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

>>
>> 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.



"Stupid?"
Do you think ALL of us who voted for Obama are welfare cases just
waiting for our next handout? We also work and pay "big" taxes just
like you, and the issues that motivated us are the lies and stupidity
from the Bush administration that got us into two unwin-able wars, a
deficit that has indebted our great-, great-grandchildren to the
Chinese, and the highest unemployment since the Depression, and it's not
over yet.

Now we see the reverse side of "What's good for General Motors is good
for the nation." and it doesn't look so pretty.

Those 47% of you who have been captivated by the Bush tax cuts will cry
all the way to the bank if you are asked to help reverse the mess your
guy created. No one earns money in a vacuum unless he prints it in his
basement. The money you earn comes from providing something to others
and we owe it to one another to make sure the less fortunate don't
starve. It's called "I am my brother's keeper" or Communitarianism.
The more banks, brokerages, businesses and "little people" who fall, the
shakier everyone's house of cards becomes unless you are sitting on a
pile of bullion.

In this economy and financial mindset, few people are more than a few
paychecks away from financial collapse. That includes the McMansion
set, also.

Obama isn't a magician, but enough of us were fed up with the excesses
and lies of the past eight years to want a whole new approach.

gloria p

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

>>>>
>>> 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.
>


Choosing Sarah Palin as a running mate didn't do much for his
stature in many eyes.

gloria p

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 09:58:56 -0500, "jmcquown" >
wrote:

>"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
...

>> Is that really Jill McQuown's post or a forger? If the former, it's no
>> sillier than most of the crap discussions that happen here and is no
>> sillier or no more outrageous than anyone announcing what their
>> SuperBowl party menu or their Academy Awards-watching party will be.
>> Good lord!!
>>
>> If the latter, don't be such a prick.
>> --
>> -Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
>> http://web.me.com/barbschaller
>> http://gallery.me.com/barbschaller/100041
>> -- a woman my age shouldn't
>> have this much fun!
>
>
>And who really gives a crap about a Superbowl party or the Academy Awards?
>Wait, I forget. You're about "dead spreads". Funeral reports. How utterly
>gruesome. Must be a Minney-sodey thang.
>
>Seriously, who gives a rats ass what anyone eats next Tuesday? The man is
>being inaugurated, not split and roasted.

Personally I don't care either but I'd rather read or discuss it than
listen to you bitch about trying to get you parents to eat before they
died. You truly are a miserable selfish bitch. Now run along and
open a can of campbells soup.

Lou

In article >,
Gloria P > wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:26:22 -0600, Pete C. wrote:
>
> >>>>
> >>> 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.
> >
>
>
> Choosing Sarah Palin as a running mate didn't do much for his
> stature in many eyes.
>
> gloria p

It was desperation. ;-) Hoping imho to recruit the Hillary voters.
Obviously it did not work...

Actually, I rather liked Palin, but not enough to warm me up to McCain.
The GOP dropped the ball on that one big time.
--
Peace! Om

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

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 10:06:55 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>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.

At least we were on a trajectory to a five trillion dollar *surplus*
when Clinton left office. Then we got a new president who gave tax
breaks to the wealthy, declared a phony war (which enriched his
friends in the military industrial complex) citing weapons of mass
destruction and 911, ignored Katrina and just plain bungled everything
in general.


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

Mae West

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 10:25:03 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>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?

He claims to have been in the military. If he was, he knows about the
marines.


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

Mae West

"Gloria P" > wrote in message
...
> Lou Decruss wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:39:01 -0700, Gloria P >
>> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> 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.
>
>
>
> "Stupid?"
> Do you think ALL of us who voted for Obama are welfare cases just waiting
> for our next handout? We also work and pay "big" taxes just like you, and
> the issues that motivated us are the lies and stupidity from the Bush
> administration that got us into two unwin-able wars, a deficit that has
> indebted our great-, great-grandchildren to the Chinese, and the highest
> unemployment since the Depression, and it's not over yet.
>
> Now we see the reverse side of "What's good for General Motors is good for
> the nation." and it doesn't look so pretty.
>
> Those 47% of you who have been captivated by the Bush tax cuts will cry
> all the way to the bank if you are asked to help reverse the mess your guy
> created. No one earns money in a vacuum unless he prints it in his
> basement. The money you earn comes from providing something to others and
> we owe it to one another to make sure the less fortunate don't starve.
> It's called "I am my brother's keeper" or Communitarianism.
> The more banks, brokerages, businesses and "little people" who fall, the
> shakier everyone's house of cards becomes unless you are sitting on a pile
> of bullion.
>
> In this economy and financial mindset, few people are more than a few
> paychecks away from financial collapse. That includes the McMansion set,
> also.
>
> Obama isn't a magician, but enough of us were fed up with the excesses and
> lies of the past eight years to want a whole new approach.
>
> gloria p
>
>

Tell the Ludicrous one, Gloria!

