Honorable Discharge?
ashaanderson
5 year old who yells, "I know you are, but what am I?" In their
latest effort to prove, short of releasing all the "missing" records,
that Bush was a stand up kind of guy who responded to the call of duty
they ask that....if President Bush w/a/s AWOL, then h/o/w c/o/m/e he
had an honorable discharge? The answer is, Bush got an honorable
discharge the same way he got escorted to the head of the line when he
wanted i/n/t/o the Guard; the same way he immediately made lieutenant
even though his scores were mediocre; the same way he was evaluated as
an outstanding pilot, the same way he got into Yale, the same way he
got out of Yale, and drug arrests and DUIs, the same way he was handed
the presidency in spite of the fact that he was not elected....because
he grandfather was Prescott Bush, because his father was the
president, because his friends are Saudi Royalty, because he is a rich
guy, an insider, a Good Old Boy (GOB), a NeoCon who will say, do and
pay anything to get what he wants.....you get the drift.
http://universitypress.info/AmericaBetrayed.html
*AWOL: Away Without Leave for a period of up to 30 days.
Deserter: AWOL for a period exceeding 30 days.
- Military Definition
a.
http://www.ashabot.com
blog: http://www.ashabot.blogspot.com
Keep out of damn ditch.
Towse
Asha wrote:
> http://universitypress.info/AmericaBetrayed.html
Rhawn Joseph would make a better case if he didn't self-publish as
"University Press" to buff his credentials and if he didn't deliberately
misquote Colleen Rowley in an attempt to make his point.
I can't be bothered doing fact-checking when the first couple things I
ran across reminded me of a nutcase I once knew.
Check out Hitler's Diaries, a movie Joseph made.
<http://www.brain-mind.com/Hitler.html> Joseph uses a quote in his
Amazon writeup and elsewhere: "Mesmerizing" - CBS/KPIX San Francisco.
Want to know where that quote was extracted from?
<http://cbs5.com/news/local/2003/05/16/Adolf_Hitler_in_His_Own_Words.html>
"Mesmerizing" came from Ken Bastida's interview with Joseph. It was
Joseph's own word.
His next quote is slightly better used: ""Experience the personality
that entranced a nation, and ultimately led to its destruction."
-CBS/KPIX San Francisco.
From the source: "The documentary, titled Hitler's Diaries, makes no
excuses for Hitler or his followers -- in fact it makes few judgements
at all. In the end, it's strength may be to let audiences experience the
personality that entranced a nation, and ultimately led it to destruction.
Use a different reference source, Asha.
--
Sal
Ye olde swarm of links: thousands of links for writers, researchers and
the terminally curious <http://www.internet-resources.com/writers>
gekko
days, except that upon that day, Asha Anderson wrote in
news:u651k0tr7gg7efc6q...@4ax.com:
> h/o/w c/o/m/e
_how come_
*how come*
and
/how come/
all work very well to make the point and give your reader the ability
to easily read the words without having to strain past the soliduses.
Just a suggestion.
--
gekko
Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
Mitch Dickson
So Asha, Does this mean that you are not voting for the "DUBYA" this time
around?
mi...@volstate.net
<Asha Anderson> wrote in message
news:u651k0tr7gg7efc6q...@4ax.com...
Bob (this one)
> Return with us now to that remarkable 09 Sep 2004, a day like other
> days, except that upon that day, Asha Anderson wrote in
> news:u651k0tr7gg7efc6q...@4ax.com:
>
>>h/o/w c/o/m/e
>
> _how come_
>
> *how come*
>
> and
>
> /how come/
>
> all work very well to make the point and give your reader the ability
> to easily read the words without having to strain past the soliduses.
Aw, gee. I thought it looked like some kind of Viking warship with all
those oars and stuff.
> Just a suggestion.
I once had an honorable discharge. It came from a flesh wound...
Pastorio
Josh Hill
>The White House defends George Bush's military record like a
>5 year old who yells, "I know you are, but what am I?" In their
>latest effort to prove, short of releasing all the "missing" records,
>that Bush was a stand up kind of guy who responded to the call of duty
>they ask that....if President Bush w/a/s AWOL, then h/o/w c/o/m/e he
>had an honorable discharge? The answer is, Bush got an honorable
>discharge the same way he got escorted to the head of the line when he
>wanted i/n/t/o the Guard; the same way he immediately made lieutenant
>even though his scores were mediocre; the same way he was evaluated as
>an outstanding pilot, the same way he got into Yale, the same way he
>got out of Yale, and drug arrests and DUIs, the same way he was handed
>the presidency in spite of the fact that he was not elected....because
>he grandfather was Prescott Bush, because his father was the
>president, because his friends are Saudi Royalty, because he is a rich
>guy, an insider, a Good Old Boy (GOB), a NeoCon who will say, do and
>pay anything to get what he wants.....you get the drift.
Man, I'm glad someone said it, because I was dying to this morning but
it's such a mouthful (or keyboardful, as it were).
--
Josh
Josh Hill
Kerry_Kan...@linkedto.privacyport.com (Buehlah B. Boinkatwink)
wrote:
>"Mitch Dickson" <mi...@volstate.net> wrote in message news:<10k22u4...@corp.supernews.com>...
>
>> So Asha, Does this mean that you are not voting for the "DUBYA" this time
>> around?
>
>That, of course, but also something else which goes a bit deeper, sir.
>Because their guy, Traitor Boy Kerry, got caught once too often with
>his hand in the cookie jar, they're searching desperately to soften
>the consequnces by way of dredging up bullshit claims about Bush's
>military service.
Really. I mean, he wasn't even there -- how could he have done the
things they claim he did?
>Bush HAS a military record, and it's as Commander-In-Chief of the
>Armed Forces of the United States of America going on four years now.
>Their guy went on a filming expedition to Nam, grabbed three bogus
>Purple Hearts and asked to be sent home, and when he did come home
>slandered every brave soldier he ever served with. He'll now pay the
>price for this treasonous behavior.
Deprived of aircraft carrier landings, I suppose.
Hey, I served with distinction in the National Guard. Did you know
that? I'm a true Republican patriot. What, no one who was there during
the two years I was remembers me? The records were mysteriously lost?
The copies of the records were mysteriously lost? Well, I'll be
danged.
--
Josh
Madelin McKinnon
why doesn't Bush ask the FBI
to investigate?
Answer: Because the Bush camp planted
a forged document, to divert
attention away from the credible
'Bush was AWOL' allegations.
Isn't Edwards a breath of fresh air?
Wendy Chatley Green
wrote:
:Isn't Edwards a breath of fresh air?
Pretty, still youthful-looking at age 53, a lawyer, not much
experience in politics, a loser in his last race....you can get a
dozen just like him for a dime.
--
Wendy Chatley Green
wcg...@cris.com
Zero
news:01q5k05jtet69nl58...@4ax.com...
> rst...@runbox.com (Madelin McKinnon) wrote:
>
> :Isn't Edwards a breath of fresh air?
>
> Pretty, still youthful-looking at age 53, a lawyer, not much
> experience in politics, a loser in his last race....you can get a
> dozen just like him for a dime.
Wendicons. perfect name for you.
enjoying your little hatefest are you?
pointless unilaterial denigration by Wendicons.
Gawd. you're *such* a hypocrite.
one just wonders if you actually realize it or not.
odds are, you don't.
the self-righteous never do.
poor damned things.
-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
> Until you show proof, it really is just your
> delusional ramblings and nothing more.
yeah, right.
and the moon was made of cheese
until Neil Armstrong tasted it.
Introducing:
Unicornian Mathematics, etc.
http://tinyurl.com/3do56
Madelin McKinnon
majority of the world. Bush ran on the promise, "I'm a uniter, not a
divider" and he has betrayed America. This is the most divisive
President in world history.
______________________________________________
Question: If the Bush memo is a forgery,
why doesn't Bush ask the FBI
to investigate?
Answer: Because the Bush camp planted
a forged document, to divert
attention away from the credible
'Bush was AWOL' allegations.
