On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:21:44 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>
> It's why I'm neither a conservative capitalist nor a Liberal marxist.

see, here's the thing, om. a 'centrist' doesn't characterize liberals,
capital letter or not, as 'marxists.'

>I also dislike those lazy assed people that have a sense of entitlement
and don't want to work for a living...

'centrists' also don't think people who get assistance are 'lazy-assed
people who don't want to work for a living.'

as long as you rant about 'affirmative action being a free ride' denied to
'WHITE people,' and carefully note that 'some of your best friends are
black,' your impersonation of a 'centrist' is bound to come up short.

it's still legal to be a right-winger. (hell, they've been running the
country into the ground for almost eight years.) but you shouldn't try to
kid yourself and others about being a 'centrist.'

blake

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:24:10 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> "Ted Campanelli" > wrote in message
> ...

>
>> Are you really sure you want to vote for someone that REFUSES to salute
>> the American Flag and has the above credentials ?
>
> Symbolism is not important as you might think.
>
> Paul

....and even if it was, the charge is typical right-wing bullshit, which is
to say *a lie*.

but they've had great success with lies for twenty-some years, no reason to
expect anything different from them.

your pal,
blake

"Goomba" > wrote in message
...
> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
>> Ok, that makes sense. I can see how the diamonds would add up quick, So
>> it was a $300,000.00 outfit as opposed to just the dress. Still, she
>> won't wear any of it ever again and you know she could have spent double
>> that easily if she wated to. And it is noteworthy because she and her
>> husband are calling themselves friends of us commoners. They have no
>> clue what our lives are like. No clue.
>>
>> Paul
>
> Letsee... Michelle O'bama made something like $400,000.00 one recent year.
> They live in a house that cost over a million dollars.
> And you think they are closer to the average "commoner"?????
>
>
A $1M home is only about 2x the cost of most homes in my area. I don't
think $1M is a lot to spend on a home these days. Ok, well maybe now with
the housing slump, but it's not really that much.

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 23:59:06 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> "George Cebulka" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Omelet wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Are you really sure you want to vote for someone that REFUSES to salute
>>>>> the American Flag and has the above credentials ?
>>>> Symbolism is not important as you might think.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>
>>> Symbolism is more important than you think.
>>> It shows a treasonous attitude.
>>>
>>> My main beef with Obama is that he SUPPORTS the formation of a North
>>> American Union under the rule of the UN which would totally abolish the
>>> American Constitution.
>>>
>>> I don't need to provide sites. There are plenty of them on Google for
>>> this subject.
>>>
>>> He's a commie.
>>
>> Where in the hell are you getting this from? Please provide some
>> references to back it up.
>
> I am not only a news junky but I love a dandy CT. Never heard it either
> unless she is referring to Jerome Corsi's book. Rumor has it Obama was in a
> limo with a political activist and was getting head from a cheap hooker and
> snorted crystal meth. Oh and he supports killing the born as a form of
> abortion. Gotta be true, it's in a book.
>
> Paul

jerome corsi never told any lies about john kerry, did he? of course you
can trust him.

your pals,
ShitPeddlersForTruth

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 05:13:04 -0500, Omelet wrote:

> In article >, George Cebulka >
> wrote:
>
>> Omelet wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Are you really sure you want to vote for someone that REFUSES to salute
>>>>> the American Flag and has the above credentials ?
>>>> Symbolism is not important as you might think.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>
>>> Symbolism is more important than you think.
>>> It shows a treasonous attitude.
>>>
>>> My main beef with Obama is that he SUPPORTS the formation of a North
>>> American Union under the rule of the UN which would totally abolish the
>>> American Constitution.
>>>
>>> I don't need to provide sites. There are plenty of them on Google for
>>> this subject.
>>>
>>> He's a commie.
>>
>> Where in the hell are you getting this from? Please provide some
>> references to back it up.
>
> Here. Take your pick, and ignore the bloggers:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6majjz

yeah, and i hear hussein osama is also gonna replace the presidential
limosine with a black helicopter!!! omgomg, stock up on ammo and canned
goods now!!

