Bardot on Palin
Richard Carnahan
Sarah Palin on Tuesday, saying the US vice presidential candidate was
a disgrace to women.
"I hope you lose these elections because that would be a victory for
the world," Bardot wrote in an open letter to Republican John McCain's
running mate in the November vote.
"By denying the responsibility of man in global warming, by advocating
gun rights and making statements that are disconcertingly stupid, you
are a disgrace to women and you alone represent a terrible threat, a
true environmental catastrophe," wrote Bardot.
The screen icon from the 1960s, who now heads an animal rights
foundation, went on to assail Palin for supporting Arctic oil
exploration that could jeopardize delicate animal habitats and for
dismissing measures to protect polar bears.
"This shows your total lack of responsibility, your inability to
protect or simply respect animal life," Bardot wrote.
In a final salvo against Palin, the 74-year-old ex-star picked up on
Palin's depiction of herself as a pitbull wearing lipstick and said
she "implored" her not to compare herself to dogs.
"I know them well and I can assure you that no pitbull, no dog, nor
any other animal for that matter is as dangerous as you are," Bardot
wrote.
Anim8rFSK
<3bde87c8-d7bb-4201...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com>,
Richard Carnahan <rfcsa...@aol.com> wrote:
> French film legend-turned-activist Brigitte Bardot took a swipe at
> Sarah Palin on Tuesday, saying the US vice presidential candidate was
> a disgrace to women.
Well, that's reason enough to vote for Palin all by itself.
--
Third root canal - averted.
Hip Hip Hurrah!
Derek Janssen
> In article
> <3bde87c8-d7bb-4201...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com>,
> Richard Carnahan <rfcsa...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>>French film legend-turned-activist Brigitte Bardot took a swipe at
>>Sarah Palin on Tuesday, saying the US vice presidential candidate was
>>a disgrace to women.
>
> Well, that's reason enough to vote for Palin all by itself.
Yes, but also:
>> In a final salvo against Palin, the 74-year-old ex-star picked up on
>> Palin's depiction of herself as a pitbull wearing lipstick and said
>> she "implored" her not to compare herself to dogs.
>> "I know them well and I can assure you that no pitbull, no dog, nor
>> any other animal for that matter is as dangerous as you are," Bardot
>> wrote.
"I know pitbulls. I've worked with pitbulls for many years. Pitbulls
are a friend of mine. Governor....you're no pitbull." ^_^
Derek Janssen (Dear Brigitte may be a barking-mad looney, but ya gotta
give her credit on this one)
eja...@verizon.net
Richard Schultz
: In article
:> French film legend-turned-activist Brigitte Bardot took a swipe at
:> Sarah Palin on Tuesday, saying the US vice presidential candidate was
:> a disgrace to women.
:
: Well, that's reason enough to vote for Palin all by itself.
According to the OP, this advice came from a legend. Would you take seriously
any advice that came, say, from King Arthur (or for that matter any of his
kuhniggets)?
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system
of government."
Michael O'Connor
election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
wull
"Michael O'Connor" <mpoco...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:85ca4f4b-003f-45a7...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
> Why does anybody care what a foreigner (who can't even vote in our
> election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
You said a mouthful there Mike. Not only a foreigner but a kooky one too.
Wull
Voltronicus
> Why does anybody care what a foreigner (who can't even vote in our
> election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
Foreigner or not, Bardot was right. Palin is a loony.
McCain spent too much time in that prison camp. He's crazy as a
shithouse rat. Do you really want his finger on the nuclear button?
Stone me
"Michael O'Connor" <mpoco...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:85ca4f4b-003f-45a7...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
> election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
It might depend on whether minds are closed or open to new thought.
You have opted to decry the criticism by diminishing the standing of the
critic.
As citizens of a world which is crumbling before our eyes, it is natural
that
someone whose life has been and is being gravely affected by decisions
taken and what may be taken, might want to input their thoughts and fears.
You cannot create a global financial empire, and assuming leadership and the
role of Chief of Police, without listening to your citizens, even those who
are
not allowed a vote, unless riding for a fall.
There has always been, it seems to me, some anti-European feeling, even
anti-foreigner
trait. This is not good for the rest of us, since we seem to get people who
have to be
introduced to a World Atlas as they come in possession of the nuc-you-ler
button.
Spiro Agnew, Dan Quayle, and perhaps the lady Palin. But a heartbeat away
from
mega-death. (Not that other nations do not throw up incompetents. George
Brown
as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs UK for one)
If you like to look up the mishaps of incompetents look up Wiki George
Brown,
Archbishop of Montevideo rumour. As good as any Dan Quayle tale.
The world Financial System - in ruins. Iceland being the first nation to
show sign of
total financial collapse, and looking to trade the old NATO base to the
Russians for
a huge loan.
Stone me.
Richard Schultz
: Why does anybody care what a foreigner (who can't even vote in our
: election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
Because she has huge tracts of land?
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
The gardener plants an evergreen whilst trampling on a flower. . .
Kingo Gondo
"Richard Schultz" <sch...@mail.biu.ack.il> wrote in message
news:gciago$cas$2...@news.iucc.ac.il...