Ed Rasimus
wrote:
______________________________________________
>
>Question: If the Bush memo is a forgery,
> why doesn't Bush ask the FBI
> to investigate?
>
>Answer: Because the Bush camp planted
> a forged document, to divert
> attention away from the credible
> 'Bush was AWOL' allegations.
The convolutions of the logic are incredible. So, you contention is
that the allegations are credible (something only a society which has
evolved to the point where less than 5% ever serve in the military
could entertain), then the Bush campaign created forged documents to
prove the allegations against them. They then channelled those
documents to the DNC, knowing that they Democratic campaigners would
recognize that they were false and hesitate to disclose them. But, the
devious Bush folks knew that the DNC would then pass the papers (which
they recognized as forgeries or at the very least questionable) to the
news department at CBS. The DNC assumed CBS would verify, but the Bush
plotters knew that CBS would rush to air the scoop and then trap all
of them.
Gimme a break. Why don't we just throw in a couple of aliens, a flying
saucer, a black helicopter or two, a cabal of world bankers and a
connction to the Illuminati?
Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
"Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights"
Both from Smithsonian Books
***www.thunderchief.org
Madelin McKinnon
Democrat candidate John Kerry comes out ahead of George W. Bush. Two
countries, India and Thailand were divided. Just three out of 35
countries said they'd like to see President Bush re-elected – Poland,
Nigeria and the Philippines, where 57 per cent favoured Mr Bush. In
Norway, 93% favored John Kerry. When is the US going to join the rest
of the world? Clearly, the US is the world's leading brand name, and
the incalculable, global cost of electing an American leader that is
so unpopular, is huge, to say the least, because George Bush will
continue to erode attitudes towards American products and companies. I
think it's safe to say that the US needs John Kerry far more than it
needs the isolation that George Bush is producing. As Donald Trump
would say to a man who is so isolated, "you're fired !"
Wendy Chatley Green
wrote:
:What is the global cost of the fact that in 30 of 35 countries
:Democrat candidate John Kerry comes out ahead of George W. Bush. Two
:countries, India and Thailand were divided. Just three out of 35
:countries said they'd like to see President Bush re-elected – Poland,
:Nigeria and the Philippines, where 57 per cent favoured Mr Bush. In
:Norway, 93% favored John Kerry.
"Some 58 percent of Europeans said strong U.S. leadership in
the world was undesirable, an increase of nine percentage points from
a similar poll last year. Only in Britain and the Netherlands do a
majority desire strong U.S. leadership."
<http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=579734§ion=news>
:When is the US going to join the rest
:of the world? Clearly, the US is the world's leading brand name, and
:the incalculable, global cost of electing an American leader that is
:so unpopular, is huge, to say the least, because George Bush will
:continue to erode attitudes towards American products and companies. I
:think it's safe to say that the US needs John Kerry far more than it
:needs the isolation that George Bush is producing. As Donald Trump
:would say to a man who is so isolated, "you're fired !"
Zero
> rst...@runbox.com (Madelin McKinnon) wrote:
>
> :What is the global cost of the fact that in 30 of 35 countries
> :Democrat candidate John Kerry comes out ahead of George W. Bush. Two
> :countries, India and Thailand were divided. Just three out of 35
> :countries said they'd like to see President Bush re-elected - Poland,
> :Nigeria and the Philippines, where 57 per cent favoured Mr Bush. In
> :Norway, 93% favored John Kerry.
>
> "Some 58 percent of Europeans said strong U.S. leadership in
> the world was undesirable,
gee, i wonder why? you fucking idiot.
Wendy Chatley Green
belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain
and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states
in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast
majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual
American states. This puts Europeans at a level of prosperity on par
with states such as Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia. Only the
miniscule country of Luxembourg has higher per capita GDP than the
average state in the USA. The results of the new study represent a
grave critique of European economic policy. "
<http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/>
(quote is from abstract of report "EU versus USA", Dr Fredrik
Bergström and Mr Robert Gidehag. Entire report can be downloaded form
the www.timbro.com website. Timbro is a Swedish think tank.)
Zero
translation: Money is Wendicon's God
therefore, the opinions of Europeans means nothing because
they have less money per capita than the people in Arkansas,
Mississippi and West Virginia.
FFS.
can you get any shallower?
nope.
Zero
> "Wendy Chatley Green" <wcg...@concentric.net> wrote
> > " If the European Union were a state in the USA it would
> > belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain
> > and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states
> > in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast
> > majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual
> > American states. This puts Europeans at a level of prosperity on par
> > with states such as Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia. Only the
> > miniscule country of Luxembourg has higher per capita GDP than the
> > average state in the USA. The results of the new study represent a
> > grave critique of European economic policy. "
> translation: Money is Wendicon's God
>
> therefore, the opinions of Europeans means nothing because
> they have less money per capita than the people in Arkansas,
> Mississippi and West Virginia.
>
> FFS.
>
> can you get any shallower?
>
> nope.
Nelly Olsen Syndrome.
at the debates, Kerry should tell it like it is.
"George, you were a fucking worthless blowhard
coward 30 years ago, and you're the same fucking
worthless blowhard coward today. You suffer from
Nelly Olsen Syndrome. And even Nelly finally
learned the error of her ways, so why haven't you?"
then he should just stand there and watch that cowardly
twit melt into the floor like the wicked witch of the west.
ding dong.
Ray Haddad
wrote:
>What is the global cost of the fact that in 30 of 35 countries
Did it ever occur to you that those other countries want a President
in the US who is to THEIR advantage and not in the best interest of
the US? Probably not.
So, any endorsement for Kerry by a foreign power should be a wake up
call to vote for President Bush.
Ray
Don May
Curious, what does this mean out of context. Very little it would
seem. There is no direct correlation between GPD per capita and
quality of life once basic needs are met, other than perhaps level of
expendable income. Is there a reason for your posting this?
Don
--
Humans search a lifetime for enlightenment ... I nap in the
sun. -- Cowcat 1991 - Oct.24,2001
Zero
news:414a0c10...@news-60.giganews.com...
>Wendy Chatley Green <wcg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> > " If the European Union were a state in the USA it would
> >belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain
> >and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states
> >in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast
> >majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual
> >American states. This puts Europeans at a level of prosperity on par
> >with states such as Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia. Only the
> >miniscule country of Luxembourg has higher per capita GDP than the
> >average state in the USA. The results of the new study represent a
> >grave critique of European economic policy. "
> >
> ><http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/>
> >
> >(quote is from abstract of report "EU versus USA", Dr Fredrik
> >Bergström and Mr Robert Gidehag. Entire report can be downloaded form
> >the www.timbro.com website. Timbro is a Swedish think tank.)
> >
>
> Curious, what does this mean out of context. Very little it would
> seem. There is no direct correlation between GPD per capita and
> quality of life once basic needs are met, other than perhaps level of
> expendable income. Is there a reason for your posting this?
auto-cued defense mechanism
Zero
news:da7ak0h27k919hfad...@4ax.com...
>rst...@runbox.com (Madelin McKinnon) wrote:
>
> >What is the global cost of the fact that in 30 of 35 countries
> >Democrat candidate John Kerry comes out ahead of George W. Bush. Two
> >countries, India and Thailand were divided. Just three out of 35
> >countries said they'd like to see President Bush re-elected - Poland,
> >Nigeria and the Philippines, where 57 per cent favoured Mr Bush. In
> >Norway, 93% favored John Kerry. When is the US going to join the rest
> >of the world? Clearly, the US is the world's leading brand name, and
> >the incalculable, global cost of electing an American leader that is
> >so unpopular, is huge, to say the least, because George Bush will
> >continue to erode attitudes towards American products and companies. I
> >think it's safe to say that the US needs John Kerry far more than it
> >needs the isolation that George Bush is producing. As Donald Trump
> >would say to a man who is so isolated, "you're fired !"
> >
> >http://media.shorturl.com
>
> Did it ever occur to you that those other countries want a President
> in the US who is to THEIR advantage and not in the best interest of
> the US? Probably not.
did it ever occur to you that *nobody* wants another Hitler?
that such a scum is to nobody's advantage?
not even the Fatherland?
