trump-offered-kim-jong-un-ride-air-force-one-report-2021-2

[micky]

From yesterday

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-offered-kim-jong-un-ride-air-force-one-report-2021-2

[Jim Joyce]

On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:55:21 -0500, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote:

>
>From yesterday
>
>https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-offered-kim-jong-un-ride-air-force-one-report-2021-2

That sounds about right. Trump will never be accused of showing good
judgment.

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:50:32 -0600, Jim Joyce

He thought it was his plane to do with what he wanted.

and he though Kim Jong Un was his friend because he smiled at him.

Trump even bragged that he got along well with him, but he didn't know
if any one else would. Totally ignored that he made no progress against
nuclear weapons and missiles, and now N. Korea is 4 years farther along.

When Gerald Ford was prez, some complained, We needed a Lincoln but we
got a Ford. With trump, we got a rusty chevy corvair with a blown
engine, if that much.

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 00:16:10 -0500, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com>
wrote:

Good thing we have Biden. KJU is going to give up all his weapons now,
hold free elections and open up his country. Isn't it great.

My bet is in 2024 KJU will be 4 more years farther along, whatever
that means.

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Tue, 23 Feb 2021 01:57:27 -0500,

gfre...@aol.com wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 00:16:10 -0500, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com>
>wrote:
>
>>In alt.home.repair, on Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:50:32 -0600, Jim Joyce
>><no...@none.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:55:21 -0500, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>From yesterday
>>>>
>>>>https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-offered-kim-jong-un-ride-air-force-one-report-2021-2
>>>
>>>That sounds about right. Trump will never be accused of showing good
>>>judgment.
>>
>>He thought it was his plane to do with what he wanted.
>>
>>and he though Kim Jong Un was his friend because he smiled at him.
>>
>>Trump even bragged that he got along well with him, but he didn't know
>>if any one else would. Totally ignored that he made no progress against
>>nuclear weapons and missiles, and now N. Korea is 4 years farther along.
>>
>>When Gerald Ford was prez, some complained, We needed a Lincoln but we
>>got a Ford. With trump, we got a rusty chevy corvair with a blown
>>engine, if that much.
>
>Good thing we have Biden. KJU is going to give up all his weapons now,

I never said Biden can solve the problem. I don't know what he can do.
Other people know more about this than I do.

But at least Biden won't look like a jackass, claiming the threat was
over when nothing was agreed on. Then making the ridiculous statement I
referred to above, roughly "We got along well, I don't know if anyone
else will." Biden won't say he "fell in love" with Kim.

Biden won't embarrass the USA by looking like an idiot, by saying such
things.

>hold free elections and open up his country. Isn't it great.
>
>My bet is in 2024 KJU will be 4 more years farther along, whatever
>that means.

Maybe. I guess you don't have a plan to do better either. But you
haven't been a public USA jackass on the world stage. And I applaud you
for that.

[trader_4]

We are entering a new era in the nuclear age that we have never
experienced before and it's not clear that anyone is paying attention.
We've entered a period where we're putting huge economic pressure on
a starving country, with an erratic dictator, that has nuclear weapons,
demanding that they disarm. It's not clear what KJU might do and we
should be thinking this through, the possible outcomes. One thing for
sure, the guy that offered the ride had no capability to do that kind of
thinking.

As to the plane ride, it's just one more example of Trump's buffoonery.
Bolton and others have said Trump went to those meetings unprepared
and saying all he had to do was get in a room with KJU and he could
convince him. No surprises there, that's worked for Trump all his life.
IDK how, but it has and it's still working with the Republican Party.
Trump got nowhere with KJU, except to give him legitimacy on the world
stage that his family has sought for 70 years. So he thought maybe a
ride on AF1 might win over KJU. Trump never thought for a second
about that scenario. It's would not have been just KJU, but his armed
security detail on AF1 with the president. When Trump came back
from that first meeting, that was a stunning moment, one where it was
obvious the Republican Party had lost it's collective mind. Trump lied,
claimed that KJU was denuclearizing right now, that he trusts him,
that the threat from NK nuclear weapons is over. Just imagine if
Obama, Hillary or Biden had done that, what the GOP would be saying.
They would have called it stupid, treason. But Trump did it, said it and
they thought it was just fine, maybe even great. That's why whoever
said this is like a cult and some people need deprogramming help
is right.