> In article
> <85ca4f4b-003f-45a7...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com>,
> Michael O'Connor <mpoco...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> : Why does anybody care what a foreigner (who can't even vote in our
> : election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
>
> Because she has huge tracts of land?
Makes more sense than the reasons the candidates themselves usually offer
up.
(And, yes, I get the reference! Thanks for the laugh--we need it right now.)
Four more weeks of this unbearable bullshit. This country is batshit.
moviePig
> "Richard Schultz" <schu...@mail.biu.ack.il> wrote in message
>
> news:gciago$cas$2...@news.iucc.ac.il...
>
> > In article
> > <85ca4f4b-003f-45a7-a2f8-791ccc8de...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com>,
> > Michael O'Connor <mpoconn...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > : Why does anybody care what a foreigner (who can't even vote in our
> > : election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
>
> > Because she has huge tracts of land?
>
> Makes more sense than the reasons the candidates themselves usually offer
> up.
>
> (And, yes, I get the reference! Thanks for the laugh--we need it right now.)
>
> Four more weeks of this unbearable bullshit. This country is batshit.
No need to mix fecal metaphors when it's all Shinola...
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
Jim Beaver
"Michael O'Connor" <mpoco...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:85ca4f4b-003f-45a7...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
> Why does anybody care what a foreigner (who can't even vote in our
> election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
Because "we" (if you mean Americans) can either fuck up or improve their
world by fucking up or improving ours. No man is an island, you know.
Though from your tone, I suspect you think otherwise.
Reminds me of an old joke that circulated when I was a kid (the son of a
Church of Christ minister):
Guy dies, goes to heaven, St. Peter's showing him around the joint, the
pool, the mess hall, the many mansions, etc. Guy notices a group of people
off by themselves huddled together talking. Asks St. Peter who those guys
off in the corner are. St. Pete says, "Oh, that's the Church of Christ
guys. They think they're the only ones up here."
Jim Beaver
the savage cabbage
We can take this from saint Bardot. she loves animals. she's a good
person.
Michael O'Connor
> > Why does anybody care what a foreigner (who can't even vote in our
> > election) thinks about whom we should vote for?
>
> Foreigner or not, Bardot was right. Palin is a loony.
> McCain spent too much time in that prison camp. He's crazy as a
> shithouse rat. Do you really want his finger on the nuclear button?
Yes, I do, given the choice between him and Obama.
Mike O'Sullivan
Anim8rFSK
It's another "vote against the other guy" election.
I wonder how many more people would vote if you COULD vote against one
guy without voting for the other?
Kingo Gondo
"the savage cabbage" <animal...@live.com> wrote in message
news:fa4f1acc-d3ff-46a0...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Reply:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blondi
And steve has a dog, too.
Michael O'Connor
> I wonder how many more people would vote if you COULD vote against one
> guy without voting for the other?
>
> --
> Third root canal - averted.
>
> Hip Hip Hurrah!
I wish people could vote "None of the Above".
Derek Janssen
>>I wonder how many more people would vote if you COULD vote against one
>>guy without voting for the other?
>
As they say in Puerto Rico, "Vota o quedate calla'o". :)
Derek Janssen
eja...@verizon.net
Death From Above
> "the savage cabbage" <animalishn...@live.com> wrote in messagenews:fa4f1acc-d3ff-46a0...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
Not everything about the Hitman was bad.
Mike O'Sullivan
America has more than its' fair share of bright and capable people, yet
almost invariably senior politicians seem to be at the least, mediocre,
with no apparent qualification for high office.
David Oberman
>I'm always amazed at the low quality of people in public life in the US.
Well ... you know ...
<shrug>
steve
On 10-Oct-2008, David Oberman <dobe...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> >I'm always amazed at the low quality of people in public life in the US.
>
> Well ... you know ...
> <shrug>
Compare the collection of idiots on Captol Hill today with the towering
intellects that crafted the US Constitution.
Who was it who said (approximately) "Our govt was designed by geniuses to be
run by idiots." ?
Ah ha. Google gives me the full quote:
“I’ve always believed that America’s government was a unique political
system — one designed by geniuses so that it could be run by idiots. I was
wrong. No system can be smart enough to survive this level of incompetence
and recklessness by the people charged to run it."
Thomas Friedman, NY Times
How true...sadly.
steve
--
We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We
laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate
and bid the geldings to be fruitful. - C.S. Lewis
Kingo Gondo
"Death From Above" <cerebur...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:df26627f-51bf-45bf...@17g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
Reply:
Yes, Gaza, don't worry--we understand your points of agreement with him.
Jim Beaver
"steve" <st...@steve.com> wrote in message
news:CsJHk.8544$JJ4....@newsfe06.iad...
>
> On 10-Oct-2008, David Oberman <dobe...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> >I'm always amazed at the low quality of people in public life in the US.
>>
>> Well ... you know ...
>> <shrug>
>
> Compare the collection of idiots on Captol Hill today with the towering
> intellects that crafted the US Constitution.
Fortunately for us, even as bad as partisan sniping could get in those days
(and it did get bad), no one was really examining every wart of a
candidate's character and dismissing him if one was found. Not like today.