blake

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 23:54:36 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> "Omelet" > wrote in message
> news
>> In article >,
>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>>
>>> > Are you really sure you want to vote for someone that REFUSES to salute
>>> > the American Flag and has the above credentials ?
>>>
>>> Symbolism is not important as you might think.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>
>> Symbolism is more important than you think.
>> It shows a treasonous attitude.
>>
>
> Treason? Not waving a Chinese made flag lapel pin (by the rules of flag
> display that is an improper display of the American flag - i.e. not to be
> made into jewelry or other forms of ornamentation) that is treason? If the
> devil can quote scripture, surely he can wear a lapel pin? Yes? I don't
> wear one either, it is a cheap and tacky excuse for what is lacking in the
> heart.
>
people alway seem to forget that the wearing of flag pins was popularized
by the thugs in the nixon administration. yes, john ehrlichman, h.r.
haldeman and chuck colson, lovers of freedom all.
>
>> He's a commie.
>
> What exactly is a commie? Are we seeing commies under every bed now in
> addition to Muslim terrorists?
>
> Paul

the muslims are worse. they come out from under the bed and slit your
throats. the communists just fluoridate the water and make movies with
ladies chests in them.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 00:23:37 -0700, Bob Terwilliger wrote:

> Paul wrote:
>
>> Oh? Did you know Sarah and Todd Palin belong to the AIC, the Alaska
>> Independence Party?
>
> No, I knew that Todd Palin belonged to the AIP up until 2002, and that there
> is no record of Sarah Palin *ever* being a member.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/us...ence%2 0party
>
> So what do you think about Joe Biden?
>
> http://www.aim.org/special-report/se...nd-larry-craig
>
> Bob

cliff kincaid is a right-wing hack who works for *accuracy in media*, a
right-wing hack group. i feel pretty safe in ignoring any burblings from
him.

blake

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 00:30:20 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Paul wrote:
>>
>>> Oh? Did you know Sarah and Todd Palin belong to the AIC, the Alaska
>>> Independence Party?
>>
>> No, I knew that Todd Palin belonged to the AIP up until 2002, and that
>> there is no record of Sarah Palin *ever* being a member.
>>
>
> She delivered a speech to the group. That is political endorsement. No
> politician does that unless they are endorsing the organization. If Obama's
> wife were a member of the Black Panther party, how would you feel?
>

wait, i thought she *founded* the black panthers?

your pal,
rush

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 05:09:39 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>
>>> Vogue magazine wrote about the dress Cindy McCain wore at the
>>> RNC opening night party. A very private affair and she wore a
>>> $300,000.00 dress. That is 6 years worth of before tax income for
>>> the average American. And this is supposed to be the "common man." I
>>> don't think so.
>>
>> Good grief! She paid *HOW MUCH* for a dress? I could buy a nice house
>> for that price 'round here. I thought wealthy movie stars didn't even
>> spend that much for a single dress... Guess I'm, waaay behind the
>> times. Sigh.
>> --
>
> An you know she is not going to ever wear it again.
>
> Paul

stick close by the nearest thrift shop. you might pick up a bargain.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 23:44:30 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:

>
>"Omelet" > wrote in message
>news
>> In article >,
>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>>
>>> A better question is just how are we going to pay for 9 trillion dollars
>>> in
>>> republican debt?
>>
>> Drill for oil in Alaska.
>> --
>
>They already do. Lots of it. Millions of barrels per year. They sell it
>all to Japan. If we want to use it, we have to buy it back from Japan or
>the commodities market. They being those oil companies who have extraction
>rights that include no strings attached as to who gets it. Alaska gasoline
>is very expensive easily double what we pay now. Why do you suppose that
>is? More drilling makes Exxon richer but does nothing to lower our national
>debt. You seem to think we have nationalized oil companies when in fact
>they are multi-national corporations. They are not even American companies,
>they just incorporate here.
>
>Paul
>
So Paul if we sell it to Japan do we get a lower price per gallon then
we pay for it?
Or do we buy it at the world price, and sell it at the world price?
I think that a wash.

Steve Pope wrote:

> It's pretty easy to demonstrate that the most successful
> economies, historically, have had fairly high rates of taxation
> (United States in the 20th century, the Roman Empire, etc.).
> The only other success stories had high levels of
> mercantilism -- direct government ownership of businesses --
> like the British Empire through much of its history. That
> is just another form of tax.
>
> There is no such thing as a successful, low-tax state, unless
> you want to count offshore tax havens.