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 07:50:58 -0500, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com>

At a certain point you have to ask wouldn't a change in policy be
worth a try. We have had a war and sanctioned N Korea over the last 70
years with nothing real to show for it but a lot of money wasted and
killed 36,000 Americans.
The same is true with the Russians when you consider Vietnam was a
proxy war with the Soviets..

We are coddling the Chinese who are more of an existential threat to
us than either of them, mostly because it is good for business.
I suppose if the Russians and N Koreans had products we wanted to buy,
we would rework our strategy.

I am not saying Trump did everything right but I am not sure the idea
was wrong.
OTOH he was wrong in Cuba. That was driven by the ExPats in Miami and
the sugar farmers around the lake. That was one of the few red spots
on that coast and maybe enough to have swung Florida for him.

[trader_4]

You make it sound like we caused the war. NK invaded South Korea.

> The same is true with the Russians when you consider Vietnam was a
> proxy war with the Soviets..

What would you have done, given them a cake and handed over Western Europe
after they already stole all of Eastern Europe? Seems to me we handled Russia
pretty much right, following WWII, right on through the end. Except maybe we
should have kicked their asses back into Russia in 1946. We had the atomic bomb,
they didn't. But no one could have predicted exactly what would happen with
Eastern Europe and they had been our allies.

>
> We are coddling the Chinese who are more of an existential threat to
> us than either of them, mostly because it is good for business.
> I suppose if the Russians and N Koreans had products we wanted to buy,
> we would rework our strategy.

It's not clear that China is more of an existential threat to us than NK.
And China today, isn't nearly as bad as what it was 50 years ago in terms
of oppression and human rights. And it's a totally different situation with
regards to nuclear arms. China already has them, while NK has just
started. China has a rational, stable leader and others in the govt to
balance out any crazy ideas. China has done a spectacular job building
it's economy and wealth. KJU is a one man nut show starving millions
to death. Trump offered him the China alternative in return for giving
up nuclear weapons. KJU refused. I'm sure the Obama/Hillary experience
with what they did in Libya didn't help. Nor did Trump's reneging on the
nuclear deal we made with Iran either. I'm sure NK inteligence had
plenty of reports for KJU on what a lying shyster Trump is. I wouldn't
have trusted anything he promised, would you?

But like I said in the other post, we are in a new era with NK, we've never
put this kind of extreme economic pressure on a country that has nuclear
weapons and increasingly has the potential to strike the US. So somebody
better be thinking about what the right strategy is moving forward.

> I am not saying Trump did everything right but I am not sure the idea
> was wrong.

Even if the idea was OK, the execution was totally wrong. He could have
had a meeting with less publicity and even worse, all the lies and praise
for a genocidal dictator. Trump didn't even get a definition of denuclearization,
yet he lied and claimed he achieved it.

[angelica...@yahoo.com]

On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 9:33:06 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

> Even if the idea was OK, the execution was totally wrong. He could have
> had a meeting with less publicity

I know you already know this, but:

No, he couldn't. Trump needs the publicity to feed his narcissism.

Cindy Hamilton

[trader_4]

That's what I see the odds favoring too.

[trader_4]

On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 9:33:06 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

I should have added that the US has tried a softer approach with NK
before. During the Clinton years a deal was reached where they were
supposed to limit their nuclear activities in return for economic aid,
some oil, etc. NK just kept on cheating. And despite the fact that NK
didn't really get all that much in aid, because it was to be given out over
time as they complied, Clinton was ripped by the Republicans for being
soft and naive.