> So, any endorsement for Kerry by a foreign power should be
> a wake up call to vote for President Bush.
yeah. right.
moon cheese and all that.
Dr Zen
Yes, but we're not Yanks. If we calculate the value of that at about
$20,000 a year, I think we come out in front.
Zen
Wendy Chatley Green
:On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:23:29 -0400, Wendy Chatley Green
:<wcg...@concentric.net> wrote:
:
:> " If the European Union were a state in the USA it would
:>belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain
:>and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states
:>in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast
:>majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual
:>American states. This puts Europeans at a level of prosperity on par
:>with states such as Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia. Only the
:>miniscule country of Luxembourg has higher per capita GDP than the
:>average state in the USA. The results of the new study represent a
:>grave critique of European economic policy. "
:>
:><http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/>
:>
:>(quote is from abstract of report "EU versus USA", Dr Fredrik
:>Bergström and Mr Robert Gidehag. Entire report can be downloaded form
:>the www.timbro.com website. Timbro is a Swedish think tank.)
:>
:
:Curious, what does this mean out of context. Very little it would
:seem. There is no direct correlation between GPD per capita and
:quality of life once basic needs are met, other than perhaps level of
:expendable income. Is there a reason for your posting this?
I found it interesting. Americans tend to think of Europe as
being advanced, sophisticated, and so very cultural. To find that
states that are considered the "armpit of the country" actually are on
par with European countries (when it comes to what you mentioned)
tarnishes that image.
The context is available at the link I provided. I plan to
read the report tonight after work. Let me know what you think.
Ed Rasimus
wrote:
>What is the global cost of the fact that in 30 of 35 countries
Gosh, Madelin, did you notice that your reply doesn't address a single
point that I made regarding your contention that Karl Rove is
responsible for "Rathergate"?
But, regarding the question of the great international demand for a
weak US, it should be noted that few folks really enjoy living in a
country that is markedly inferior. If you can't raise your country to
the higher level, then the alternative would be to encourage the
higher level to come down to you.
Notice that historically throughout the twentieth century, all of
those countries were more than willing to be bailed out by US military
might, to enjoy trade with the US, to accept US foreign aid and even
to immigrate to the US.
Josh Hill
<wcg...@concentric.net> wrote:
> I found it interesting. Americans tend to think of Europe as
>being advanced, sophisticated, and so very cultural. To find that
>states that are considered the "armpit of the country" actually are on
>par with European countries (when it comes to what you mentioned)
>tarnishes that image.
Hmmm . . . isn't the culture which produces art to keep a sleepy
emperor awake a culture which devotes disproportionate resources to an
emperor? The most sophisticated art is that which is produced for an
elite. For that reason, it seems to me that cultural sophistication
reflects to some degree the legacy of a system that fails to take the
greatest advantage of human resources, given the possibilities
afforded by our current state of technological development. And this
country, in culture as in wine-making, has long specialized in making
a reasonable product available to the masses, rather than a superb one
to a relative few.
Also, too much sophistication isn't necessarily a good thing. Progress
is best brought about by an ideal compromise between empiricism and
finesse. Training can thwart accomplishment, if it is given too much
emphasis, by wasting time and creating rigidity of thought. Think the
School of David and Impressionism, or dinosaurs and mammals, or
advanced China and the grubby, fractured European states.
It seems to me too that, owing to our early freedom from aristocracy,
our long experience with enfranchisement, and a certain degree of
self-selection, Americans have a very different relationship towards
authority than Europeans do. Europeans are apt to find it
inconceivable that government is guided by any principle other than
self interest -- cf. what Alan said the other day about the American
government. Europeans are apt to think in terms of control by elites
-- cf. Zen's recent dismissal of the importance of the American
electorate. Americans, OTOH, are likely to see themselves as working
for their own benefit, as participants in a meritocracy rather than
victims of economic exploitation. The rules of the game are seen as
"to everyone who polishes his shoes and works hard" rather than "for
the benefit of the bosses." This creates differing attitudes towards
work: Europeans are more likely than Americans to want to work 9-5,
take long vacations, and spend time with their children, and more
likely too to engage in the sort of class warfare that leads to
economically counterproductive measures like confiscatory taxation,
excessive protectionism, or overly rigid work rules.
The United States is also better at creating social fluidity and
extending educational opportunities to the general population. For all
our tooth-gnashing over the foreign advantage in math tests, we've
long sent a far greater percentage of our citizens to college than any
other country, and been less likely to rely on rigid and frequently
class-based tracking of the sort that decides whether a child is going
to become a chemist or a bulldozer operator at age 14. And the
deemphasis of social class means that an American is unlikely to have
opportunities closed off to him if he speaks with a Brooklyn accent.
That benefits the economic system, since the most talented youngsters
are more apt to end up in the most demanding occupations.
Too, I think we have an optimistic outlook that favors innovation. Our
attitude towards problems is a can-do one, whether we're fighting
cancer, investing in the Internet, or invading Iraq. Europeans tend to
see the down side, to want to perfect things, to emphasize our
mistakes, but in the end, I think that brashness, that faith in
progress and confidence in success works in our favor.
But even if European policies were akin to our own, it's unlikely that
Europe would be as prosperous. We have more abundant natural
resources, a huge captive market, and an immense English-speaking
labor pool (albeit they have Zen, whose an immense English-speaking
labor pool in himself) which gives American businesses more
versatility than their European counterparts. And I think it's
important to keep in mind that, at essence, we are in fact a European
country, a colony that benefited both from circumstances and from the
ability to refashion its system of government according to the most
advanced thinking of the time. We traded first on the continent's
resources and then the industrial revolution that began in Europe,
while having no need to waste wealth acquiring, controlling, and
fighting over the externally-located resources of empire. The per
capita GDP of the Western European states may be lower than our own,
but it's in the same ballpark, because we're playing much the same
game.
--
Josh
Josh Hill
To the extent that no known belt can contain you.
--
Josh
Zero
news:vg6bk0lno8vef0fti...@4ax.com...
whoooooooooosh.
Josh, get a grip man.
nice speculative essay (even if totally wrong on several points),
but... you miss the point entirely.
here. allow me to clarify it for you:
>Wendy Chatley Green <wcg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> > I found it interesting. Americans tend to think of Europe as
> >being advanced, sophisticated, and so very cultural. To find that
> >states that are considered the "armpit of the country" actually are on
> >par with European countries (when it comes to what you mentioned)
> >tarnishes that image.
tarnishes that image.
why? what is Wendicon's motivation and "interest" in
"tarnishing" the image of sophisticated Europeans?
Gawd. i mean, what a fucking hypocrite.
this goes quite beyond her usual passive-aggressive
hypocritical hatemongering stupidity and willful ignorance.
she's quite outted herself.
concentrate on the obvious for once, Josh.
stop respecting those who so totally and thoroughly
disrepect others for no justifiable reason whatsoever.
IOW: take the gloves off, man. wake up.
"EU no better than Mississippi"
i mean, like whoa.
Alan Hope
>Also, too much sophistication isn't necessarily a good thing.
I take it this is your response to my closely-argued post on the St.
Matthew Passion and grief, since I've been unable to find anything in
the thread to which I posted.
If so, it's a very inadequate one. But I'm not at all surprised.
It would have been nice if you had had the courtesy to keep the
discussion within the thread, though.
--
AH
Disregard From address, and use Reply To instead.
Looney
"Ed Rasimus" <rasimu...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:t107k0pau4ghqajui...@4ax.com...
--
Looney
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rant of the Loon
http://looneytoohey.blogspot.com/
Don May
>ma...@comcast.net (Don May) wrote in message news:<414a0c10...@news-60.giganews.com>...
>
>(snip)
>
>> Curious, what does this mean out of context. Very little it would
>> seem. There is no direct correlation between GPD per capita and
>> quality of life once basic needs are met, other than perhaps level of
>> expendable income. Is there a reason for your posting this?