Speaking of which..... there is a hurricane heading for the Turks and
Caicos Islands. When they were hit a few years ago they were looking
for aid from Canada and the US. That left me wondering..... the place
is a tax shelter. It's primary business is banking, hiding money from
the US and Canadian government so that people don't have to pay tax on
it. So when they need help, they expect us to use taxpayers money to
help them rebuild. Just doesn't seem right to me. If they want tax money
to help them, they should raise their own taxes instead of just sitting
back and making money of untaxed income.

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 09:23:18 -0400, Goomba wrote:

> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>
>>>> Vogue magazine wrote about the dress Cindy McCain wore at the
>>>> RNC opening night party. A very private affair and she wore a
>>>> $300,000.00 dress. That is 6 years worth of before tax income for
>>>> the average American. And this is supposed to be the "common man." I
>>>> don't think so.
>>> Good grief! She paid *HOW MUCH* for a dress? I could buy a nice house
>>> for that price 'round here. I thought wealthy movie stars didn't even
>>> spend that much for a single dress... Guess I'm, waaay behind the
>>> times. Sigh.
>>> --
>>
>> An you know she is not going to ever wear it again.
>>
>> Paul
>>
> You know you credibility gets even lower when you report such
> inaccuracies so passionately.
> <eye roll>

o.k., maybe it was the *ensemble*. but it was widely reported:

Cindy McCain's $300,000 Outfit
by Vanity Fair
September 4, 2008, 10:29 AM

One of the persistent memes in the Republican line of attack against Barack
Obama is the notion that he is an elitist, whereas the G.O.P. represent
real working Americans like Levi ´F-inÿ Redneck¡ Johnston.

It caught our attention, then, when First Lady Laura Bush and would-be
First Lady Cindy McCain took the stage Tuesday night wearing some rather
fancy designer clothes. So we asked our fashion department to price out
their outfits.

Laura Bush
Oscar de la Renta suit: $2,500
Stuart Weitzman heels: $325
Pearl stud earrings: $600-$1,500
Total: Between $3,425 and $4,325

Cindy McCain
Oscar de la Renta dress: $3,000
Chanel J12 White Ceramic Watch: $4,500
Three-carat diamond earrings: $280,000
Four-strand pearl necklace: $11,000-$25,000
Shoes, designer unknown: $600
Total: Between $299,100 and $313,100

Wow! No wonder McCain has so many houses: his wife has the price of a
Scottsdale split-level hanging from her ears.

(All prices except Lauraÿs shoes and Cindyÿs watch are estimates, and the
jewelry prices are based on the assumption that the pieces are real.)

<http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/09/cindy-mccains-300000-outfit.html>

in any case, jes' plain folks.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 05:14:31 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> "Omelet" > wrote in message
> news
>> In article >,
>> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>
>>> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>
>>> > Vogue magazine wrote about the dress Cindy McCain wore at the
>>> > RNC opening night party. A very private affair and she wore a
>>> > $300,000.00 dress. That is 6 years worth of before tax income for
>>> > the average American. And this is supposed to be the "common man." I
>>> > don't think so.
>>>
>>> Good grief! She paid *HOW MUCH* for a dress? I could buy a nice house
>>> for that price 'round here. I thought wealthy movie stars didn't even
>>> spend that much for a single dress... Guess I'm, waaay behind the
>>> times. Sigh.
>>
>> I could by a freakin' MANSION for that around here! <sigh>
>> --
>
> They have been reported recently to put $900,000.00 on a credit card in one
> month. Now before anyone accuses me of hating the rich, this is just an
> example of how they have no clue about what is going on in the country.
> They are doing very, very well indeed. Why should they change anything?
>
> Paul

checkbooks are *so* passé.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 12:54:31 GMT, Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> ChattyCathy > news:ga0fke$nn3$1
> @registered.motzarella.org: in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>
>>> Vogue magazine wrote about the dress Cindy McCain wore at the
>>> RNC opening night party. A very private affair and she wore a
>>> $300,000.00 dress. That is 6 years worth of before tax income for
>>> the average American. And this is supposed to be the "common man." I
>>> don't think so.
>>
>> Good grief! She paid *HOW MUCH* for a dress? I could buy a nice house
>> for that price 'round here. I thought wealthy movie stars didn't even
>> spend that much for a single dress... Guess I'm, waaay behind the
>> times. Sigh.
>
> Who was it that said "I might die tomorrow but I'll die in Dior"? Was it
> Tallulah Bankhead? Can't recall. $300k is not that much for a dress in
> Cindy McCain's big picture. I'm sure it is original coture and not a knock
> off sold at Kmart. Drop in the bucket for her.
>
> Michael

