"George" > wrote in message
...
> Giusi wrote:
>> "George" ha scritto nel messaggio
>>
>> they voted to pull currently around a trillion dollars > out of our
>> pockets to throw it on the front steps of the useless > financial
>> industry which are nothing but a bunch of greedy parasitical
>>> thieves who have inserted >themselves into every aspect of life.
>>
>> Could you allow that they are trying to rescue it because if it goes the
>> retirement savings of million will go with it? Thay aren't trying to
>> rescue Maddon, you know.
>
> If the institutions disappeared whatever was left of the retirement
> savings of millions would still be left. The government should have simply
> let the crooked and greedy institutions fail and transfer the remains to
> sound institutions just like they have done with failed banks in the past.
> There was absolutely no need to bail these crooks out except to transfer
> more wealth to them. The government created lots of FUD and it worked.
>
> Bailing them out sent a message of continue as usual and you will get your
> bonuses for a job well done and thats exactly what happened.
>
>>
>> That financial system is run by our brothers, aunts and children. These
>> are not aliens or terrorists sent to break us. The greed, bad judgment
>> and lack of responsibility displayed is how our society reared them.
>> Those that weren't already like that quickly figured it out.
>
> Sure, and when the crooked and greedy ones were left to fail the other
> ones would continue and have a serious fear they would also fail and that
> they really needed to continue to realize it isn't there money. They
> simply have a job because of the wealth of others and they are there
> simply to provide a service and not continue to devise ways to move
> massive wealth to themselves.
>
> If your brother, aunt or child committed a criminal act for whatever
> motivation would you say "thats OK you know how it is" or "they should be
> prosecuted/punished according to standards"?
>
>>
>> You can rant and rave about them, but THEY ARE US. The now impotent
>> oversight departments SEC, et al, were set up to save us from another
>> 1929, but we laugh at the Depression mentality of our parents and
>> grandparents and we didn't pay attention to the fact that this has always
>> been us and nothing has changed. The dog that bites needs muzzling.
>>
>>
>>
> Sure heroes and criminals and everyone else are us too. The last of the
> protections devised to prevent another 1929 were removed by the joint work
> of the red and blue teams when Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
> into law enabling all of their financial friends to pretty much do
> whatever they wanted.

Then why do Americans put up with it?
Surely almost 300mil of you can change things.

Lou Decruss wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:42:49 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:

>> senators get to drink at lunch time? that explains a lot.
>
> If I had to listen to that crap all day long my water glass would be
> filled with gin starting in the morning.

(laugh) I'm with you. Politics is my idea of hell, start with
having to sit around listening to blowhards all day long.

nancy

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:39:52 -0500, "Felice" >
wrote:

>So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno via
>Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.

I'm going to do what I normally do. I'll go to work so I can pay more
taxes to bail out all the losers who want everything without working
for it.

When I'm done working to pay my taxes I'll whip up a big batch of
pixie dust and sprinkle it on my popcorn so hopefully I'll at least
dream that everything will be better in the morning.

I eat Chicago food every day so whatever I eat will be authentic.

What exactly are you celebrating again? Whatever it is I hope you
have fun!

Lou

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
> Dan Abel > news:dabel-331103.09185117012009@c-61-68-245-
> 199.per.connect.net.au: in rec.food.cooking
>
>> In article >,
>> sf > wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:19:31 -0600, Kathleen
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I really hate bumble bees.
>>> I have no problem with bumble bees, but wasps are a different story.
>> I don't have a problem with bees. My father used to keep them in the
>> back yard. He always told us that if we don't bother the nest, and
>> watch where we put our body parts, we won't have a problem. Wasps and
>> hornets are different. We've had a couple of problems at church camp.
>> I suspect, though, that kids found those paper nests irresistible, and
>> threw rocks or poked them with sticks. Some kids got stung multiple
>> times. The staff at the camp would kill any nest that we reported, if
>> it was close to camp or a trail.
>
> I have a healthy respect for bees. I'm allergic to some bee stings and
> I've learned to leave them alone. Generally if I don't bother them, they
> don't bother me. Except those little sweat bees (not sure if that's the
> name of them or not, it's what we've always called them). They hover
> around you and they do sting. Thankfully I'm not allergic to their sting.