"Gloria P" > wrote in message
...
> 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!
>

Al Franken rocks, man. Anyone who could write a book entitled "Rush
Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot" cannot be all bad.

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> 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.
>

That's the least this mf can do. Really.

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 14:06:04 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"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.
>
Basher he is. This is from his 2004 book "Lies and the Lying Liars
Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right"

[begin quote]
Rich Lowry is an editor at National Review. If you watch cable news,
you've probably seen his head talking here or there, arguing the
conservative position on some issue of the day. He's pretty young, I'd
say about forty now. He's not bad, as these guys go. Fairly
articulate. He even enjoyed a run as a semi-regular on The NewsHour.

One area where Lowry seems paleo-conservative, though, is in the realm
of gender politics. When Massachusetts governor Jane Swift had twins,
he called for her to step down. I agreed, but that was because she was
a Republican.

As you may have figured out by now, I'm a bit of a C-SPAN junkie, and
a couple of years ago, late at night, I caught Rich talking, I think,
to some College Republicans. He was saying that Democrats had
"feminized" politics. In fact, by making it okay for politicians to
cry, Lowry said that we Democrats had "sissified" politics.

There seemed to be only one thing to do. The next day, I called the
National Review and got Rich's direct line. I remember the
conversation very clearly.

RICH: Hello

ME: Rich, Al Franken. How do you do?

RICH: Fine. To what do I owe the honor of your call?

ME: Well, I saw you on C-SPAN last night talking about how we
Democrats had sisified politics. So, I thought I'd challenge you to a
fight.

RICH:...A fight?

ME: Yeah. I figure the loser gives a thousand dollars to the winner's
charity.

RICH: Where...where would we fight?

ME: In my parking garage.

RICH: Parking garage?

ME: Yeah.

RICH: What would the rules be?

ME: No rules. It's like Fight Club.

RICH: Fight Club?

ME: Yeah. No weapons or anything. The first to say "uncle" loses.

RICH: You want to fight me in a garage? With no rules?

ME: Yeah. If you win, I have to give to some nutty right-wing cause.
If I win, you have to give to...I don't know, NARAL or Emily's List.

RICH: Can I ask you something?

ME: Sure.

RICH: Do you fight a lot?

ME: No, I have actually never been in a fight. But I wrestled in high
school and I'm pretty confident I could beat you. Then again, I'm
fifty and have a bad back. But I think I could take you. At any rate,
I just don't want this "Democrats have sissified politics" to stand.
So, I want to fight you.

RICH: Can I take a day or so to decide?

ME: Sure. Take your time. I just figured that anyone who said that
Democrats had sissified politics would kind of have to fight.

RICH: I understand. How about if I sleep on it?

ME: Absolutely. I'll call you tomorrow.

RICH: Okay, sure.

It was an extremely satisfying phone call. Sizing Lowry up on TV, he
seemed just a tad on the wimpy side, which had only been confirmed by
his reaction: terrified. I was just a decent high school wrestler, but
I was convinced I could take him down, then basically punch his ears
till he called "uncle."
[end quote]

It goes on, but in the end they decided to just have a nice lunch
(OBFood). Now this may be pompous and self-appointed and all, but
taking macho posturings from a chickenhawk in earnest is also pretty
funny.
--
modom

ambitious when it comes to fiddling with meat

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> "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.
>
>


I don't live in Minnesota, either. My opinion of his abilities is
from listening to his opinions and beliefs on his radio talk show,
obviously very different from his SNL portrayals.

gloria p

sf wrote on Sun, 18 Jan 2009 01:09:12 -0800:

>> 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

Why is it impossible to accept that, within the limits of
error, no-one can possibly say who the voters actually preferred? In
that case the only sensible thing to do would be to spin a coin. I know
it seems undignified to settle a very important matter in this fashion
but it is pretty certain that continuing recounts and court challenges,
are a waste of money.