>>
>> Don
>
>Sure, Don, and I think I'll liquidate two million plus in assets and
>go live in a cave. I'll leave enough to buy a little propane stove, a
>few blankets, stock up on canned food and such and have a blast. Screw
>this lousy 800K house and Lexus in this beautiful mountain resort! Why
>didn't I think of this before?
>
>Wait a minute! I have a better idea. I'll move to Europe where they'll
>grab every dime I have and leave me *enough* to buy a shack and a cord
>of wood to heat it in winter. They, of course, will reallocate my
>money in a very wise fashion. Nirvana awaits! Maybe I can buy one of
>those little Italian motor scooters and whiz around at 15 MPH on
>cobblestone streets. What a life, eh?
>
>Yeppers, Don, if these figures were exactly reversed the Europeans
>would be telling us what a failure socialism is, right?
>Guffaws!!!!!!!!
>
>Buehlah B. Boinkatwink
>
It's so easy to push Boinkatwink's button and hear his pre-progamed
chip squeal. How can I resist? Push the button . . . squeal, push
the button ... squeal.
I suspect the last twink you boinked didn't know it was in.
Have a nice day Buehlah.
Don
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Keep thy smooth words and juggling homilies
For those who know thee not.--Lord Byron
Josh Hill
wrote:
>Josh Hill goes:
>
>>Also, too much sophistication isn't necessarily a good thing.
>
>I take it this is your response to my closely-argued post on the St.
>Matthew Passion and grief, since I've been unable to find anything in
>the thread to which I posted.
>
>If so, it's a very inadequate one. But I'm not at all surprised.
>
>It would have been nice if you had had the courtesy to keep the
>discussion within the thread, though.
I haven't forgotten your post, Alan -- the reason I haven't responded
yet is because I thought it required a more considered response than
the usual, and I've been harried and fatigued. When that happens I
tend to put the more demanding posts aside and respond to the ones
that require less thought, meaning that, not infrequently, the posts
that interest me most are the ones I answer last.
I also have a tendency to procrastinate if I don't do something right
away, so when I have to do this or get called away in the middle of a
lengthy response (which I hate) I sometimes have trouble getting back
to what I was doing. Hence the occasional post that I respond to days
or even weeks late, or give up on entirely since it's no longer
timely. I still have a half-completed response to your last post in
the "UK English" debate, and another to Zen's . . . and a
three-week-old email from Paula . . .
--
Josh
Alan Hope
>I haven't forgotten your post, Alan -- the reason I haven't responded
>yet is because I thought it required a more considered response than
>the usual, and I've been harried and fatigued. When that happens I
>tend to put the more demanding posts aside and respond to the ones
>that require less thought, meaning that, not infrequently, the posts
>that interest me most are the ones I answer last.
"Your cheque is in the post".
>I also have a tendency to procrastinate if I don't do something right
>away, so when I have to do this or get called away in the middle of a
>lengthy response (which I hate) I sometimes have trouble getting back
>to what I was doing. Hence the occasional post that I respond to days
>or even weeks late, or give up on entirely since it's no longer
>timely. I still have a half-completed response to your last post in
>the "UK English" debate, and another to Zen's . . . and a
>three-week-old email from Paula . . .
I'll take this as a spnak, shall I? Save you the effort, and both of
us the time. Okay?
Alan Hope
>For some inexplicable reasons, ma...@comcast.net (Don May) wrote:
>:On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:23:29 -0400, Wendy Chatley Green
>:<wcg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>:> " If the European Union were a state in the USA it would
>:>belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain
>:>and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states
>:>in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast
>:>majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual
>:>American states. This puts Europeans at a level of prosperity on par
>:>with states such as Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia. Only the
>:>miniscule country of Luxembourg has higher per capita GDP than the
>:>average state in the USA. The results of the new study represent a
>:>grave critique of European economic policy. "
>:><http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/>
>:>(quote is from abstract of report "EU versus USA", Dr Fredrik
>:>Bergström and Mr Robert Gidehag. Entire report can be downloaded form
>:>the www.timbro.com website. Timbro is a Swedish think tank.)
>:Curious, what does this mean out of context. Very little it would
>:seem. There is no direct correlation between GPD per capita and
>:quality of life once basic needs are met, other than perhaps level of
>:expendable income. Is there a reason for your posting this?
> I found it interesting. Americans tend to think of Europe as
>being advanced, sophisticated, and so very cultural. To find that
>states that are considered the "armpit of the country" actually are on
>par with European countries (when it comes to what you mentioned)
>tarnishes that image.
Aren't you supposed to be an MBA? Shouldn't you have acquired some
means of evaluating economic statistics?
> The context is available at the link I provided. I plan to
>read the report tonight after work. Let me know what you think.
No, first read it then spout some utter shit about what it says.
You deliver truck-parts in the arsehole of the American wilderness,
and you're telling us about sophistication and culture. How long would
your mule have to walk to reach an opera-house, Wendy? How many
carburettors would you need to sell (and be paid for) to buy a ticket
for an art exhibition?
Fucking shit-kickers in their John Deere hats. I took four weeks
holiday this year, at the beach and in Rome. Hands up all Americans
who topped that.
Bill Oliver
Wendy Chatley Green <wcgreen...@lycos.com> wrote:
> " If the European Union were a state in the USA it would
>belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain
>and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states
>in the United States.
Kerry promises us the French economic miracle.
billo
Dr Zen
<wcg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>For some inexplicable reasons, ma...@comcast.net (Don May) wrote:
>
>:On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:23:29 -0400, Wendy Chatley Green
>:<wcg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>:
>:> " If the European Union were a state in the USA it would
>:>belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain
>:>and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states
>:>in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast
>:>majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual
>:>American states. This puts Europeans at a level of prosperity on par
>:>with states such as Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia. Only the
>:>miniscule country of Luxembourg has higher per capita GDP than the
>:>average state in the USA. The results of the new study represent a
>:>grave critique of European economic policy. "
>:>
>:><http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/>
>:>
>:>(quote is from abstract of report "EU versus USA", Dr Fredrik
>:>Bergström and Mr Robert Gidehag. Entire report can be downloaded form
>:>the www.timbro.com website. Timbro is a Swedish think tank.)
>:>
>:
>:Curious, what does this mean out of context. Very little it would
>:seem. There is no direct correlation between GPD per capita and
>:quality of life once basic needs are met, other than perhaps level of
>:expendable income. Is there a reason for your posting this?
>
> I found it interesting. Americans tend to think of Europe as
>being advanced, sophisticated, and so very cultural. To find that
>states that are considered the "armpit of the country" actually are on
>par with European countries (when it comes to what you mentioned)
>tarnishes that image.
So more dollars means more sophistication?
Wendicons in a phrase.
You could have a million, dear, and you still wouldn't get it.
Zen
Dr Zen
wrote:
>Wendy Chatley Green goes:
Rome? Isn't that where the Americans built the Colosseum? And where
famous Mississippian Michelangelo's Pieta is in St Peter's, built, as
we all know, by a Texas company?
Zen
Rick
> Rome? Isn't that where the Americans built the Colosseum? And where
> famous Mississippian Michelangelo's Pieta is in St Peter's, built, as
> we all know, by a Texas company?
Halliburton--the same Texax company that recently was awarded a nobid
contract to restore _David_.
--
Rick
Wendy Chatley Green
wrote:
:Aren't you supposed to be an MBA? Shouldn't you have acquired some
:means of evaluating economic statistics?
Of course. Which, however, is more fun?
A. Analysing statistics
B. Tossing an interesting one into Usenet.
Dr Zen
Yes, dear, you're *good* at chemicals. World leaders at chemicals.
Zen
Dr Zen
Yes, dear, you're *good* at chemicals. World leaders at chemicals.
Zen
Dr Zen
<wcg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>For some inexplicable reasons, Alan Hope <not.al...@mail.com>
>wrote:
>
>:Aren't you supposed to be an MBA? Shouldn't you have acquired some
>:means of evaluating economic statistics?
>
> Of course. Which, however, is more fun?
>
> A. Analysing statistics
>
> B. Tossing an interesting one into Usenet.
>
>
Ther-wack. You showed Nanna this time.