My buddy is allergic to bees. He never knew it until college age. A
couple of us were downtown and he got stung and dropped to the ground
like a sack of potatoes. Fortunately he wasn't by himself and the
downtown hospital was nearby. He always carries a spring loaded epi pen
with him since then.

>
> There is a nest of underground type bees on the west side of our house
> that I've left alone for nearly 3 years. We're very careful not to
> disturb them when we're gardening on the small strip of land there. That
> side of the house is not fenced. The bees tend to keep the neighborhood
> children out. For some reason the kids like to use that strip of land to
> sneak into our back yard. Never could figure out why they want to go out
> of their way to get into or yard but that's kids for you. Since we've
> left the bees alone, haven't had a problem with the neighborhood spoiled
> brats.
>
> Michael
>

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:39:52 -0500, Felice wrote:

> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno via
> Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.

Fried chicken, shitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.

On 18 Jan 2009 14:33:02 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>"Bob Terwilliger" >
: in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Felice wrote:
>>
>>> When Jimmy Carter was sworn in I did a Suth'n lunch involving
>>> g-r-i-t-s. Silly, yes, but we take our fun where we find it!
>>
>> That's pretty much my take on it too, and that's the same reason I
>> don't mind seeing others' menus for Super Bowl Sunday, Oscar Night,
>> Bastille Day, or whatever. Thematic menus can be both challenging and
>> fun, so it interests me to read about them.
>>
>> As to what I'll have for lunch next Tuesday, I haven't made any
>> special plans. Maybe I'll make a Chicago-style hot dog and a pineapple
>> milkshake.
>
>We're doing Chicago style hot dogs, house made french fries and chili.
>Haven't thought about dessert much. Hmmm... Is there a Chicago-style
>cheesecake maybe? I'll have to look and see if Chi is famous for a
>dessert type food.
>
>Michael

http://www.elicheesecake.com/tours.aspx

Lou

In article >,
"Michael \"Dog3\"" > wrote:

> Dan Abel > news:dabel-331103.09185117012009@c-61-68-245-
> 199.per.connect.net.au: in rec.food.cooking
>
> > In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:19:31 -0600, Kathleen
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >I really hate bumble bees.
> >>
> >> I have no problem with bumble bees, but wasps are a different story.
> >
> > I don't have a problem with bees. My father used to keep them in the
> > back yard. He always told us that if we don't bother the nest, and
> > watch where we put our body parts, we won't have a problem. Wasps and
> > hornets are different. We've had a couple of problems at church camp.
> > I suspect, though, that kids found those paper nests irresistible, and
> > threw rocks or poked them with sticks. Some kids got stung multiple
> > times. The staff at the camp would kill any nest that we reported, if
> > it was close to camp or a trail.
>
> I have a healthy respect for bees. I'm allergic to some bee stings and
> I've learned to leave them alone. Generally if I don't bother them, they
> don't bother me. Except those little sweat bees (not sure if that's the
> name of them or not, it's what we've always called them). They hover
> around you and they do sting. Thankfully I'm not allergic to their sting.
>
> There is a nest of underground type bees on the west side of our house
> that I've left alone for nearly 3 years. We're very careful not to
> disturb them when we're gardening on the small strip of land there. That
> side of the house is not fenced. The bees tend to keep the neighborhood
> children out. For some reason the kids like to use that strip of land to
> sneak into our back yard. Never could figure out why they want to go out
> of their way to get into or yard but that's kids for you. Since we've
> left the bees alone, haven't had a problem with the neighborhood spoiled
> brats.
>
> Michael

Good fences make good neighbors. <g>

Never thought of using bees as a fence line!
--
Peace! Om

"Any ship can be a minesweeper. Once." -- Anonymous

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:39:01 -0700, Gloria P >
wrote:

>Felice wrote:
>> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno via
>> Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>>
>> Felice
>> .
>>
>>
>
>
>I know quite a few people who should be eating humble pie.