plus, while i don't know much about this kind of thing, i think a lot of
these are 'loaners.' like nancy reagan, wife of poor-but-honest ronnie,
most of whose dresses went back to the designer's shop.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:32:29 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:
>
>A better question is just how are we going to pay for 9 trillion dollars in
>republican debt?
What percentage of the GNP is the debt? And how that compare to the
past?

> Bush's tax cuts were supposed to generate 1.5
>million jobs. We lost 3 million instead.

And what was the unemployment percentage until the last year.
And what is the historical comparison. And also consider if we got rid
of the 5% of the workforce that is illegal aliens ( which is up
tremendously since 2000) , what our unemployment rate would be?

> So are you better off now than you were in 2000?
Yes There was a recession because of Dot Com collapse, and I lost
money because of it.
>
>Obama's plan, by every examination would lower taxes for 95% of thecountry.
>He will not raise taxes on the other 5, her will merely allow the tax cuts
>of 2001 to expire when they were planned to expire.
So the tax rate & tax bill would go up on people making $31K. Is that
your definition of rich or the upper 5%.

>

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 07:09:06 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> "If this is class warfare, my class is winning - Warren G. Buffet"
>
> Paul

<snort>

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 06:57:42 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:


>
>And McCain voted with him 90 percent of the time. That is very important,
>Om. McSame is Bush. There is no difference.
>
>Paul
>
Paul that is Dem rhetoric. With out unanimous votes, ect, he agrees
with Bush about 45% of the time. Or the same amount of time as Obama
if you count the number of time he voted within the unanimous vote.
:-)

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 14:09:18 GMT, Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> Goomba > :
> in rec.food.cooking
>
>> I see now. You're jealous. You have class envy and think you're
>> somehow entitled to presume to know about their private family
>> finances because they have more than you?
>> Money magazine often writes about the millionaires who live amongst
>> us. They pinch pennies and take care of their resources. That's how
>> they GET to be millionaires.
>
> I don't care much about anyone's wealth. We're talking about one of the
> most significant presedential elections this country has seen it quite
> awhile. At least that I can remember. Or maybe I've finally become aware
> of politics in the past 16 years. Anyway, I'm much more interested in the
> issues at hand.
>
> Michael

in 2000, sure, 'things are o.k., why not give the free-market republicans a
chance? george bush seems like a nice fella, i could have a beer with him
and talk about baseball.'

2008: 'holy shit, hit the brakes, driver! i thought you knew the way to
the airport!'

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 08:01:06 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:



>
>McCain was holding out for Joe Lieberman as his running mate. Perhaps the
>only man in the senate McCain truly trusts. He was told to pick Palin - it
>was not his pick. Who is in charge? McCain, or Bush's boys? Karl Rove is
>running McCain's campaign as well as 169 lobbyists. Obama has 0 lobbyists
>working for him.
Supposition and wish full thing.
>
>A vote for McCain is a vote or Bush's third term. I wager even Dick Cheney
>will be kept on the payroll.
>
I doubt that but Obama will be the second Carter term. Same policy,
and inexperience.
>Paul
>

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:09:22 -0500, Omelet wrote:

> In article >,
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Paul wrote:
>>>
>>>> Vogue magazine wrote about the dress Cindy McCain wore at the RNC opening
>>>> night party. A very private affair and she wore a $300,000.00 dress.
>>>> That is 6 years worth of before tax income for the average American.
>>>> And
>>>> this is supposed to be the "common man." I don't think so.
>>>
>>> The dress itself cost only one-one-hundredth of that price:
>>>
>>> Oscar de la Renta dress: $3,000
>>> Chanel J12 White Ceramic Watch: $4,500
>>> Three-carat diamond earrings: $280,000
>>> Four-strand pearl necklace: $11,000-$25,000
>>> Shoes, designer unknown: $600
>>> Total: Between $299,100 and $313,100
>>>
>>> Obviously, the diamond earrings were the big-ticket items, not the dress.
>>
>> Ok, that makes sense. I can see how the diamonds would add up quick, So it
>> was a $300,000.00 outfit as opposed to just the dress. Still, she won't
>> wear any of it ever again and you know she could have spent double that
>> easily if she wated to. And it is noteworthy because she and her husband
>> are calling themselves friends of us commoners. They have no clue what our
>> lives are like. No clue.
>>
>> Paul
>
> I'm not convinced Obama does either. What is the cost of living in
> Hawaii?