Zen
Josh Hill
wrote:
>Josh Hill goes:
Why? I was perfectly serious, and this was the very opposite of a
spank. But you seem intent on building a hell in heaven's despite.
--
Josh
Josh Hill
wrote:
>Wendy Chatley Green goes:
You worked?
--
Josh
Josh Hill
No, I believe it's where the British did.
--
Josh
Josh Hill
wrote:
Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
expansion in US history. Kerry promises us what virtually every
Democratic president has done for at least 75 years now -- improve the
economy over what it was under the Republicans.
--
Josh
Zero
news:0cbck0d2idpegajmi...@4ax.com...
>Alan Hope <not.al...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> :Aren't you supposed to be an MBA? Shouldn't you have acquired some
> :means of evaluating economic statistics?
>
> Of course. Which, however, is more fun?
>
> A. Analysing statistics
>
> B. Tossing an interesting one into Usenet.
C. outting an incredibly self-righteous hypocrite for
attempting to "tarnish" an entire sophisticated society
because 58% of that intelligent society agrees with 90%
of the rest of the world in thinking that "that asshole"
Bush is a self-absorbed self-serving lying evil asshole
twit who poses a serious danger to the whole free world
because of his already known actions and future plans.
Kurt Ullman
Josh44...@snet.net wrote:
>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
>expansion in US history. Kerry promises us what virtually every
>Democratic president has done for at least 75 years now -- improve the
>economy over what it was under the Republicans.
>
Ie take what the GOp has fixed and screw it up again. You think it
is just happenstance that the longest peace time expansion took
place when the GOP was in charge of Congress and stopping Clinton
from screwing up too much??
Heck, Clinton shoulda got down on his knees and thanked the GOP
for stopping his tax increase (including the carbon tax on oil) in
'93. THAT would have put a stop to the Greenspan -Gates expansion.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the
ecalyptus tree is to koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
---PJ O'Rourke
Dr Zen
wrote:
This is what we'd need to make your post apropos:
1/ Forget that Wendy compared the EU, not the UK, with the USA.
2/ Forget that Alan mentioned holidaying in Rome, within the EU, not
in the UK.
3/ Forget that the things I mentioned are in Rome, within the EU, not
in the UK, and that I am contrasting *European* culture with American
lack.
It's a lot of effort for your very lame joke but I'm prepared to do
it.
Wait just a sec...
Hee hee. Very good, Josh. You sure got me. Ho ho.
Zen
Alan Hope
All right, keep your hair on. I was ribbing you.
Go ahead and reply when you have the time. But consider this: how can
you even approach the St. Matthew Passion without keeping in mind the
Christian message which inspired it? Does any appreciation that
doesn't take account of what Bach had in his mind have any meaning? Or
does the Thing, once composed, take on a life of its own, and open
itself up to ownership by all?
Davida Chazan - The Chocolate Lady
>For some inexplicable reasons, Alan Hope <not.al...@mail.com>
>wrote:
>
>:Aren't you supposed to be an MBA? Shouldn't you have acquired some
>:means of evaluating economic statistics?
>
> Of course. Which, however, is more fun?
>
> A. Analysing statistics
>
> B. Tossing an interesting one into Usenet.
>
You little troll, you!
--
Davida Chazan (The Chocolate Lady)
<davidac AT jdc DOT org DOT il>
~*~*~*~*~*~
"What you see before you, my friend, is the result of a lifetime of
chocolate."
--Katharine Hepburn (May 12, 1907 - June 29, 2003)
~*~*~*~*~*~
Bill Oliver
Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
>
>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
>expansion in US history.
Dream on. Go look up the European economies. And, of course,
your characterization of the economy is wrong. And, of course,
your characterization of the Clinton economy is wrong. However,
I can understand that the best the Dems can hope for is another
speculative bubble like the dot.com fiasco.
billo
Looney
"Dr Zen" <gol...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a1cck0h0ap8r53cdn...@4ax.com...
My, my, I do believe that was an insult, dear...
Looney
"Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote in message
news:6idck0176od2668jv...@4ax.com...
Like that was any proof in the first place. I love it when pole-whacking
bourgeoisie like Alan pretend that not having calloused, blue-collar hands
somehow elevates them above the proles who slave their fucking backs out to
feed thankless assholes who believe that culture only comes on the beach in
Rome, who doesn't believe that one of those fuckers in their jeans and "John
Deere Hats" ever goes home and reads Thackery, Faulkner or Nietzsche, has
ever traveled to a real city, visited the museums and landmarks, attends the
opera or symphony, done their learnin' at a University, or knows a Pinot
from a Merlot from a Cab.
Fuck you, Alan.
Looney
Clinton had exactly *dick* to do with the "longest peacetime expansion in US
history."
Welcome to dot.com.
Care to try again?
Alex R.
I'm guessing, according to provincial Euro-logic, it would be in the
interest of world-harmony, and European culture in general, for a UN
soldier to knock that fucking John Deere hat right off your head and set
you on a real classism-based career path there Looney. How's about
becoming... a baron? That's a pretty good job.
Then again, who's going to pony-up taxes for NEA grants and patronize
the arts in general if not for successful carburetor salemen?
AR
Josh Hill
wrote:
>In article <aldck09dfvq8iod55...@4ax.com>,
>Josh44...@snet.net wrote:
>
>>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
>>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
>>expansion in US history. Kerry promises us what virtually every
>>Democratic president has done for at least 75 years now -- improve the
>>economy over what it was under the Republicans.
>>
> Ie take what the GOp has fixed and screw it up again. You think it
>is just happenstance that the longest peace time expansion took
>place when the GOP was in charge of Congress and stopping Clinton
>from screwing up too much??
> Heck, Clinton shoulda got down on his knees and thanked the GOP
>for stopping his tax increase (including the carbon tax on oil) in
>'93. THAT would have put a stop to the Greenspan -Gates expansion.
Bzzzt. Bush has a Republican Congress too -- pretty much the /same/
Republican Congress -- and he's made a royal mess of the economy.
As to a carbon tax, it's neither here nor there as far as the economy
is concerned. OTOH, some of us don't think Bangladesh should end up
under water so that people can drive giant Jeeps to the shopping mall,
and wonder whether sending money to Saudi Arabia so they can educate a
new generation of Wahabi fanatics is a groove move.
--
Josh
Looney
"Alex R." <tadgk...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2qonb8F...@uni-berlin.de...
Fuckin'-A, buddy.
Coors?
Alan Hope
>> >>:><http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/>
>> You worked?
>Fuck you, Alan.
If it got you to take off that stupid fucking hat, then my effort was
not in vain.
If you have a giant sloping craggy forehead, Anthony, then flaunt it.
That's what I say.
Looney
"Alan Hope" <not.al...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:r7cek0hem0qvtejih...@4ax.com...
It's a low-pro golf hat. It was off. Now it's on. Heh!
> If you have a giant sloping craggy forehead, Anthony, then flaunt it.
> That's what I say.
No more than you do, but then, that's the point, champ.
Get those sand-fleas out of your shorts yet?
Alex R.
In glasses. Pilsner glasses. Clean pilsner glasses with little etched
caricatures of a Kaiser wearing a pointy helmet and a monocle.
AR
Looney
Fuckin' highbrow, hoity-toity cityboy.
Keee-rist, prolly don't even know howzta open up a can rightly...
With yer teeth, dammit!
Gawd...
Zero
news:DcF1d.19545$XD....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
[...]
> Like that was any proof in the first place. I love it when pole-
> whacking bourgeoisie like Alan pretend that not having calloused,
> blue-collar hands somehow elevates them above the proles who
> slave their fucking backs out to feed thankless assholes who
> believe that culture only comes on the beach in Rome, who
> doesn't believe that one of those fuckers in their jeans and
> "John Deere Hats" ever goes home and reads Thackery,
> Faulkner or Nietzsche,
there are *always* mutant exceptions, Loon.
> has ever traveled to a real city, visited the museums and
> landmarks,
Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas, FFS.
"give me $5,000 in chips, please"
> attends the opera or symphony,
LOL.
