and
was back in the hospital less than 12 hours later.

Now we are finding he may have fractured vertebrae. He is pushing 83,
so no operations. He has cancer, heart disease, and about 1/8 of his
lung capacity. He is too fragile to even run some of the tests on him
now.

Oddly, the best suggestion the combined brain trust can come up with
is to (literally....) "super" glue his fractures together with some
kind of epoxy. Other than that, nothing.

So now we wait and see. I have a few more full days at the hospital
as they have no advocate or anyone to speak coherently on their
behalf. Mom is slowly losing it, and she is at the point where she
wandered off in the emergency room a couple of times while we were
there waiting for the docs.

Gonna be a long week.

Once again, thanks to all for the good wishes. I will pass them on to
him telling it came from "the internet". He will get a charge out of
it. He isn't sure what the internet is, but he knows "all the kids
are nuts about it" these days and everyone is "on it" but him.

Robert

wrote in message
...
On May 19, 1:57 pm, Swingman wrote:

Sorry to hear about your folks. Spent Mother's Day with Mom half
remembering that she had kids, then struggling with which ones of those
present were hers.

The lucid moments were worth it, but they are getting farther and
farther apart. All the best to both your mother and father, and you two,
to boot.

Thanks to everyone, up and down in this thread for the good wishes.
It was Friday, Saturday, and 1/2 Sunday in the hosptal. Got Dad home
late Sunday, he fell flat on his back, tangled up in his walker, and
was back in the hospital less than 12 hours later.

Now we are finding he may have fractured vertebrae. He is pushing 83,
so no operations. He has cancer, heart disease, and about 1/8 of his
lung capacity. He is too fragile to even run some of the tests on him
now.

Oddly, the best suggestion the combined brain trust can come up with
is to (literally....) "super" glue his fractures together with some
kind of epoxy. Other than that, nothing.

IIRC, super glue got its start in medicine so it's not too odd.


So now we wait and see. I have a few more full days at the hospital
as they have no advocate or anyone to speak coherently on their
behalf. Mom is slowly losing it, and she is at the point where she
wandered off in the emergency room a couple of times while we were
there waiting for the docs.

Gonna be a long week.

Once again, thanks to all for the good wishes. I will pass them on to
him telling it came from "the internet". He will get a charge out of
it. He isn't sure what the internet is, but he knows "all the kids
are nuts about it" these days and everyone is "on it" but him.

He's On It NOW!

Best wishes to all. Including You! It's a tough row to hoe.


Robert