--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Gloria P wrote:
> 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

I think it is general apathy more than anything. I would bet most people
don't even know what form of government we have or how it works.

Somehow we need to have the same interest in what the politicians are
doing as we have in the next American idol.

Dan Abel wrote:
> 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.
>


Tell me more about this "free market" concept you mentioned in your last
sentence. From where I sit it appears we have a Capitalist profit and
Socialist loss system. If there were actually a "free market" the
companies that were poorly managed or that imploded because of greed
would simply disappear or their assets purchased by a stronger
organization wouldn't they?

"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 am really changing my perspective and thinking about some fried chicken
and waffles.

Dimitri

"Michael \"Dog3\" wrote:
> "modom (palindrome guy)" says:
> > "Michael \"Dog3\" wrote:
> >>Melba's Jammin' opines:
>
> >>> Bean Soup -- in hope that it'll help get me another senator in the
> >>> legislature?
>
> >>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 ;-)
>
> > 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. �
>
> LOL... Maybe Barb can come up with a Recount Soup. I'm going to think
> about a Blago Bisque. �You'll have to pay a Senate Seat to get a taste of
> it ;-)

I think Barb would call that Blago Borscht.

Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 09:58:56 -0500, "jmcquown" >
> wrote:
>
> >"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> Is that really Jill McQuown's post or a forger? If the former, it's
no
> >> sillier than most of the crap discussions that happen here and is no
> >> sillier or no more outrageous than anyone announcing what their
> >> SuperBowl party menu or their Academy Awards-watching party will be.
> >> Good lord!!
> >>
> >> If the latter, don't be such a prick.
> >> --
> >> -Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
> >> http://web.me.com/barbschaller
> >> http://gallery.me.com/barbschaller/100041
> >> -- a woman my age shouldn't
> >> have this much fun!
> >
> >
> >And who really gives a crap about a Superbowl party or the Academy
Awards?
> >Wait, I forget. You're about "dead spreads". Funeral reports. How
utterly
> >gruesome. Must be a Minney-sodey thang.
> >
> >Seriously, who gives a rats ass what anyone eats next Tuesday? The man
is
> >being inaugurated, not split and roasted.
>
> Personally I don't care either but I'd rather read or discuss it than
> listen to you bitch about trying to get you parents to eat before they
> died. You truly are a miserable selfish bitch. Now run along and
> open a can of campbells soup.


Yup...make that a dented, *leaking* can of soup...say that's been sitting
around for a year or so.

<chuckle>


--
Best
Greg

In article >,
George > wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:

> > 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.

> Tell me more about this "free market" concept you mentioned in your last
> sentence. From where I sit it appears we have a Capitalist profit and
> Socialist loss system. If there were actually a "free market" the
> companies that were poorly managed or that imploded because of greed
> would simply disappear or their assets purchased by a stronger
> organization wouldn't they?

You hit the nail right on the head. When the Federal government (the
FDIC and the FSLIC) is guaranteeing the deposits that the bankers are
using to speculate with, it's not a free market. After the 1929 stock
crash, laws were passed to regulate things. But we didn't learn again
with the S&L crash in the late 80s, requiring a bailout of over US$100
billion.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> 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

I don't know; I've never used them. The State Fair blue ribbon cherry
pie, made by Lola Nebel, Cambridge, MN, however, used the Oregon brand
canned cherries (tart). She told me. Her cherry pie brought $600 to
the State Fair Foundation's fundraising auction last August. I stopped
bidding after $100.

--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller
http://gallery.me.com/barbschaller/100041
-- a woman my age shouldn't
have this much fun!

In article >,
"cybercat" > wrote:

> We're having filet mignon, lobster tails broiled in butter, asparagus
> and home made rolls made in my bread machine. Strawberries and
> champagne for dessert.

ROTFL!! Rock on!!
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller
http://gallery.me.com/barbschaller/100041
-- a woman my age shouldn't
have this much fun!

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

The fact is that if Obama had been yet another white male politician we
would have had a repeat of 2000 with essentially a tie. It was the few
percent of folks deciding to vote for Obama for the novelty value that
tipped the scale, those voting based on issues were split pretty evenly.

It matters little who we have in the White House as we are ultimately
doomed as a country unless we can find a way to eliminate this extreme
polarization which cripples the ability of the government to find a
middle ground and deal with critical issues.

Michael \"Dog3\" wrote:
>
> "Pete C." > news:49720617$0$20205
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
> >
> > 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.
>
> 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?