> done their learnin' at a University,
MBAs of culture, indeed.
> or knows a Pinot from a Merlot from a Cab.
flaunting your mutancy is quite the hoot!
> Fuck you, Alan.
please don't accidently make him horny.
anyway, Wendicons is the one who originally denigrated the Missippians, FFS.
duh... double duh...
and an infinitely sophisticated omni-duh.
-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
"those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
-- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
Vote Kerry!
Don't let the world blame us Americans
for our evil fucking greedy fanatical leaders.
Alex R.
Ya but Leave 'em in the truck and you gotta do it the old way, have the
barmaid do it as you compliment her tits.
AR
Looney
Yeah, but yer tits are droopy...
Josh Hill
wrote:
You and Zen. Whoever said I was the perfect straight man was right . .
.
>Go ahead and reply when you have the time. But consider this: how can
>you even approach the St. Matthew Passion without keeping in mind the
>Christian message which inspired it? Does any appreciation that
>doesn't take account of what Bach had in his mind have any meaning? Or
>does the Thing, once composed, take on a life of its own, and open
>itself up to ownership by all?
That's an interesting question. Perhaps we can experience religion as
art, just as we can experience a love affair or an adventure that
isn't actually our own? Is religion itself really so distinct from
art? Is it perhaps story that has achieved an unusual level of belief?
And isn't music one of the most general forms of art, a symbolic
representation of emotion and story at their most essential level? Of
Shakespeare's airy nothing, without the local habitation and the name?
--
Josh
Josh Hill
Hey, Faulkner's work. I get calluses just thinking about him. --
Badminton, anybody?
--
Josh
Josh Hill
wrote:
>In article <aldck09dfvq8iod55...@4ax.com>,
Eight years of prosperity, Billo. You can't handwave your way out of
that.
--
Josh
Josh Hill
<ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote:
>
>"Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote in message
>news:aldck09dfvq8iod55...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:29:55 -0000, bi...@radix.net (Bill Oliver)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <t40ak0h3ctegmknc5...@4ax.com>,
>> >Wendy Chatley Green <wcgreen...@lycos.com> wrote:
>> >> " If the European Union were a state in the USA it would
>> >>belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain
>> >>and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states
>> >>in the United States.
>> >
>> >
>> >Kerry promises us the French economic miracle.
>>
>> Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
>> growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
>> expansion in US history. Kerry promises us what virtually every
>> Democratic president has done for at least 75 years now -- improve the
>> economy over what it was under the Republicans.
>
>Clinton had exactly *dick* to do with the "longest peacetime expansion in US
>history."
>
>Welcome to dot.com.
>
>Care to try again?
As I said to Billo, you can't handwave your way out of it. The figures
are clear: Democratic presidents have done significantly better with
the economy for at least 75 years now. Dare I suggest to the
Republicans here that it might be more productive to figure out why
that is than to make excuses more various than Kennedy assassination
theories and alien abductions, and about as compelling?
--
Josh
Looney
There is no handwave. Clinton had nothing to do with it. Period.
Bill Oliver
Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:19:02 -0000, bi...@radix.net (Bill Oliver)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <aldck09dfvq8iod55...@4ax.com>,
>>Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
>>>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
>>>expansion in US history.
>>
>>Dream on. Go look up the European economies. And, of course,
>>your characterization of the economy is wrong. And, of course,
>>your characterization of the Clinton economy is wrong. However,
>>I can understand that the best the Dems can hope for is another
>>speculative bubble like the dot.com fiasco.
>
>Eight years of prosperity, Billo. You can't handwave your way out of
>that.
>
I'm not. And I am very proud of the effects of the Reagan/Bush
policies that Clinton took advantage of. And all your handwaving
can't change the fact that the dot.com bubble was the dot.com
bubble, that the bubble burst while Clinton was in office and
that Bush inherited the result.
billo
Looney
Josh, we're talking about Clinton. The prosperity he enjoyed was not
manufactured in any way by his policies or leadership. No president of any
party could have forseen and planned that out. Why don't you just admit the
fucker was lucky as hell?
Zero
> "Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote
> >bi...@radix.net (Bill Oliver) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <aldck09dfvq8iod55...@4ax.com>,
> > >Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
> > >>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
> > >>expansion in US history.
> > >
> > >Dream on. Go look up the European economies. And, of course,
> > >your characterization of the economy is wrong. And, of course,
> > >your characterization of the Clinton economy is wrong. However,
> > >I can understand that the best the Dems can hope for is another
> > >speculative bubble like the dot.com fiasco.
> >
> > Eight years of prosperity, Billo. You can't handwave your way out of
> > that.
>
> There is no handwave. Clinton had nothing to do with it. Period.
Gawd.
it's stuff of this low level of intellect and total lack of common sense
that makes me wonder why i bother reading usenet.
i might as well move to Mississippi.
Jackson Pillock
:
: "Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote in message
Unless I'm mistaken, Alan grafted his way.
:
:
Ray Haddad
<ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote:
>Coors?
Heh. I'd give a week's salary for a Coors right now.
Sadly, by the time you read this, the offer will be null and void.
Ray
Dick Harper
> Wendy Chatley Green goes:
> > I found it interesting. Americans tend to think of Europe as
> >being advanced, sophisticated, and so very cultural. To find that
> >states that are considered the "armpit of the country" actually are on
> >par with European countries (when it comes to what you mentioned)
> >tarnishes that image.
> You deliver truck-parts in the arsehole of the American wilderness,
Seems to me the same could be said of Andrew Carnegie.
> and you're telling us about sophistication and culture. How long would
> your mule have to walk to reach an opera-house, Wendy?
The Opera House in Enosburg Falls was built with the fortune of
a veterinarian who sold a spavin cure.
> How many
> carburettors would you need to sell (and be paid for) to buy a ticket
> for an art exhibition?
How many words does Mr. Hope need to sell to buy an Internet
connection?
--Dick
Dr Zen
<ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote:
I know, I know. Pinot (Noir/Gris) and Merlot are types of grape. A
Cab's what you take when you've had a few too many of the drinks made
from them. Only a philistine would call the grape type "Cab", so I
know you're meaning the carriage.
Zen
Alan Hope
> How many words does Mr. Hope need to sell to buy an Internet
>connection?
Eight.
Josh Hill
<ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote:
>
>"Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote in message
>news:d1vek0peikvlfo3de...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:19:02 -0000, bi...@radix.net (Bill Oliver)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <aldck09dfvq8iod55...@4ax.com>,
>> >Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
>> >>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
>> >>expansion in US history.
>> >
>> >Dream on. Go look up the European economies. And, of course,
>> >your characterization of the economy is wrong. And, of course,
>> >your characterization of the Clinton economy is wrong. However,
>> >I can understand that the best the Dems can hope for is another
>> >speculative bubble like the dot.com fiasco.
>>
>> Eight years of prosperity, Billo. You can't handwave your way out of
>> that.
>
>There is no handwave. Clinton had nothing to do with it. Period.
That's just denial, Looney. If you take that approach, you can
convince yourself of anything.
--
Josh
Josh Hill
wrote:
>In article <d1vek0peikvlfo3de...@4ax.com>,
>Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
>>On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:19:02 -0000, bi...@radix.net (Bill Oliver)
>>wrote:
>>Eight years of prosperity, Billo. You can't handwave your way out of
>>that.
>>
>
>I'm not. And I am very proud of the effects of the Reagan/Bush
>policies that Clinton took advantage of. And all your handwaving
>can't change the fact that the dot.com bubble was the dot.com
>bubble, that the bubble burst while Clinton was in office and
>that Bush inherited the result.
Oh, for God's sake. Bush's four years were an economic disaster, and
both Bush and Clinton had to deal with Reagan's astronomical deficits.
Eight years of voodoo economics, as Bush himself put it, followed by a
necessary tax increase, meaning that Bush got stuck with Reagan's
bill. Pretty much what happens when economic policy is determined on
the basis of nutcase ideology, cheap electoral advantage, and favors
to wealthy campaign contributors rather than economics.