um, how long has it been since he lived in hawaii? and i'm quite sure his
flag pin is diamond-encrusted platinum.

blake

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 09:25:47 -0400, Goomba wrote:

> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
>> Ok, that makes sense. I can see how the diamonds would add up quick, So it
>> was a $300,000.00 outfit as opposed to just the dress. Still, she won't
>> wear any of it ever again and you know she could have spent double that
>> easily if she wated to. And it is noteworthy because she and her husband
>> are calling themselves friends of us commoners. They have no clue what our
>> lives are like. No clue.
>>
>> Paul
>
> Letsee... Michelle O'bama made something like $400,000.00 one recent
> year. They live in a house that cost over a million dollars.
> And you think they are closer to the average "commoner"?????

and they worked for their money, unlike mccain, who married it.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 09:16:34 -0500, Omelet wrote:

> In article >,
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
>> Did you know McCain begged to be Kerry's running mate? Did you know in 01
>> he was poised to switch to the democrat party but then Jim Jeffords went
>> Independent and McCain got ****ed and pulled out of the deal? He's not what
>> he would like you to think he is.
>
> Many of us already know McCain is a RINO.
>
> I don't hold it against him...

how 'centrist' of you.

blake

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 06:15:46 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:


>>> We get most of our oil from Venezuela. Way more than the ME. In a
>>> crisis
>>> we can temporarily nationalize oil companies and redirect 100% of
>>> production
>>> for domestic use. It has been done before.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>
>> So lets do it now and give the American people a break!
>> --
>
>McCain would not agree. You may convince Obama though.
>
>Paul
>
I have no doubt that you could convince Obama to nationalize oil
companies, that is the socialist way.

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 09:55:29 -0400, Goomba wrote:

> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>> Goomba > :
>> in rec.food.cooking
>>
>>
>>> Letsee... Michelle O'bama made something like $400,000.00 one recent
>>> year. They live in a house that cost over a million dollars.
>>> And you think they are closer to the average "commoner"?????
>>
>> No, I'd say she took initiative and made something of herself. Cindy McCain
>> is from inherited wealth. Last estimates of her net worth I could find was
>> something like $100 million. Vast difference between $400k a year, a
>> million dollar house vs. $100 million wouldn't you say?
>>
> Probably not to the guy making 35K and living in a 75K house in small
> town America. How many houses one owns is a silly discriminator for an
> election, if you ask me? How many houses do the Kennedy's own?
>
>
>> Million dollar homes are commonplace these days. $400k is a very nice
>> income, even by todays standards. I'd say Michelle Obama has done well for
>> herself. Cindy McCain was the only child from an extremely priviledged
>> background. See the difference? Of course neither are close to the average
>> American household but in the big picture you're comparing a Mercedes to a
>> private lear jet.
>>
>> Michael
>>
> So what you're saying is it *is* okay to be rich, as long as you're a
> Democrat and rich? Is that where the Kennedy's fit in?

it's fine to be rich. what's *not fine* is to have more money than god and
turn around and call someone with one-hundredth of your assets an
'out-of-touch elitist.'

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 13:27:02 -0700, Pan > wrote:

>And what was the unemployment percentage until the last year.
>And what is the historical comparison. And also consider if we got rid
>of the 5% of the workforce that is illegal aliens ( which is up
>tremendously since 2000) , what our unemployment rate would be?

Our native unemployed will not do what they do. If they did, there
would be no jobs for immigrants to fill and there's the logical end of
the illegal immigration problem.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> I suppose her expenditures support a few, select jobs. How many minimum
> wage employees did it take to make the jewelry or the gown?
>
> Michael

So you do begrudge her spending her own money....?