[Rod Speed]

"micky" <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote in message
news:rgt93ghvg0pbi1tbf...@4ax.com...

But could well get the USA involved in yet another military
adventure/fiasco somewhere else in the world.

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:e292cded-137c-404f...@googlegroups.com...

He's not the prez anymore, stupid.

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:2ae4f02a-92d9-42a8...@googlegroups.com...

They didn’t steal it, that was the result of the Yalta agreement, stupid.

> Seems to me we handled Russia pretty much right, following
> WWII, right on through the end. Except maybe we should
> have kicked their asses back into Russia in 1946.

That was never even remotely possible. It wasn’t even
remotely possible to kick them out of Germany either.

> We had the atomic bomb, they didn't.

But they wouldn’t have meekly gone back to russia if the USA
had threatened to nuke Moscow if they had not done that.

> But no one could have predicted exactly what would
> happen with Eastern Europe and they had been our allies.

>> We are coddling the Chinese who are more of an existential
>> threat to us than either of them, mostly because it is good
>> for business. I suppose if the Russians and N Koreans had
>> products we wanted to buy, we would rework our strategy.

> It's not clear that China is more of an existential threat to us than NK.

Economically it certainly is and I bet it will be just as belligerent
in the south china sea and with Taiwan as it was with Trump.

> And China today, isn't nearly as bad as what it was 50 years ago in terms
> of oppression and human rights. And it's a totally different situation
> with regards to nuclear arms. China already has them, while NK has just
> started. China has a rational, stable leader and others in the govt to
> balance out any crazy ideas. China has done a spectacular job building
> it's economy and wealth. KJU is a one man nut show starving millions
> to death. Trump offered him the China alternative in return for giving
> up nuclear weapons. KJU refused. I'm sure the Obama/Hillary experience
> with what they did in Libya didn't help. Nor did Trump's reneging on the
> nuclear deal we made with Iran either. I'm sure NK inteligence had
> plenty of reports for KJU on what a lying shyster Trump is. I wouldn't
> have trusted anything he promised, would you?

> But like I said in the other post, we are in a new era with NK, we've
> never
> put this kind of extreme economic pressure on a country that has nuclear
> weapons and increasingly has the potential to strike the US. So somebody
> better be thinking about what the right strategy is moving forward.

There is no such animal with someone like Kim Jong Un.

And he has nukes so he doesn’t get fucked over by the USA
like the USA has done with Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc etc etc.

I would have nukes too in his situation. You wont
be getting him to give them up, you watch.

>> I am not saying Trump did everything right
>> but I am not sure the idea was wrong.

> Even if the idea was OK, the execution was totally wrong.
> He could have had a meeting with less publicity and even
> worse, all the lies and praise for a genocidal dictator.
> Trump didn't even get a definition of denuclearization,
> yet he lied and claimed he achieved it.

Yeah, Biden needs you to tell him how things must be done.

[Peeler]

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:46:42 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

--
Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"Shit you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID: <ogoa38$pul$1...@news.mixmin.net>

[Tekkie©]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 01:57:27 -0500, gfre...@aol.com posted for all of us to
digest...

You betcha, and it ain't gonna be good for us...

--
Tekkie

[Tekkie©]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 09:05:21 -0500, gfre...@aol.com posted for all of us to
digest...

>

> At a certain point you have to ask wouldn't a change in policy be
> worth a try. We have had a war and sanctioned N Korea over the last 70
> years with nothing real to show for it but a lot of money wasted and
> killed 36,000 Americans.
> The same is true with the Russians when you consider Vietnam was a
> proxy war with the Soviets..
>
> We are coddling the Chinese who are more of an existential threat to
> us than either of them, mostly because it is good for business.
> I suppose if the Russians and N Koreans had products we wanted to buy,
> we would rework our strategy.
>
> I am not saying Trump did everything right but I am not sure the idea
> was wrong.
>

I agree. Most of the disagreements as to T's actions were because he wasn't
using the the old worn out play-book of the rich establishment.