The end of the dot.com boom produced a turndown that corresponds in
less prosperous times to a cyclical bust. The bear portion of such
cycles are normally brief. The economy should have recovered after six
months or so and resumed its upwards climb, but Bush's policies made
that impossible, and so, four years later, we're still in a slump.
--
Josh
Josh Hill
<ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote:
Because he wasn't. He followed sound fiscal policy -- reducing the
deficit without slashing spending or increasing taxes so abruptly as
to create a downturn. His moderate/liberal programs provided just the
right stimulus, strong enough to grow demand at a sustainable rate
without creating inflation. That left the Federal Reserve plenty of
space in which to maneuver. Bush, OTOH, ignored the advice of the vast
majority of economists in the interest of getting elected and enacted
a fiscally irresponsible tax cut. A Democrat would not have cut taxes,
but would have increased benefits to the poor and unemployed,
precisely the prescription when demand is weak, particularly when
interest rates are effectively zero and the economy is teetering on
the edge of deflation.
And, really, I've said this before: the economy does much better under
Democratic presidents than Republican ones, and this is true as far
back as I've checked, 75 years. If it had happened once or twice, you
could chalk it up to a fluke, but it's consistent. And that lead me to
wonder why, and to conclude that it's because our economy is usually
limited by demand rather than availability of capital, and Democrats
usually increase demand.
--
Josh
Looney
"Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1qWdnTIX-Ln...@adelphia.com...
> "Looney" <ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote in message
> news:1nL1d.19788$Qh3....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
>
> > "Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote
>
> > >bi...@radix.net (Bill Oliver) wrote:
> > >
> > > >In article <aldck09dfvq8iod55...@4ax.com>,
> > > >Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
> > > >>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
> > > >>expansion in US history.
> > > >
> > > >Dream on. Go look up the European economies. And, of course,
> > > >your characterization of the economy is wrong. And, of course,
> > > >your characterization of the Clinton economy is wrong. However,
> > > >I can understand that the best the Dems can hope for is another
> > > >speculative bubble like the dot.com fiasco.
> > >
> > > Eight years of prosperity, Billo. You can't handwave your way out of
> > > that.
> >
> > There is no handwave. Clinton had nothing to do with it. Period.
>
> Gawd.
>
> it's stuff of this low level of intellect and total lack of common sense
> that makes me wonder why i bother reading usenet.
>
> i might as well move to Mississippi.
Okay, dumbfuck, please tell us how Clinton and his policies engineered the
rise of the dot.com surge.
And do be brief.
Looney
Looney
Perhaps between you and Zero you can come up with some sort of
daisy-chained, six-degrees-of-bullshit explanation as to how Clinton and his
policies engineered the dot.com bubble.
Waiting...
Looney
All very fascinating Josh, but without the bolster of the very unique
dot.com surge, it would've meant shit.
Zero
> "Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote
> > "Looney" <ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote
> > > "Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote
> > > >bi...@radix.net (Bill Oliver) wrote:
> > > > >Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
> > > > >>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
> > > > >>expansion in US history.
> > > > >
> > > > >Dream on. Go look up the European economies. And, of course,
> > > > >your characterization of the economy is wrong. And, of course,
> > > > >your characterization of the Clinton economy is wrong. However,
> > > > >I can understand that the best the Dems can hope for is another
> > > > >speculative bubble like the dot.com fiasco.
> > > >
> > > > Eight years of prosperity, Billo. You can't handwave your way
> > > > out of that.
> > >
> > > There is no handwave. Clinton had nothing to do with it. Period.
> >
> > Gawd.
> >
> > it's stuff of this low level of intellect and total lack of common
> > sense that makes me wonder why i bother reading usenet.
> >
> > i might as well move to Mississippi.
>
> Okay, dumbfuck, please tell us how Clinton and his policies
> engineered the rise of the dot.com surge.
>
> And do be brief.
ok.
well, VP Al Gore "invented" the internet.
hee hee.
...
but seriously, Clinton was president of the US during those 8 years.
contrast that economy with when Carter was president for 4 years.
you wanted brief, there it is.
now froth about why Clinton was NOT AT ALL responsible for the
state of the economy but Carter was COMPLETELY responsible.
i anticipate reading your reply with my new Usenet Malaise.
-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
"those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
-- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
Vote Bush OUT!
Don't let the world (nor our children)
blame us voters for our evil fucking
stupid greedy fanatical leaders.
Alex R.
Toss me a fuckin' beer. I like pretend stories.
AR
Zero
> "Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote
> >"Looney" <ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote:
> > >"Josh Hill" <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote
> > >> bi...@radix.net (Bill Oliver) wrote:
> > >> >Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>Bush has already done that, given us four years of virtually zero
> > >> >>growth and job loss of after Clinton gave us the longest peacetime
> > >> >>expansion in US history.
> > >> >
> > >> >Dream on. Go look up the European economies. And, of course,
> > >> >your characterization of the economy is wrong. And, of course,
> > >> >your characterization of the Clinton economy is wrong. However,
> > >> >I can understand that the best the Dems can hope for is another
> > >> >speculative bubble like the dot.com fiasco.
> > >>
> > >> Eight years of prosperity, Billo. You can't handwave your way
> > >> out of that.
> > >
> > >There is no handwave. Clinton had nothing to do with it. Period.
> >
> > That's just denial, Looney. If you take that approach, you can
> > convince yourself of anything.
>
> Perhaps between you and Zero you can come up with some sort of
> daisy-chained, six-degrees-of-bullshit explanation as to how Clinton
> and his policies engineered the dot.com bubble.
>
> Waiting...
as a dot.com entrepreneur of the early 90's, i can vouch for the
Clinton/Gore embracing of "the internet" for education and commerce.
i remember specifically watching a very unusual televised conference
shortly after Clinton became president where he and Gore brought
together dozens of other wonks who sat at a huge table and brainstormed
all manner of economic growth strategies, including the mostly unknown
interent.
it was a strange peek into a pro-active executive session.
mostly because there hadn't been one like that before.
(at least not one that was televised so broadly)
and because the VP was actually tuned in and involved.
it was quite fascinating and thought-provoking.
the whole country was tuned in.
do you remember it?
or were you busy licking your wounds that ReadMyLips41 had lost?
Alex R.
1. The Gipper ended Communism as the Demofuckingcrats wrung their hands
about Star Wars. Fuckin' commies. Nice dividends. Made it hard for the
impeached criminal to fuck up too badly.
2. Fuel got expensive, (gas for your truck) Carter tinkered and tinkered
some more to stop energy cost driven inflation - made it worse.
Stagflation sucked. You ain't old enough to remember Billy Beer. It was
not better than Coors.
Zero
> Zero wrote:
>
> > "Looney" <ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote in message
> 1. The Gipper ended Communism
The Gipper didn't end communism, communism ended communism.
the Gipper just unethically rigged the game to speed up its failure a bit.
> 1. The Gipper ended Communism as the Demofuckingcrats wrung
> their hands about Star Wars.
"Star Wars" was a sinful waste of Time, Energy, and Liberty.
> Fuckin' commies. Nice dividends. Made it hard for the
> impeached criminal to fuck up too badly.
well, if you're gonna use that sort of partisan formula to assign
responsibility for various economies, Nixon deserves all the credit
for opening relations with COMMUNIST China.
chew on that one a bit.
do enjoy the multi-dimensional cognitive dissonancy.
> 2. Fuel got expensive, (gas for your truck)
yeah. and why did it? duh.
> Carter tinkered and tinkered some more to stop energy
> cost driven inflation - made it worse.
Carter had the right idea, free us from relying on foreign tinkerers
for our energy needs. Reagen stupidly ignored his wisdom and
tossed that brilliant idea out the rational window.
thus making it worse and keeping us hostage.
> Stagflation sucked. You ain't old enough to remember
> Billy Beer. It was not better than Coors.
i have one six-pack of empty Billy Beer somewhere.
and on this point of quality, we can agree.
party hats!
Looney
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA...
That would have happened no matter WHO was president. Geddit?
No, I'm sure you don't. Your and Josh's myopic worship of Captain Blowjob
knows no bounds.