Why in God's name would anyone who ever did anything remotely human want to
expose his family and himself to what passes for the critical examination of
a candidate these days? If Thomas Jefferson's bed partners or James
Monroe's business dealings or Abe Lincoln's nutty wife (let alone his face!)
got the kind of "this is what's really important" scrutiny today's
candidates get, we'd still be singing "God Save the Queen" and muttering to
ourselves about it. I sometimes think you have to BE an idiot to want to
climb under that microscope -- even if you're a great patriot and a person
of enormously good ideas.
Jim Beaver
Blue
> In article
> <3bde87c8-d7bb-4201-8c82-fe6170565...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com>,
> Richard Carnahan <rfcsac6...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > French film legend-turned-activist Brigitte Bardot took a swipe at
> > Sarah Palin on Tuesday, saying the US vice presidential candidate was
> > a disgrace to women.
>
> Well, that's reason enough to vote for Palin all by itself.
>
> --
> Third root canal - averted.
>
> Hip Hip Hurrah!
Hell yes! Blue
Richard Schultz
: If Thomas Jefferson's bed partners or James
: Monroe's business dealings or Abe Lincoln's nutty wife (let alone his face!)
: got the kind of "this is what's really important" scrutiny today's
: candidates get, we'd still be singing "God Save the Queen" and muttering to
: ourselves about it.
I suppose that you're aware of what the contemporary news media had to say
about Jefferson's sex life. The only reason that he didn't get the kind of
"scrutiny" that candidates get today was that they didn't have TV back then.
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"an optimist is a guy/ that has never had/ much experience"
Derek Janssen
> In article <f5OHk.323$%11...@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>, Jim Beaver <jumb...@prodigy.spam> wrote:
>
> : If Thomas Jefferson's bed partners or James
> : Monroe's business dealings or Abe Lincoln's nutty wife (let alone his face!)
> : got the kind of "this is what's really important" scrutiny today's
> : candidates get, we'd still be singing "God Save the Queen" and muttering to
> : ourselves about it.
>
> I suppose that you're aware of what the contemporary news media had to say
> about Jefferson's sex life.
Namely, that the lack of a two-party system in the early 19th cty. meant
that ALL campaign attacks had to be personal--
Especially if you ended up pissing off your own hired smear-campaign
tailgunner by jilting him at the altar after the election.
Derek Janssen (apparently, James Callender had a *thing* for "secret
affair" stories, that was his specialty)
eja...@verizon.net
Jim Beaver
> In article <f5OHk.323$%11...@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>, Jim Beaver
> <jumb...@prodigy.spam> wrote:
>
> : If Thomas Jefferson's bed partners or James
> : Monroe's business dealings or Abe Lincoln's nutty wife (let alone his
> face!)
> : got the kind of "this is what's really important" scrutiny today's
> : candidates get, we'd still be singing "God Save the Queen" and muttering
> to
> : ourselves about it.
>
> I suppose that you're aware of what the contemporary news media had to say
> about Jefferson's sex life. The only reason that he didn't get the kind
> of
> "scrutiny" that candidates get today was that they didn't have TV back
> then.
I'm aware. Your point is, actually, the point I was trying to make. He got
scrutinized, but not like today.
Jim Beaver
Richard Schultz
:
:> : If Thomas Jefferson's bed partners or James
:> : Monroe's business dealings or Abe Lincoln's nutty wife (let alone his
:> : face!) got the kind of "this is what's really important" scrutiny today's
:> : candidates get, we'd still be singing "God Save the Queen" and muttering
:> : to ourselves about it.
:> I suppose that you're aware of what the contemporary news media had to say
:> about Jefferson's sex life. The only reason that he didn't get the kind
:> of "scrutiny" that candidates get today was that they didn't have TV back
:> then.
: I'm aware. Your point is, actually, the point I was trying to make. He got
: scrutinized, but not like today.
Yes, but the accusations made against him when he was running for President
were more or less the same sort of accusations that got Bill Clinton
impeached. And let's not even talk about Grover "Ma, ma, where's my Pa"
Cleveland and his party of "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion."
George Peatty
wrote:
>Fortunately for us, even as bad as partisan sniping could get in those days
>(and it did get bad), no one was really examining every wart of a
>candidate's character and dismissing him if one was found. Not like today.
>Why in God's name would anyone who ever did anything remotely human want to
>expose his family and himself to what passes for the critical examination of
>a candidate these days? If Thomas Jefferson's bed partners or James
>Monroe's business dealings or Abe Lincoln's nutty wife (let alone his face!)
>got the kind of "this is what's really important" scrutiny today's
>candidates get, we'd still be singing "God Save the Queen" and muttering to
>ourselves about it. I sometimes think you have to BE an idiot to want to
>climb under that microscope -- even if you're a great patriot and a person
>of enormously good ideas.
The lust for power is what persuades them to endure the abuse. Apropos of
nothing, but since you mention him, my favorite Lincoln quote is: "If I were
two-faced, would I be wearing this one?"
Derek Janssen
(Trying to apply the statement to Brigitte Bardot, and it loses
something...) ;)
Derek Janssen
eja...@verizon.net