I'm very curious why you would say something so stupid. The 47% of us
who didn't vote for him not only work and pay big taxes, but we also
are educated enough to know what the issues were/are. The rest of you
can sit in a line with your hands out waiting for the promises to come
true.

"change?" What a joke.

In article >,
Uncle Nasty > wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:39:52 -0500, Felice wrote:
>
> > So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
> > Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno
> > via
> > Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>
> Fried chicken, shitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.

You forgot the moon pies.
--
Peace! Om

"Any ship can be a minesweeper. Once." -- Anonymous

On 18 Jan 2009 14:13:28 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>Can you explain this "divide" you speak of? What exactly is divided? We
>have always been a nation of differing opinions, ideas, religious beliefs
>and political ideals. Where exactly is the division of which you speak?

Probably in the red states.


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

Mae West

On 18 Jan 2009 14:30:23 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>In 2000 when Bush won I accepted it and was ready to give him my full
>support until the Iraq invasion. After that I was finished with him. His
>win in 2004 was a bitter pill to swallow. At least for me.

They got what they voted for.


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

Mae West

"Uncle Nasty" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:39:52 -0500, Felice wrote:
>
>> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno
>> via
>> Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>
> Fried chicken, shitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.
>

welcome home fatman.

--
C.D

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:11:58 -0600, Uncle Nasty >
wrote:

>On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:39:52 -0500, Felice wrote:
>
>> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno via
>> Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>
>Fried chicken, shitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.

WB


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

Mae West

On 18 Jan 2009 14:02:35 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>For some reason the kids like to use that strip of land to
>sneak into our back yard. Never could figure out why they want to go out
>of their way to get into or yard but that's kids for you.

They're probably playing hide and seek.


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

Mae West

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 09:27:05 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
>> "Felice" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>>> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno
>>> via Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>>>
>>> Felice
>>> .
>> I really have to wonder why the inuaguration of a U.S. President influences
>> your choices for lunch on that day. Did you have something special for
>> lunch the day Jimmy Carter was sworn in? How silly.
>
> I don't think it's silly at all, but it is a good question. Neither my
> wife nor I liked any of the Bush's. That was not a cause for
> celebration. Bill Clinton did a good job, but after his name got
> dragged through the mud during his first term, I think a lot of women
> would just as soon not have lunch with him.

maybe so, but i think a lot of other women find him a compelling figure,
possibly for the same reason.

i'd much rather have a beer with him than some other (soon-to-be)
ex-presidents i could name.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:26:22 -0600, Pete C. wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:37:42 -0600, Pete C. wrote:
>>
>>> Felice wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>>>> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno via
>>>> Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>>>>
>>>> Felice
>>>> .
>>>
>>> Very close to half the population of the US will not be celebrating. I
>>> expect close to 100% are hoping for the best however.
>>>
>>> It's pretty sad how the perception of the election is drastically
>>> different when the reality is that it was only a few percent further
>>> apart than the election folks still haven't stopped bitching about.
>>> Those few percent can largely be attributed to those voting based on the
>>> novelty factor of making a historic election, and not on political
>>> positions.
>>>
>>
>> yeah, they voted for the novelty of having a competent, intelligent man in
>> the white house. thrill-crazy kids.
>
> That "competent, intelligent" applied to both candidates, and obviously
> not to the guy leaving office who was not on the ballot.

your estimation of john mccain obviously varies from mine.