> i remember specifically watching a very unusual televised conference
> shortly after Clinton became president where he and Gore brought
> together dozens of other wonks who sat at a huge table and brainstormed
> all manner of economic growth strategies, including the mostly unknown
> interent.
>
> it was a strange peek into a pro-active executive session.
>
> mostly because there hadn't been one like that before.
> (at least not one that was televised so broadly)
>
> and because the VP was actually tuned in and involved.
>
> it was quite fascinating and thought-provoking.
>
> the whole country was tuned in.
>
> do you remember it?
>
> or were you busy licking your wounds that ReadMyLips41 had lost?
Ooh, isn't that the one where Algore invented the internet? That conference
had fuck-all to do with the dot.com surge. It was going to happen even if
Algore had jumped on the table and jerked off into Bill Gates' face while
singing Gregorian chants at the top of his lungs then bit the head off a
chicken.
Get real...
Looney
Scary thing is, you believe it.
> ...
>
> but seriously, Clinton was president of the US during those 8 years.
>
> contrast that economy with when Carter was president for 4 years.
>
> you wanted brief, there it is.
>
> now froth about why Clinton was NOT AT ALL responsible for the
> state of the economy but Carter was COMPLETELY responsible.
>
> i anticipate reading your reply with my new Usenet Malaise.
Silly boy. Do point out where I've blamed Carter for the late 70's economy?
Looney
Not till you hike up those droopy tits.
Zero
> "Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote
> > "Looney" <ant...@thetooheyshatespam.com> wrote
> > > Perhaps between you and Zero you can come up with some sort of
> > > daisy-chained, six-degrees-of-bullshit explanation as to how Clinton
> > > and his policies engineered the dot.com bubble.
> > >
> > > Waiting...
> >
> > as a dot.com entrepreneur of the early 90's, i can vouch for the
> > Clinton/Gore embracing of "the internet" for education and commerce.
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA...
>
> That would have happened no matter WHO was president. Geddit?
you mean that Daddy Bush, who didn't even know what a grocery
scanner was, FFS, was going to embrace and encourage a technology
to bring the information highway to the average person's den?
i don't think so, Loon. not by any strecth of ReadMyLips41's imagination.
we would have simply been involved in some new war.
no time for expanding access to knowledge thru home interconnectivity.
duh.
change takes intentional pro-active focus.
without it, you get more of the same. aka conservatism.
> No, I'm sure you don't. Your and Josh's myopic worship of
> Captain Blowjob knows no bounds.
i don't worship Clinton at all.
i do admire his vision to some degree.
his pro-active optimism.
and his tendency to thoughful diplomacy
OTOH: i don't admire either Bush's lack of vision.
it's a "vision thing," ya know?
> > i remember specifically watching a very unusual televised conference
> > shortly after Clinton became president where he and Gore brought
> > together dozens of other wonks who sat at a huge table and brainstormed
> > all manner of economic growth strategies, including the mostly unknown
> > interent.
> >
> > it was a strange peek into a pro-active executive session.
> >
> > mostly because there hadn't been one like that before.
> > (at least not one that was televised so broadly)
> >
> > and because the VP was actually tuned in and involved.
> >
> > it was quite fascinating and thought-provoking.
> >
> > the whole country was tuned in.
> >
> > do you remember it?
> >
> > or were you busy licking your wounds that ReadMyLips41 had lost?
>
> Ooh, isn't that the one where Algore invented the internet?
he didn't say he "invented" it, he said he said he was instrumental in
bringing it about.
but thanks for insiring yet more Usenet malaise in the form of
witnessing yet more unending stubborn adherence to totally
flimsy denigration.
> That conference had fuck-all to do with the dot.com surge.
bzzzt. and whooooooosh.
it had to do with grabbing the econmy by the balls and making it cum.
> It was going to happen even if Algore had jumped on the table
> and jerked off into Bill Gates' face
eventually, yes. probably. but it didn't come during ReadMyLips41.
nor during Gipperbiy's reaign. and it surely could have.
all the pieces had been in place for decades.
what lacked was the will and enthusiasm and support that
Clinton/Gore provided.
the embracing of the opportunities of the information superhighway,
as they so called it back then.
Bill Gates and Steve Jobs could have been jerked off to way
back in 1984. but they weren't. the Big Blue IBM-thinkers
of the time had no vision. nor desire.
> while singing Gregorian chants at the top of his lungs then bit
> the head off a chicken.
>
> Get real...
after that last characterization you're asking *moi* to get real?
heh.
maliase.
Looney
Lordy, you'll say anything, won't you? The dot.com surge was a marketplace
phenomenon, pure and simple. Nothing Clinton or Gore did changed anything.
Nothing Bush Sr. would have done would have changed anything. You're
moronic if you believe they have that sort of clout.
Zero
> Lordy, you'll say anything, won't you? The dot.com surge was a
marketplace
> phenomenon, pure and simple. Nothing Clinton or Gore did changed
anything.
> Nothing Bush Sr. would have done would have changed anything. You're
> moronic if you believe they have that sort of clout.
Gawd. it's not about "clout," FFS.
it's about leadership.
ReadMyLips41's leadership was restricted to waging war.
as is ReadMyLips43.
it's a matter of using the bully pulpit to promote your goals.
i prefer Kerry's goals vs Bushole's goals anyday.
especially since ReadMyLips43 is lying about all of his goals.
for instance, when's the last time you heard him say:
"i'm a uniter, not a divider"?
last election, he said it about 50,000 times.
this round? zilch.
what happened?
same with
"i'm a compasionate conservative"
so, how well did he promote that "goal", huh?
or the other one?
or the "restoring honor and integrity to the White House"
FFS, he's done more harm to the credibility of the
White House and the Presidency than Nixon.
we now return you back to your usual usenet malaise....
Alex R.
If we ever agree here, Muslim suicide bombers are having a snowday from
(Parochial) school in hell.
>
>>1. The Gipper ended Communism as the Demofuckingcrats wrung
>>their hands about Star Wars.
>
>
> "Star Wars" was a sinful waste of Time, Energy, and Liberty.
>
No it wasn't. See above.
>
>>Fuckin' commies. Nice dividends. Made it hard for the
>>impeached criminal to fuck up too badly.
>
>
> well, if you're gonna use that sort of partisan formula to assign
> responsibility for various economies, Nixon deserves all the credit
> for opening relations with COMMUNIST China.
>
Well, one of us has to be just a little partisan, or we'll just agree on
everything, dammit. I don't hold Nixon's federalizing in high regard.
Just as you probably don't like LBJ for his warmongering.
> chew on that one a bit.
Have I given you the recipe for buttery lutefisk?
> do enjoy the multi-dimensional cognitive dissonancy.
>
>
>
>>2. Fuel got expensive, (gas for your truck)
>
>
> yeah. and why did it? duh.
Whatever. I was referring to the net result. Energy costs directly
linked to our economy. We move a lot of stuff, bound to be cause and
effect based directly on costs.
>
>
>>Carter tinkered and tinkered some more to stop energy
>>cost driven inflation - made it worse.
>
>
> Carter had the right idea, free us from relying on foreign tinkerers
> for our energy needs. Reagen stupidly ignored his wisdom and
> tossed that brilliant idea out the rational window.
>
Meanwhile, as we endured Carters ideas, unemployment soared, inflation
was double-digit and prime interest was what, 22-percent?
> thus making it worse and keeping us hostage.
Dumping Little Jimmy Carter sure didn't seem worse if you wanted to eat.
Whatever your perception of net result, going into the 80s was some
scary unstable shit. Did you ever hear about the time he just about
caused a nuclear war? He re-aimed ICBMs at Soviet launch stations.
Sometimes Jimmy just didn't think ahead.
>
>>Stagflation sucked. You ain't old enough to remember
>>Billy Beer. It was not better than Coors.
>
>
> i have one six-pack of empty Billy Beer somewhere.
lol. Me too. Not sure they are empty....
> and on this point of quality, we can agree.
>
> party hats!
Little straw ones with pictures of elephants and donkeys tossing shit
at each other.