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 00:03:58 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:

>
> The fiercest neocon warhawks in Bush's administration never saw service.
> Rumsfed, Bush, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rice, Cheney never were in the service.
> Many received very dubious deferments. Most pundits aka O'Reilly and
> lImbaugh never saw service either. Most warhawk senators never served.
>
> Paul

reminds of redd foxx's line about wwii: 'war is a terrible thing. i
didn't go myself, but i saw a lot of people go.'

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
.. .
> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:21:44 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>>
>> It's why I'm neither a conservative capitalist nor a Liberal marxist.
>
> see, here's the thing, om. a 'centrist' doesn't characterize liberals,
> capital letter or not, as 'marxists.'
>
>>I also dislike those lazy assed people that have a sense of entitlement
> and don't want to work for a living...
>
> 'centrists' also don't think people who get assistance are 'lazy-assed
> people who don't want to work for a living.'
>
> as long as you rant about 'affirmative action being a free ride' denied to
> 'WHITE people,' and carefully note that 'some of your best friends are
> black,' your impersonation of a 'centrist' is bound to come up short.
>
> it's still legal to be a right-winger. (hell, they've been running the
> country into the ground for almost eight years.) but you shouldn't try to
> kid yourself and others about being a 'centrist.'
>
Or ever even try to say that she's not a racist.

In article >, sf wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 07:40:23 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
> >Geeze Bob... We have BILLIONS of gallons of oil in the ground that we
> >are not drilling!
> >
> >If we need it, it's there.
> >
> >And we need it NOW.
>
> We need alternative energy now, not more oil.

Eventually, yes I agree.

But drilling here for our own oil and USING it here will buy us the time
that is needed.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
enigma > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote in
> news >
> > Ditto. I work in health care, now for a board that has over
> > 20 hospitals in the system.
>
> well, actually you work for the "health industry". if there
> were not specific laws *requiring* any of those hospitals to
> provide at least rudimentary care to the poor, they wouldn't.
> under the free market system, which McCain supports, health
> care is only going to get more expensive & available to fewer
> people. while i am not a fan of government health care, i
> think the "system" needs a good clean out. there is 'for
> profit' and there is greed...
> lee

The most expensive part of health care is compliance.

Believe me, I have first hand experience with that! The industry is
regulated to death.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
"cybercat" > wrote:

> "enigma" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > Omelet > wrote in
> > news > >
> >> Ditto. I work in health care, now for a board that has over
> >> 20 hospitals in the system.
> >
> > well, actually you work for the "health industry". if there
> > were not specific laws *requiring* any of those hospitals to
> > provide at least rudimentary care to the poor, they wouldn't.
> > under the free market system, which McCain supports, health
> > care is only going to get more expensive & available to fewer
> > people. while i am not a fan of government health care, i
> > think the "system" needs a good clean out. there is 'for
> > profit' and there is greed...
> > lee
> > --
>
> And as long as Om gets her fat ass examined at a decent cost twice a year,
> she doesn't give a ****.

Ignorant ass hole... I can't even afford Physical therapy, or the
Cardiologist my internal med doctor wants me to see.

You are so full of shit you can't see the light of day...

I pity you.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
"Giusi" > wrote:

> --
> http://www.judithgreenwood.com
> > "Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio newsmpomelet-
> >
> >> I have thyroid issues. I need to keep my thermostat at 72. ;-)
> >
> > I do not even have a thyroid and I have never heard this suggested as the
> > mildest of help. In thirty years of treatment in three countries, no one
> > has told me to override my body's thermostatic abilities. My two sisters,
> > both medical professionals, also are being treated for thyroid problems
> > and they also never heard of this.

Huh?

I keep it at 72 for personal comfort. It's has nothing to do with
treatment! My medication tends to make me feel hot, and I don't like
that.

Period.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
"Giusi" > wrote:

> "Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> > "Giusi" > wrote:
> >> We live in Europe with much higher energy costs. We try hard not to
> >> waste
> >> energy because it costs too much. There's still a lot to do, but believe
> >> me
> >> when I say that paying over $4800 a year for heat and lights and minimal
> >> car
> >> use for a single person is hardly getting a bargain.
> >
> > I pay a lot more than that! My MONTHLY utility for power, water, sewage >
> > and garbage runs me no less than $400.00. This month was $480.00. My
> > monthly fuel bill for mine and dads cars (I commute 32 miles per day
> > round trip) is costing about $250.00 per month. That's $600.00 to
> > $700.00 per month, or $7,200 to $8,400 per year.
>
> 1. you are two people
> 2. you included things I did not such as rubbush and water
> 3. you commute.
>
> I have been rationing myself to 30 liters of gas per month for some time
> now. If I go on a job which uses more than 10 liters, there is a trip
> charge. I use public transport which where I live is not easy.