We have always had differing opinions, however in decades past the bulk
of the population understood the need to find a middle ground for the
good of the country.

In recent decades opinions have become more and more extreme and the
main political parties have shifted further and further to the extremes,
resulting in the inability to find that middle ground and deal with
issues lest finding that middle ground conflict with a parties political
aspirations.

The extreme divide can be clearly seen in the 2000 election tie, and the
near ties in the two subsequent elections with the wingers in each case
claiming a few percent somehow constituted a landslide.

When we get to an election where the margin is a solid double digit
percentage then we may have some hope...

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

> sf > : in
> rec.food.cooking
>
> > 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.
>
> They need to hide and seek elsewhere. I don't want them in my garden.
>
> Michael

Put up a fence.
--
Peace! Om

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

In article >,
George > wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
> > 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.
> >
>
>
> Tell me more about this "free market" concept you mentioned in your last
> sentence. From where I sit it appears we have a Capitalist profit and
> Socialist loss system. If there were actually a "free market" the
> companies that were poorly managed or that imploded because of greed
> would simply disappear or their assets purchased by a stronger
> organization wouldn't they?

You are not alone in thinking that the "bail out" is the worst idea ever.
They are only doing it to try to save jobs from what I understand.
--
Peace! Om

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

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

> Omelet >
> news > rec.food.cooking
>
> > In article >,
> > "Michael \"Dog3\"" > wrote:
> >
> >> sf > :
> >> in rec.food.cooking
> >>
> >> > 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.
> >>
> >> They need to hide and seek elsewhere. I don't want them in my garden.
> >>
> >> Michael
> >
> > Put up a fence.
>
> A better idea is to start calling the police. Last I heard it's still
> private property and not a public playground.
>
> Michael

Good fences make good neighbors. IME they've always been worth the
investment. T-posts and 2" x 4" farm fencing is cheap, attractive, and
impossible to climb.

I did my entire quarter acre for $600.00.
--
Peace! Om

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

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:56:54 -0600, Omelet wrote:

> 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.

What on earth is a moon pie?

In article .com>,
"Pete C." > wrote:

> 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
>
> The fact is that if Obama had been yet another white male politician we
> would have had a repeat of 2000 with essentially a tie. It was the few
> percent of folks deciding to vote for Obama for the novelty value that
> tipped the scale, those voting based on issues were split pretty evenly.
>
> It matters little who we have in the White House as we are ultimately
> doomed as a country unless we can find a way to eliminate this extreme
> polarization which cripples the ability of the government to find a
> middle ground and deal with critical issues.

Think "Rome".

China may be our downfall... especially if Obama undermines the Second
Amendment. I pray he's not that foolish. (Please note, I'm supporting
him, but with caution).

The last basic defense our country can have against a home invasion is
an armed populace.
--
Peace! Om

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

In article >,
Horry > wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:56:54 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>
> > 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, chitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.
> >
> > You forgot the moon pies.
>
> What on earth is a moon pie?

<lol> Southern delight. Chocolate covered graham cracker shell and
marshmallow.
Very Southern/Redneck:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Pie

My reference was meant as humor. Hope nobody took offense!
--
Peace! Om

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

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 04:32:35 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:
>
>A better idea is to start calling the police. Last I heard it's still
>private property and not a public playground.
>
You're cranky lately.



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

Mae West

In article >,
Horry > wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:56:54 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> What on earth is a moon pie?

Courtesy of Blake:

<http://www.scooterhost.com/scooter-images/moon-pie.gif>

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:15:41 -0600, Omelet wrote:

> In article >,
> Horry > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:56:54 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>>
>> > 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, chitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.
>> >
>> > You forgot the moon pies.
>>
>> What on earth is a moon pie?
>
> <lol> Southern delight. Chocolate covered graham cracker shell and
> marshmallow.
> Very Southern/Redneck:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Pie
>
> My reference was meant as humor. Hope nobody took offense!

Ohhhhh... Wagon Wheels?

http://fourthirds-user.com/galleries...on_wheels_.jpg

Horry said...

> On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:15:41 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> Horry > wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:56:54 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>>>
>>> > 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, chitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.
>>> >
>>> > You forgot the moon pies.
>>>
>>> What on earth is a moon pie?
>>
>> <lol> Southern delight. Chocolate covered graham cracker shell and
>> marshmallow.
>> Very Southern/Redneck:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Pie
>>
>> My reference was meant as humor. Hope nobody took offense!
>
> Ohhhhh... Wagon Wheels?
>
> http://fourthirds-user.com/galleries...on_wheels_.jpg


Oh, no, no!

Wagon Wheels! http://tinyurl.com/7tppnr and drowning in butter, just as I
was raised on!

Andy

Andy wrote:
> Horry said...
>
>> On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:15:41 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> Horry > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:56:54 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 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, chitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.
>>>>> You forgot the moon pies.
>>>> What on earth is a moon pie?
>>> <lol> Southern delight. Chocolate covered graham cracker shell and
>>> marshmallow.
>>> Very Southern/Redneck:
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Pie
>>>
>>> My reference was meant as humor. Hope nobody took offense!
>> Ohhhhh... Wagon Wheels?
>>
>> http://fourthirds-user.com/galleries...on_wheels_.jpg
>
>
> Oh, no, no!
>
> Wagon Wheels! http://tinyurl.com/7tppnr and drowning in butter, just as I
> was raised on!
>
> Andy

Never heard of a Wagon Wheel treat, until today. This is prolly his
Wagon Wheel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagon_Wheel_(biscuit)

Heh, I would eat it.

Becca

On 17 Jan 2009 14:38:08 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>"Felice" > : in
>rec.food.cooking
>
>> 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.
>
>A few neighbors and fellow Obama campaign volunteers are gathering over
>here and we're doing Chicago Style hot dogs
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago-style_hot_dog, or as authentic as we
>can make them. Janet is in charge of getting ahold of the authentic
>Vienna Beef franks. There will also be some polish sausages. Louise wants
>"red hots" so we've got to find some of those, whatever they are. I'll
>Google those over the weekend.

It's just another name for a hot dog. Use the Vienna's and you'll be
all set. You'll also need S.Rosen's buns too but I don't know if
you'll find those down there.

http://www.thebestofchicago.com/rosens.aspx

Lou

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> George > wrote:
>
>> Dan Abel wrote:
>
>>> 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.
>
>> Tell me more about this "free market" concept you mentioned in your last
>> sentence. From where I sit it appears we have a Capitalist profit and
>> Socialist loss system. If there were actually a "free market" the
>> companies that were poorly managed or that imploded because of greed
>> would simply disappear or their assets purchased by a stronger
>> organization wouldn't they?
>
> You hit the nail right on the head. When the Federal government (the
> FDIC and the FSLIC) is guaranteeing the deposits that the bankers are
> using to speculate with, it's not a free market. After the 1929 stock
> crash, laws were passed to regulate things. But we didn't learn again
> with the S&L crash in the late 80s, requiring a bailout of over US$100
> billion.
>
Right, and then the greedy parasite bankers bankers still thought they
were too restrained and they had their agents create the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which removed the remaining restrictions on their
greed. And after they made tons of money and drove the economy into the
ground they got their agents to transfer over a trillion dollars of
wealth to them.

Omelet wrote:
> In article >,
> George > wrote:
>
>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> Tell me more about this "free market" concept you mentioned in your last
>> sentence. From where I sit it appears we have a Capitalist profit and
>> Socialist loss system. If there were actually a "free market" the
>> companies that were poorly managed or that imploded because of greed
>> would simply disappear or their assets purchased by a stronger
>> organization wouldn't they?
>
> You are not alone in thinking that the "bail out" is the worst idea ever.
> They are only doing it to try to save jobs from what I understand.

They did it to transfer more wealth to a few whose greed helped get us
where we are.

The jobs thing was just a FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) smoke screen in
order to try and make it look different than what it really is.

On 17 Jan 2009 14:50:11 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>"jmcquown" >
: in rec.food.cooking
>
>> "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.
>
>Ordinarily I don't but several of my friends and neighbors worked hard on
>the Obama campaign and we're going to celebrate this one. We deserve it.
>Besides, it *is* an historical moment in US history.

I didn't vote for him but I'll agree you deserve to celebrate. I hope
you have a great time. Personally I'm happy because it seems we've
made some progress overcoming racism. But there's still much left to
overcome.

>I wonder what the Bush supporters did for his inaugurations? Kick back on
>the sofa and popped open a can of beer?

I only voted for Bush the first time and neither I or anyone else I
know gave a shit about his inauguration. We were just glad to not
have to listen to Gore for 4 years. And look at the babbling fool we
got. I'm glad he's gone in 24 hours.

Lou

In article >,
Becca > wrote:

> Andy wrote:
> > Horry said...
> >
> >> On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:15:41 -0600, Omelet wrote:
> >>
> >>> In article >,
> >>> Horry > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:56:54 -0600, Omelet wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> 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, chitlins, watermelon, and grape soda.
> >>>>> You forgot the moon pies.
> >>>> What on earth is a moon pie?
> >>> <lol> Southern delight. Chocolate covered graham cracker shell and
> >>> marshmallow.
> >>> Very Southern/Redneck:
> >>>
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Pie
> >>>
> >>> My reference was meant as humor. Hope nobody took offense!
> >> Ohhhhh... Wagon Wheels?
> >>
> >> http://fourthirds-user.com/galleries...on_wheels_.jpg
> >
> >
> > Oh, no, no!
> >
> > Wagon Wheels! http://tinyurl.com/7tppnr and drowning in butter, just as I
> > was raised on!
> >
> > Andy
>
> Never heard of a Wagon Wheel treat, until today. This is prolly his
> Wagon Wheel.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagon_Wheel_(biscuit)
>
> Heh, I would eat it.
>
> Becca

When it comes to marshmallow treats, Nabisco Mallomars are my personal
favorite. I've not had one in years. <g> Sugar gives me zits!

<http://www.nabiscoworld.com/brands/b...&CatalogType=1
&BrandKey=mallomars&BrandLink=/&BrandId=73&PageNo=1>

Peeps are good melted in hot cocoa. The cool thing about the chick
shaped peeps is that they melt all the way except the eyeballs. Your
cocoa cup stares back at you. <g> The best peeps for this are stale
peeps. Leave the package in the cabinet for a few months and the peeps
get to be hard as a rock.
--
Peace! Om

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

In article >,
Lou Decruss > wrote:

> On 17 Jan 2009 14:38:08 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> > wrote:
>
> >"Felice" > : in
> >rec.food.cooking
> >
> >> 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.
> >
> >A few neighbors and fellow Obama campaign volunteers are gathering over
> >here and we're doing Chicago Style hot dogs
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago-style_hot_dog, or as authentic as we
> >can make them. Janet is in charge of getting ahold of the authentic
> >Vienna Beef franks. There will also be some polish sausages. Louise wants
> >"red hots" so we've got to find some of those, whatever they are. I'll
> >Google those over the weekend.
>
> It's just another name for a hot dog. Use the Vienna's and you'll be
> all set. You'll also need S.Rosen's buns too but I don't know if
> you'll find those down there.
>
> http://www.thebestofchicago.com/rosens.aspx
>
> Lou

Red Hots are cinnamon candies:

<http://www.groovycandies.com/GC2Sear...field=red+hots
&utm_source=GGL&utm_medium=PPC&utm_term=0000066969 >

Good mixed into vanilla ice cream, or cupcake frosting for valentines
day treats.
--
Peace! Om

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

sf wrote:
>
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 10:06:55 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:
>
> >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.
>
> At least we were on a trajectory to a five trillion dollar *surplus*
> when Clinton left office.

It was a phony surplus from the about to burst "tech bubble".

> Then we got a new president who gave tax
> breaks to the wealthy,

The "wealthy" and the "employers" overlap a great deal, and if you
recall, Clinton's tech bubble had burst and the economy needed to grow
to employ those out of jobs due to that tech bubble burst.

> declared a phony war (which enriched his
> friends in the military industrial complex) citing weapons of mass
> destruction and 911,

The only thing phony about the war is the claims about it made by the
loony wingers. As for WMDs, the UN UNSCOM inspection team documented
their existence.

> ignored Katrina

Katrina wasn't ignored, it was a situation that had not been
contemplated / planned for. FEMA was always designed as the third level
emergency responder tasked with providing support when requested by
state government. With Katrina, the corrupt and unprepared local
government, the first responders went AWOL. The state government, the
second level responders, being similarly unprepared bungled their
response and by the time information got to FEMA and they realized they
needed to respond in a role they were not designed for, a day plus had
passed and then another day plus was required for them for get aid to
the area.

Whether Katrina occurred under Bush or under Clinton, the response in
the first couple days would have been the same. The differences would
have come after the initial response with Clinton being likely to spend
more tax dollars to bail out the unprepared.

> and just plain bungled everything
> in general.