your

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 13:55:05 -0600, modom (palindrome guy) wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:26:22 -0600, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>blake murphy wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:37:42 -0600, Pete C. wrote:
>>>
>>> > Felice wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>>> >> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno via
>>> >> Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>>> >>
>>> >> Felice
>>> >> .
>>> >
>>> > Very close to half the population of the US will not be celebrating. I
>>> > expect close to 100% are hoping for the best however.
>>> >
>>> > It's pretty sad how the perception of the election is drastically
>>> > different when the reality is that it was only a few percent further
>>> > apart than the election folks still haven't stopped bitching about.
>>> > Those few percent can largely be attributed to those voting based on the
>>> > novelty factor of making a historic election, and not on political
>>> > positions.
>>> >
> I didn't reply to this when I first read it, but this afternoon I want
> to caution against this sort of analysis to the extent that it is
> based on a conception of voters' motives. George Will said something
> about voters' motives back in October after Colin Powell's endorsement
> of Obama:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl_ivLT-Zm0&eurl
>
> And it's just downright odd. Millions of Americans, including Powell,
> weighed statements of policy and estimations of character, evaluated
> the candidates' evident grasp of ideas and issues to make their
> decisions, and along comes a commentator who alleges that if he had
> the right tools, he could measure their motives -- motives which he
> suspects he already knows according to his special ability to divine
> what they're really thinking.
>
> Geoge Will does not know what I think. He does not have that sort of
> psychometric tool. Asserting my motives is my job, not anyone else's.
> And that goes for all of us, regardless of our politics.
>
> The net effect of such assessment is to subvert the concept of
> reasonable choice.
>
> Similarly, to assert that voters, whom you do not know, were motivated
> by a "novelty factor" is to claim a special knowledge of their
> psyches.

as usual, george will (along with many others) is full of shit.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:16:39 -0600, Pete C. wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 10:24:43 -0600, Pete C. wrote:
>>
>>> sf wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:51:08 -0800 (PST), Lynn from Fargo
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Funny, you don't sound Centrist to me. You sound slightly right of
>>>>>Gengis Khan.
>>>>
>>>> Obama's team kicked ass and everyone knows it except diehard right
>>>> wingers and the perpetually disgruntled.
>>>
>>> Funny, the election results were far from a landslide. Your warped
>>> comments on my centrist view and presentation of the facts of the
>>> election only serve to validate my comments. We have a serious divide in
>>> the US and until we find a way to bring the bulk of the population back
>>> to the center things are only going to get worse.
>>
>> <derisive snort>
>>
>> yes, that was one of the most important republican goals, bringing the
>> country back to the center. no question.
>>
>> blake
>
> Another mindless winger heard from...

i am a liberal, but not mindless.

i think people voted for obama in large measure because of the utter and
complete failure of the bush administration, not because he is 'the magic
negro.'

you can lick your wounds and pretend otherwise if you wish.

blake

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 06:13:06 -0600, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:42:49 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:57:30 -0600, modom (palindrome guy) wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:39:52 -0500, "Felice" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>>>>Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno via
>>>>Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>>>>
>>>>Felice
>>>>.
>>> Second reply. Here's the menu for the official Senate luncheon the
>>> day of the inauguration:
>>>
>>> The Appetizer: Seafood Stew accompanied by Duckhorn Vineyards, 2007
>>> Sauvignon Blanc, Napa Valley.
>>>
>>> The Entree: Brace of American birds (pheasant and duck), served with
>>> Sour Cherry Chutney and Molasses Sweet Potatoes and accompanied by
>>> Goldeneye, 2005 Pinot Noir, Anderson Valley.
>>>
>>> Dessert: Apple Cinnamon Sponge Cake and Sweet Cream Glacé , with
>>> Korbel Natural “Special Inaugural Cuvée,” California Champagne.
>>>
>>> Pix of the plates and other stuff he
>>> http://inaugural.senate.gov/luncheon/
>>
>>senators get to drink at lunch time? that explains a lot.
>
> If I had to listen to that crap all day long my water glass would be
> filled with gin starting in the morning.
>
> Lou Kennedy

actually, i was thinking something like that when i posted the above.
drinking wine at lunch might be a breather from more powerful stuff that
some of them have in their offices.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 11:17:40 -0800, sf wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:48:19 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>many people (quite reasonably, i think) are very happy to see george
>>bush's back as he returns to texas.
>
> He's the only president (except Regan, who dyed his hair) I remember
> who didn't visibly age in office. He certainly got a lot of rest....
> off to bed at 9PM every night and to Camp David as much as possible.
> Well, lots of rest and Cheney making decisions for him. It was a no
> brainer presidency.