We don't have reliable public transportation where I live.
I wish we did.

Except for taxis, and that costs more than gas does.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 09:25:47 -0400, Goomba wrote:
>
>> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, that makes sense. I can see how the diamonds would add up quick,
>>> So it
>>> was a $300,000.00 outfit as opposed to just the dress. Still, she won't
>>> wear any of it ever again and you know she could have spent double that
>>> easily if she wated to. And it is noteworthy because she and her
>>> husband
>>> are calling themselves friends of us commoners. They have no clue what
>>> our
>>> lives are like. No clue.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>
>> Letsee... Michelle O'bama made something like $400,000.00 one recent
>> year. They live in a house that cost over a million dollars.
>> And you think they are closer to the average "commoner"?????
>
> and they worked for their money, unlike mccain, who married it.
>

Honestly, I admire your tenacity and patience arguing with morons like this,
I know you're tired of repeating yourself, though. Let them stew in their
shit. The election is coming, and when it is over, they'll be braising in
their bile for at least eight years. Eight.

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 05:14:26 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
> >
> >> "Omelet" > wrote in message
> >> news > >>> In article >,
> >>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> A better question is just how are we going to pay for 9 trillion dollars
> >>>> in
> >>>> republican debt?
> >>>
> >>> Drill for oil in Alaska.
> >>> --
> >>
> >> They already do. Lots of it. Millions of barrels per year. They sell it
> >> all to Japan. If we want to use it, we have to buy it back from Japan or
> >> the commodities market. They being those oil companies who have
> >> extraction
> >> rights that include no strings attached as to who gets it. Alaska
> >> gasoline
> >> is very expensive easily double what we pay now. Why do you suppose that
> >> is? More drilling makes Exxon richer but does nothing to lower our
> >> national
> >> debt. You seem to think we have nationalized oil companies when in fact
> >> they are multi-national corporations. They are not even American
> >> companies,
> >> they just incorporate here.
> >>
> >> Paul
> >
> > And that needs to be changed! It's f-ing BS that American oil gets sold
> > on the commodities market! We need to use American oil in AMERICA and
> > only sell off the excess.
> >
> > We SHOULD have nationalized oil companies!
>
> tsk, tsk. how communistic of you.
>
> since the u.s. consumes a *whole lot* more than it consumes, it's hard to
> say where this 'excess' would come from.
>
> blake

I'm a centrist babe. A conservative liberal.

Necessities to life should be available to everyone at an affordable
price. The rich can make their money off of the technophiles. ;-)

I have no intention of EVER owning an I-phone!
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 06:13:30 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > "Giusi" > wrote:
> >>
> >> Cue hysterical laughter...
> >>
> >> that's not only a Socialist take it's like incredibly naive and lacks
> >> understanding of a free market. US oil IS a commodity. It is bought and
> >> sold on the world market to who will pay. If you make it unavailable on
> >> the
> >> free market, then the rest of the world may decide to keep their oil from
> >> the US market. Since the US market is the most wasteful and greedy of
> >> all,
> >> that would leave the US with only Alaskan and Texan and Gulf of Mexico
> >> oil,
> >> pretty much.
> >> Better turn everything off, Om, because your solution could flip the
> >> switch
> >> for the entire country. You think "What's mine is mine and what's yours
> >> is
> >> mine also."
> >
> > Babe, all I know is that right now, the cost of energy is hurting and
> > even killing a lot of people.
> >
> > There has to be a way to fix that.
> >
> > The needs of our nation, our tax payers have to come first.
> > The damn Dem's are living in fields of unicorns and have not really
> > shown me anything that will help soonest.
>
> drilling for more oil might help in ten years, *maybe*. what about thirty
> years after that, when *everyone* runs out of oil?
>
> blake