One must remember that public actions and statements are BS. I personally think
that T was trying to do right but had so much battling behind the scenes by
both parties that he really couldn't accomplish his agenda.

--
Tekkie

[Rod Speed]

"Tekkie©" <Tek...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:9PdZH.674$Cy2...@fx06.iad...

Another example of you abstaining from off topic posts, Arlen ?

[gfre...@aol.com]

We won that war in the summer of 1950, We had liberated all of South
Korea and were occupying most of the north but that wasn't good
enough. MacArthur with the blessing of Truman, drove to the Yalu
River. That brought China into the war and they pretty much kicked our
ass. We were lucky to get back to where we were before the war.

>
>> The same is true with the Russians when you consider Vietnam was a
>> proxy war with the Soviets..
>
>What would you have done, given them a cake and handed over Western Europe
>after they already stole all of Eastern Europe? Seems to me we handled Russia
>pretty much right, following WWII, right on through the end. Except maybe we
>should have kicked their asses back into Russia in 1946. We had the atomic bomb,
>they didn't. But no one could have predicted exactly what would happen with
>Eastern Europe and they had been our allies.
>

The Soviets took that territory fair and square, losing about 20
million people in the process. They thought they won it as a spoil of
war. That was the way it always worked before.

>> We are coddling the Chinese who are more of an existential threat to
>> us than either of them, mostly because it is good for business.
>> I suppose if the Russians and N Koreans had products we wanted to buy,
>> we would rework our strategy.
>
>It's not clear that China is more of an existential threat to us than NK.
>And China today, isn't nearly as bad as what it was 50 years ago in terms
>of oppression and human rights. And it's a totally different situation with
>regards to nuclear arms. China already has them, while NK has just
>started. China has a rational, stable leader and others in the govt to
>balance out any crazy ideas. China has done a spectacular job building
>it's economy and wealth. KJU is a one man nut show starving millions
>to death. Trump offered him the China alternative in return for giving
>up nuclear weapons. KJU refused. I'm sure the Obama/Hillary experience
>with what they did in Libya didn't help. Nor did Trump's reneging on the
>nuclear deal we made with Iran either. I'm sure NK inteligence had
>plenty of reports for KJU on what a lying shyster Trump is. I wouldn't
>have trusted anything he promised, would you?
>
>But like I said in the other post, we are in a new era with NK, we've never
>put this kind of extreme economic pressure on a country that has nuclear
>weapons and increasingly has the potential to strike the US. So somebody
>better be thinking about what the right strategy is moving forward.
>
>

I am not as sanguine as you are about the strategic objectives of
China. Perhaps you should look at what they are doing to their
neighbors and what is going on in latin America.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:nrfb3g5e1r48ronmm...@4ax.com...

Nope, they just wanted to avoid it happening again.

And imposed their political system on most of the
places they occupied, just like the allies did too.

> That was the way it always worked before.

That mangles the real story, particularly with WW1.

Fuck all basically except with Tibet.

> and what is going on in latin America.

Fuck all as far as China is concerned.

[Peeler]

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 15:43:53 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

--

Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID: <g4t0jt...@mid.individual.net>

[trader_4]

On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 4:01:31 PM UTC-5, Tek...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 09:05:21 -0500, gfre...@aol.com posted for all of us to
> digest...
>
> >
> > At a certain point you have to ask wouldn't a change in policy be
> > worth a try. We have had a war and sanctioned N Korea over the last 70
> > years with nothing real to show for it but a lot of money wasted and
> > killed 36,000 Americans.
> > The same is true with the Russians when you consider Vietnam was a
> > proxy war with the Soviets..
> >
> > We are coddling the Chinese who are more of an existential threat to
> > us than either of them, mostly because it is good for business.
> > I suppose if the Russians and N Koreans had products we wanted to buy,
> > we would rework our strategy.
> >
> > I am not saying Trump did everything right but I am not sure the idea
> > was wrong.
> >
> I agree. Most of the disagreements as to T's actions were because he wasn't
> using the the old worn out play-book of the rich establishment.

Being decent, honest, moral, mature, stable, not self focused were never worn out.
At least not for me and apparently most American voters agreed last November.

>
> One must remember that public actions and statements are BS.

Whatever they were before Trump took over, he sure took it to orders of
magnitude worse. Or have you found those 7 new US Steel factories,
for example?

I personally think
> that T was trying to do right but had so much battling behind the scenes by
> both parties that he really couldn't accomplish his agenda.
>
> --
> Tekkie

I'm sure you do. Trump relies on people like you who buy his divisive BS.
It's always someone else's fault. BTW, where is that Trump wonderful new
health insurance proposal? The one he was promising for 5 years? Just
months ago we have him on video, I believe the interview was with
Chris Wallace, where he lied again, saying it was coming in just a couple of
weeks. The Trump and the Trumpets get mad at Chris Wallace, for exposing
a little bit of the truth. Who exactly prevented Trump from putting forth
that proposal? Same thing with almost everything else, like immigration.
Trump has a big mouth, big balls, where was the proposal for comprehensive
immigration reform? The GOP had the WH, Senate and House his first two
years, Trump never put forth a damn thing, he just punted it all to others.
If they did nothing, he was fine with it. He didn't care about solving immigration,
he just wanted to be able to use it to further his power.

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:cb5e2fb0-db26-4747...@googlegroups.com...

> On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 4:01:31 PM UTC-5, Tek...@comcast.net
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 09:05:21 -0500, gfre...@aol.com posted for all of us
>> to
>> digest...
>>
>> >
>> > At a certain point you have to ask wouldn't a change in policy be
>> > worth a try. We have had a war and sanctioned N Korea over the last 70
>> > years with nothing real to show for it but a lot of money wasted and
>> > killed 36,000 Americans.
>> > The same is true with the Russians when you consider Vietnam was a
>> > proxy war with the Soviets..
>> >
>> > We are coddling the Chinese who are more of an existential threat to
>> > us than either of them, mostly because it is good for business.
>> > I suppose if the Russians and N Koreans had products we wanted to buy,
>> > we would rework our strategy.
>> >
>> > I am not saying Trump did everything right but I am not sure the idea
>> > was wrong.
>> >
>> I agree. Most of the disagreements as to T's actions were because he
>> wasn't
>> using the the old worn out play-book of the rich establishment.
>
> Being decent, honest, moral, mature, stable, not self focused were never
> worn out.
> At least not for me and apparently most American voters agreed last
> November.

Nope, just a majority who bothered to vote.

You do realise that he isnt prez now ?

Give it a fucking rest.

[Peeler]

On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 03:24:58 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

> Give it a fucking rest.

Says the abnormal senile pest who gets up every night between 1 and 4 am in
Australia just so he can keep pestering people on Usenet without too long a
break!

[Tekkie©]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 22:10:19 -0500, gfre...@aol.com posted for all of us to
digest...

>

> I am not as sanguine as you are about the strategic objectives of
> China. Perhaps you should look at what they are doing to their
> neighbors and what is going on in latin America.
>

It seems like everyone likes to look to past. I applaud you for looking to the
future and in spite of what is being declared China is the enemy, for now and
future generations.

--
Tekkie

[Tekkie©]

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 08:20:48 -0800 (PST), trader_4 posted for all of us to

I respect your opinion but do not agree with it. I am not a Trumper (as you
call it) but rather a devil's advocate. I have a different viewpoint than you
but please do not portray me as an evil person. Am I not allowed to have my own
opinions?

There is a new President and let us focus on him. T is the past and there are
several court cases that will either prove or disprove our opinions.

Thank you for your support -- Bartles & Jaymes

--
Tekkie

[trader_4]

IDK what that's supposed to mean in this context. We saw you here defending
just about everything Trump did.

I have a different viewpoint than you
> but please do not portray me as an evil person. Am I not allowed to have my own
> opinions?

I don't recall portraying you as evil.

>
> There is a new President and let us focus on him. T is the past and there are
> several court cases that will either prove or disprove our opinions.

I only wish it was true that Trump is in the past. If so, what's he doing at CPAC
on Sunday? And why are most of the leading GOP politicians running around
saying we need Trump, Trump needs us, why are they running down to Mar a Lago
to pay homage? I've never seen that before with any president who left office
and Trump left in defeat. If you're talking about the defamation cases, I can't
wait for those, but I doubt it will change the opinions of the Trumpets. They are
deep, deep down the conspiracy and denial rabbit hole. Many are waiting for Trump
to be sworn in on Mar 4. It never should have gotten to that point, but Trump
told big lies about a stolen election, so that he could try to undo the
election and cling to power was the way to go. He started the final phase of his
lying, that lead to the insurrection on election night. With 60 percent of the votes
in, with no swing states called, Trump came out, declared himself the winner
and said all further counting would be fraud and counting must stop. That's
your America? Your values? His base still believe him.
If Trump wants the country to move on, to put himself in the past, then he should
say at CPAC that the election was not stolen, that he accepts the results and
his supporters should too. Even better to also say that he's not going to run again.
But you and I know he's not going to do either, so why pretend? It's more likely
that Trump is going to say the election was stolen again or say that he loves the
insurrectionists again, while claiming to be the leader of the party and dangling
the possibility of running again.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 2/26/2021 5:43 PM, trader_4 wrote:

> If Trump wants the country to move on, to put himself in the past, then he should
> say at CPAC that the election was not stolen, that he accepts the results and
> his supporters should too. Even better to also say that he's not going to run again.
> But you and I know he's not going to do either, so why pretend? It's more likely
> that Trump is going to say the election was stolen again or say that he loves the
> insurrectionists again, while claiming to be the leader of the party and dangling
> the possibility of running again.
>
>
>
>

In spite of everything, I read today that McConnell will support him if
he runs in 2024.

[jimmy]

Recent events have made it clear that Mitch McCuckold will do whatever Xi Jingping tells him to do.

[marika]

On Monday, February 22, 2021 at 11:16:17 PM UTC-6, micky wrote:
> In alt.home.repair, on Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:50:32 -0600, Jim Joyce
> <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:55:21 -0500, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>From yesterday
> >>
> >>https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-offered-kim-jong-un-ride-air-force-one-report-2021-2
> >
> >That sounds about right. Trump will never be accused of showing good
> >judgment.
> He thought it was his plane to do with what he wanted.
>
> and he though Kim Jong Un was his friend because he smiled at him.
>
> Trump even bragged that he got along well with him, but he didn't know
> if any one else would. Totally ignored that he made no progress against
> nuclear weapons and missiles, and now N. Korea is 4 years farther along.
>
> When Gerald Ford was prez, some complained, We needed a Lincoln but we
> got a Ford. With trump, we got a rusty chevy corvair with a blown

> engine, if that much.by

Trump's problem is that he is not a negotiator in spite of his sales pitch that he is a deal maker

Kim played him, and played him well. The entire time that Trump was supposedly levying sanctions, Putin and Xi were skillfully helping Kim to avoid those by playing games to get Kim the goods he wanted, bypassing all sanction by disguising boats

Trump had absolutely no idea what he was doing and gave Kim parity and legitimacy by meeting with him and allowing photos of them as if they were pals. Way over his head

Trump pretended to be a dove, like the one in my yard

“I am very comfortable up here on my mat of sticks, thank you”

Just so he wouldn't have to do a lick of actual work

mk5000

Freud said he didn’t know what women wanted. I know what women want. They want a whole lot of people to talk to.--God Bless You, Dr. Kevorkian , Kurt Vonnegut