i don't know, he looks a little less chirpy than he did eight years ago.

but he did spend one-fifth of his term on vacation, and knocked off at
five-thirty almost every day. clearly not the hardest-working man in show
business.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:29:28 -0600, Melba's Jammin' wrote:

> In article >,
> "modom (palindrome guy)" > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 13:07:45 -0600, Melba's Jammin'
>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>The menu on one site name it Sour Cherry Chutney; the recipe on the link
>>>I posted just calls it Cherry Chutney. I wrote to Senator Feinstein to
>>>request the chef be flogged. I got a canned reply.
>>
>> Canned like the cherries. In defense of the floggable chef, it's
>> January and fresh cherries, sour or otherwise, are scarce. But your
>> point is well taken -- if a bit BARBaric from the chef's point of
>> view.
>> --
>> modom
>
> No, nein, nyet, ixnay! It's not about fresh cherries vs. canned,
> Mikhail. It's about a recipe on the menu that's called Sour Cherry
> Chutney and the recipe calls for bing (sweet) cherries. Oregon brand
> cans a sour cherry, too.

are they really sour? like the bright-red cherries (on the tree, not dyed)
of my youth?

your pal,
blake

On 17 Jan 2009 19:24:11 GMT, Default User wrote:

> Kathleen wrote:
>
>> ™¥ Horry ™¥ wrote:
>
>>> Is it true that Americans call bumble bees "humble bees"?
>>
>> Not that I've ever heard.
>>
>> I've heard them called "Ow, ow, ow, goddamn it, shit, NO don't come
>> back here there's a goddamn nest call the dogs in oh crap there's one
>> stuck in my HAIR getitout getitout GETITOUT!"
>>
>> I really hate bumble bees.
>
> Are you sure you're talking about bumble bees? While somewhat
> ferocious-looking, they aren't very aggressive, less so than even
> European honeybees. You pretty much have to step in the nest to get
> workers to respond at all. The drones will fly at you, but they can't
> sting.
>
> Brian

we used to have a ton of bumblebees flying around a huge (three-story)
wisteria vine growing out of what used to be a well directly behind my
parent's house. they never stung, or did much but, well, bumble around.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:07:12 -0800, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

>Horry asked:
>
>> Is it true that Americans call bumble bees "humble bees"?
>
>Only the Americans who have a rather unusual speech impediment.
>
>Bob

ebonics?

Lou

In article >,
George > wrote:


> 47% of those who voted didn't vote for Obama. Clearly you expressed
> something completely different. I think the intense polarization that
> drives this is driven by the fat cats who own the politicians playing
> with us.
>
> A good current example is we are told it is a good thing that the "blue
> team" controls Congress because they are very smart and work for the
> "common man". Yet they voted to pull currently around a trillion dollars
> out of our pockets to throw it on the front steps of the useless
> financial industry which are nothing but a bunch of greedy parasitical
> thieves who have inserted themselves into every aspect of life.

So, let's agree that throwing a trillion dollars of good money after bad
is a very painful experience. So, would the "red" team have done this?
Or would they have made it two trillion? Just speculation. And who is
responsible for the mess anyway? Some folks think that the "red" team
gutting the Federal regulations might have been a big factor. Was the
"blue" team blameless? Of course not. Enough of them voted for these
laws that they passed. The big one was signed by Bill Clinton, as
President. Everybody, both red and blue, though that deregulation and
the free market were good things.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

sf wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 23:54:02 -0600, "modom (palindrome guy)"
> > wrote:
>
>> Barb lives in Minne-haha-soter where the contested, contested, and
>> contested recount has taken thousands of years to complete this cycle
>> and there ain't a Blago in sight.
>
> Now waitaminute... I thought one beat the other by 250-500 votes (who
> said one vote doesn't matter?). It's up to the courts now because the
> loser is crying foul.
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_155367.html
>
>


Al Franken is a bright, compassionate, literate, well-rpoken guy.
Minnesota could do worse. The gov could appoint one of its
prominent citizens (like Jesse Ventura?) to the post. Yike!

gloria p

In article >,
"Michael \"Dog3\"" > wrote:

> "Pete C." > news:49720617$0$20205
> : in rec.food.cooking

> > Funny, the election results were far from a landslide. Your warped
> > comments on my centrist view and presentation of the facts of the
> > election only serve to validate my comments. We have a serious divide
> in
> > the US and until we find a way to bring the bulk of the population back
> > to the center things are only going to get worse.
>
> Can you explain this "divide" you speak of? What exactly is divided? We
> have always been a nation of differing opinions, ideas, religious beliefs
> and political ideals. Where exactly is the division of which you speak?

I have a little different take on things, and I guess it's time for me
to blurt it out. We go through this every four years. It's painful for
me to watch Presidential debates. They just aren't very nice to each
other. It's like a kid's game. The object is to polarize everybody, in
order to get them to vote for the one candidate. After the election,
there's a natural period where this polarization (or great divide) just
naturally goes away, and the nation comes together to support to
newly-elected President.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
"Michael \"Dog3\"" > wrote:

> sf > : in
> rec.food.cooking
>
> > On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:42:43 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas
> > > wrote:

[snipped all]

> > A. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
> > B. Educate yourself
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Band
> > C. Get into your feeble brain that "Send in the Marines" is a joke
>
> You hit the nail on the head with "C" sf )

Perhaps Peter isn't from the US? Can you name the branches of the
Australian military? (hint - I don't think that there are four) How
about the sub-branches?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 17:23:26 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 11:17:40 -0800, sf wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:48:19 GMT, blake murphy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>many people (quite reasonably, i think) are very happy to see george
>>>bush's back as he returns to texas.
>>
>> He's the only president (except Regan, who dyed his hair) I remember
>> who didn't visibly age in office. He certainly got a lot of rest....
>> off to bed at 9PM every night and to Camp David as much as possible.
>> Well, lots of rest and Cheney making decisions for him. It was a no
>> brainer presidency.
>
>i don't know, he looks a little less chirpy than he did eight years ago.
>
>but he did spend one-fifth of his term on vacation, and knocked off at
>five-thirty almost every day. clearly not the hardest-working man in show
>business.
>

Condoleezza Rice told staffers to give him the Cliff Notes version of
anything he had to read. It had to be pared down to two pages or he
didn't read it. That's one way to leave the office by 5:30.


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

Mae West

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:16:39 -0600, Pete C. wrote:
>
> > blake murphy wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 10:24:43 -0600, Pete C. wrote:
> >>
> >>> sf wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:51:08 -0800 (PST), Lynn from Fargo
> >>>> > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Funny, you don't sound Centrist to me. You sound slightly right of
> >>>>>Gengis Khan.
> >>>>
> >>>> Obama's team kicked ass and everyone knows it except diehard right
> >>>> wingers and the perpetually disgruntled.
> >>>
> >>> Funny, the election results were far from a landslide. Your warped
> >>> comments on my centrist view and presentation of the facts of the
> >>> election only serve to validate my comments. We have a serious divide in
> >>> the US and until we find a way to bring the bulk of the population back
> >>> to the center things are only going to get worse.
> >>
> >> <derisive snort>
> >>
> >> yes, that was one of the most important republican goals, bringing the
> >> country back to the center. no question.
> >>
> >> blake
> >
> > Another mindless winger heard from...
>
> i am a liberal, but not mindless.
>
> i think people voted for obama in large measure because of the utter and
> complete failure of the bush administration, not because he is 'the magic
> negro.'
>
> you can lick your wounds and pretend otherwise if you wish.
>
> blake

I agree. I think the majority that voted for Obama in this election
voted for the man, not the color.
--
Peace! Om

"Any ship can be a minesweeper. Once." -- Anonymous

peninsula wrote:

>
> Then why do Americans put up with it?
> Surely almost 300mil of you can change things.
>
>


In my experience it's almost impossible to get three people to agree on
a solution to a problem. How do you get the majority of 300 million to
agree when each has a separate answer?

gloria p

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 11:39:32 -0600, Lou Decruss
> wrote:

>On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:07:12 -0800, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:
>
>>Horry asked:
>>
>>> Is it true that Americans call bumble bees "humble bees"?
>>
>>Only the Americans who have a rather unusual speech impediment.
>>
>>Bob
>
>ebonics?
>
British.



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

Mae West

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
> LOL... Maybe Barb can come up with a Recount Soup.



How about a chicken soup filled with alphabet pasta?


> I'm going to think about a Blago Bisque. You'll have to pay a
> Senate Seat to get a taste of it ;-)

Lobster bisque with caviar-topped croutons and a glug of champagne
or maybe goldwasser.

:-(

gloria p

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 11:56:41 GMT, "peninsula" > wrote:

>
>"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
>> "Felice" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>>> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from Uno
>>> via Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>>>
>>> Felice
>>> .
>> I really have to wonder why the inuaguration of a U.S. President
>> influences your choices for lunch on that day. Did you have something
>> special for lunch the day Jimmy Carter was sworn in? How silly.
>>
>> Jill
>
>Don't you wish you could just inhale the same air as Obama does?

I've inhaled Chicago air for over 50 years and my shit still stinks
just like his does.

Lou

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
> Oh dear Gawd. We need a Rod Blagojevich soup. We'll have to find a recipe
> out there for soup that has an ingredient list calling for rotten apples
> ;-)
>
> Michael
>
Maybe something made with hard cider? :-)

--
Jean B.

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
> "Bob Terwilliger" >
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Felice wrote:
>>
>>> When Jimmy Carter was sworn in I did a Suth'n lunch involving
>>> g-r-i-t-s. Silly, yes, but we take our fun where we find it!
>> That's pretty much my take on it too, and that's the same reason I
>> don't mind seeing others' menus for Super Bowl Sunday, Oscar Night,
>> Bastille Day, or whatever. Thematic menus can be both challenging and
>> fun, so it interests me to read about them.
>>
>> As to what I'll have for lunch next Tuesday, I haven't made any
>> special plans. Maybe I'll make a Chicago-style hot dog and a pineapple
>> milkshake.
>
> We're doing Chicago style hot dogs, house made french fries and chili.
> Haven't thought about dessert much. Hmmm... Is there a Chicago-style
> cheesecake maybe? I'll have to look and see if Chi is famous for a
> dessert type food.
>
> Michael
>
>
One of Obama's daughters was quoted as saying he wasn't into
sweets but likes pumpkin pie.

--
Jean B.

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:24:08 GMT, "peninsula" > wrote:

>
>"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
>> "peninsula" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Felice" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> So what are those of us who are celebrating going to have for lunch on
>>>>> Tuesday? The best I can come up with is Chicago deep-dish pizza from
>>>>> Uno via Dining In. Someone has to have a better idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Felice
>>>>> .
>>>> I really have to wonder why the inuaguration of a U.S. President
>>>> influences your choices for lunch on that day. Did you have something
>>>> special for lunch the day Jimmy Carter was sworn in? How silly.
>>>>
>>
>>> Don't you wish you could just inhale the same air as Obama does?
>>>
>>
>> Frankly, no. Who gives a rats ass what we eat for lunch that day?! It's
>> a Tuesday. Same as any other day. I'll probably make chicken noodle
>> soup, curl up on the couch and read a book. It's only an "event" at the
>> White House.
>>
>> Jill
>
>Fair enough. You don't like Obama?

Actually you can like Obama and still be annoyed by the insanity that
has been caused by his election.

>btw, I am not a troll and I like American opinions.
>I guess the future of Australia & New Zealand is dictated by America.
>Hopefully Obama is up to the challenge.

I hope the same.

Lou

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 09:30:03 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>In article >,
> "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
>
>> Frankly, no. Who gives a rats ass what we eat for lunch that day?! It's a
>> Tuesday. Same as any other day. I'll probably make chicken noodle soup,
>> curl up on the couch and read a book. It's only an "event" at the White
>> House.
>
>That's simply not true. I forget the numbers, but a significant
>percentage of the entire US population will be physically present. A
>lot of others will be watching and listening. I'm not interested at
>all, but I can still recognize that others are.

I'm not all that interested either but it is like watching a train
wreck. I can't keep the TV off. For me I think the amusing part is
watching people make total fools of themselves. I'm sure Al Gore must
be very proud of his party when he looks at all the private jets
flying celebrities in for the event. But let's not drill for oil.

Lou

"Gloria P" > wrote in message
>
> Al Franken is a bright, compassionate, literate, well-rpoken guy.
> Minnesota could do worse. The gov could appoint one of its
> prominent citizens (like Jesse Ventura?) to the post. Yike!
>
> gloria p

I don't live in your state so I'm not interested in the local politics, but
my opinion of him differs. I always thought he was a pompous ass. That
opinion is based on his TV appearances as a humorist as well as self
appointed basher of the opposing party. Maybe his campaign speeches were
better.

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:21:37 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
>> For "physically present", and the entire population of the US, I think
>> 1% is really high. Since I wrote the above, I have read in many places
>> that it is estimated that 2 million people will be there.
>
>Where will they all pee? I cannot imagine being in a crowd like that, or
>Times Square on NY eve.

The party in Chicago was pretty damn big too without a single arrest.
Without beer tents things are usually much more controlled. I still
wouldn't want to be anywhere near there though.

Lou

Michael "Dog3" wrote:


> There is a nest of underground type bees on the west side of our house
> that I've left alone for nearly 3 years. We're very careful not to
> disturb them when we're gardening on the small strip of land there. That
> side of the house is not fenced. The bees tend to keep the neighborhood
> children out. For some reason the kids like to use that strip of land to
> sneak into our back yard. Never could figure out why they want to go out
> of their way to get into or yard but that's kids for you. Since we've
> left the bees alone, haven't had a problem with the neighborhood spoiled
> brats.

The kids from the neighborhood behind ours used to come over the privacy
fence and cut through our yard to save having to walk two blocks up the
street and around the corner. I didn't want them doing it because A)
Zane is extremely territorial and protective of his domain, B), the
fence is old and they'd already broken a couple of slats clambering over
and C), they'd failed, on more than one occasion, to latch the front
gate going out, which meant the dogs could get out.

I knew the kids in question, had told them repeatedly I didn't want them
on the fence or in the yard, and why, but it evidently didn't make much
of an impression. Until one afternoon when I heard Zane roaring like a
rabid werewolf. I dropped what I was doing and ran outside, dreading
what I might find.

What I found was one of the young rocket scientists from the
neighborhood behind us, a 13 year old boy, dangling upside down from the
top of the fence, the hem of his parka snagged between the slats of the
fence. His friends had abandoned him, leaving him to his fate when Zane
came raging from the far end of the yard.

Zane could have had him, could have shredded him if he'd wanted to.
Instead, he'd settled for scaring the kid nearly comatose, snarling at
any movement, any effort to free himself. He was a human pinata and
Zane wasn't wearing a blindfold and didn't need a bat.

I snapped a shot of him with my cell phone (leverage) then fetched a
step ladder and got him unhooked. I knew the boy, knew about his family
situation, so when I told him that I would refrain from telling his
stepdad about what had happened in exchange for a promise to stay out of
my yard I knew he'd agree and count himself lucky.

To the best of my knowledge, that was the last time any of them cut
through my yard.