It's only a start.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 06:55:00 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
> >
> >> "Omelet" > wrote in message
> >> news > >>> In article >,
> >>> "Giusi" > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> >>>> >
> >>>> > And that needs to be changed! It's f-ing BS that American oil gets
> >>>> > sold
> >>>> > on the commodities market! We need to use American oil in AMERICA and
> >>>> > only sell off the excess.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > We SHOULD have nationalized oil companies!
> >>>> > --
> >>>> > Peace! Om
> >>>>
> >>>> Cue hysterical laughter...
> >>>>
> >>>> that's not only a Socialist take it's like incredibly naive and lacks
> >>>> understanding of a free market. US oil IS a commodity. It is bought
> >>>> and
> >>>> sold on the world market to who will pay. If you make it unavailable on
> >>>> the
> >>>> free market, then the rest of the world may decide to keep their oil
> >>>> from
> >>>> the US market. Since the US market is the most wasteful and greedy of
> >>>> all,
> >>>> that would leave the US with only Alaskan and Texan and Gulf of Mexico
> >>>> oil,
> >>>> pretty much.
> >>>> Better turn everything off, Om, because your solution could flip the
> >>>> switch
> >>>> for the entire country. You think "What's mine is mine and what's yours
> >>>> is
> >>>> mine also."
> >>>
> >>> Babe, all I know is that right now, the cost of energy is hurting and
> >>> even killing a lot of people.
> >>>
> >>> There has to be a way to fix that.
> >>>
> >>> The needs of our nation, our tax payers have to come first.
> >>> The damn Dem's are living in fields of unicorns and have not really
> >>> shown me anything that will help soonest.
> >>> --
> >>
> >> Yes they have Om. They have proposd ending the "Enron Loophole" which is
> >> causing extreme speculation through dark markets. It was stonewalled by
> >> the
> >> republicans. They have proposed releasing oil from the Strategtic
> >> Reserve,
> >> shot down by the republicans. And this has worked in the past. So they
> >> have tried and each time the republicans obstructed it. The republicans
> >> want leases sold with no strings attached and that by the DOE analysis
> >> won't
> >> do anything for years.
> >>
> >> The republicans have had years to deal with this and they did nothing.
> >> Now
> >> in an election year they want to make hay with it.
> >>
> >> Paul
> >
> > Time will tell... My mind is seldom totally closed about things like
> > this, but I need to be shown by _action_.
> >
> > Actions always speak louder than words!
> >
> > We need fixes NOW. Not in 20 years.
>
> bush thought a good fix would be to invade iraq, and thus control their
> reserves.
>
> there are no fixes for *now*.
>
> blake

Bush is a moron.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:21:44 -0500, Omelet wrote:
> >
> > It's why I'm neither a conservative capitalist nor a Liberal marxist.
>
> see, here's the thing, om. a 'centrist' doesn't characterize liberals,
> capital letter or not, as 'marxists.'
>
> >I also dislike those lazy assed people that have a sense of entitlement
> and don't want to work for a living...
>
> 'centrists' also don't think people who get assistance are 'lazy-assed
> people who don't want to work for a living.'
>
> as long as you rant about 'affirmative action being a free ride' denied to
> 'WHITE people,' and carefully note that 'some of your best friends are
> black,' your impersonation of a 'centrist' is bound to come up short.
>
> it's still legal to be a right-winger. (hell, they've been running the
> country into the ground for almost eight years.) but you shouldn't try to
> kid yourself and others about being a 'centrist.'
>
> blake

Whatever Blake.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> >> Where in the hell are you getting this from? Please provide some
> >> references to back it up.
> >
> > Here. Take your pick, and ignore the bloggers:
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/6majjz
>
> yeah, and i hear hussein osama is also gonna replace the presidential
> limosine with a black helicopter!!! omgomg, stock up on ammo and canned
> goods now!!
>
> blake

I am.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote:
>
> > i still doubt he'll let you suck his dick.
>
> At our last local Usenet food get-together I actually was
> propositioned with that exact offer (with Om as my witness!). I
> tried to break it to him gently and good naturedly, but he was still
> pretty disappointed. At least I know who to call if I ever get that
> urge.

<snicker> Yes, I watched it with a certain morbid fascination. ;-D

>
> Greg, OTOH, I wouldn't be so good-natured with. Stand in line,
> Greg. I've got plenty of better suitors to choose from in the
> meantime.
>
> -sw

And the guy hitting on you was kinda cute. <eg>
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain