On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 01:01:08 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 21:48:39 GMT, "brooklyn1"
> > wrote:
>
>>He wishes ears were a spine. LOL
>
> His dumbo ears don't work. He slept through church for 20 years.
>
> Lou

well, let's be honest here. anyone who's been to church has heard a fair
amount of rubbish.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:07:19 -0500, Gregory Morrow wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 14:01:51 GMT, brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>
>>> Obama is very ignorant man,
>>
>> <derisive snort>
>>
>>> just has the gift of the gab that panders to the
>>> masses of asses. It's easy to sweet talk the ignorant, it's done by
>>> other silver tongued scam artists in every house of worship every
>>> day, that's where he apprenticed.
>>
>> yeah, he apprenticed at harvard law. all has-been navy cooks are
>> surely justified in looking down at him.
>
> Sheldon is correct.

sheldon has proved over and over here that he doesn't know his ass from a
hole in the ground. you should know better.

blake

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:52:14 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:26:05 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 14:01:51 GMT, brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>
>>> Obama is very ignorant man,
>>
>> <derisive snort>
>>
>>>just has the gift of the gab that panders to the
>>> masses of asses. It's easy to sweet talk the ignorant, it's done by other
>>> silver tongued scam artists in every house of worship every day, that's
>>> where he apprenticed.
>>
>>yeah, he apprenticed at harvard law.
>
> Do you think he knows how to make a grilled cheese sandwich? I don't
> think so.
>

with all due respect, i don't that that's strictly required for the office.

>>i don't think obama will replace you in annals of jerk-off history. just a
>>guess on my part.
>
> shemp sure is a jag-off and I do enjoy slapping him around, but he
> doesn't seem like a parasite.
>
> Lou

what difference does that make with respect to his idiotic political
opinions (or those on any other topic, for that matter)?

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 19:04:42 GMT, brooklyn1 wrote:

> "blake murphy" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 10:31:14 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>> "brooklyn1" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> That's due to the fact that there are very few skilled tradesmen in the
>>>> US
>>>> who are capable of producing those parts (proven by the fall of the US
>>>> auto empire) There are no programs to teach the "real" vocational
>>>> skills
>>>> of master machinist, tool & diemaker, moldmaker, etc., all there are is
>>>> assmbly line ants and fat cats at the top, there is no center, the
>>>> center
>>>> is all overseas.
>>> snipped here
>>>> The government needs to initiate real apprenticeship programs that
>>>> teach
>>>> those manufacturing jobs, then the US would have more jobs than workers,
>>>> there'd would be no unemployment.
>>>
>>> Like most states, CT is having a tough time with the budget. They are
>>> considering closing the two trade schools the state has.
>>>
>>> Now, this will probably upset a lot of people, but I have a suggestion.
>>> I
>>> understand there is only so much money and there has to be cuts. Why not
>>> keep the trade schools open and cut back sports in the other schools?
>>> Seems to me the state will be better off having some skilled workers than
>>> ex-football players with bad knees. Trade school graduates are the
>>> mechanics fixing our cars, wiring our homes, plumbing our toilets. We
>>> need
>>> them more than a kid that used to play basketball in junior high.
>>
>> i have some sympathy for what you are saying, but why not (gasp) provide
>> sufficient funds for football also? after all, we need some kind of gloss
>> to obfuscate the idea that schools are mainly aimed at turning out worker
>> bees.
>>
>> 'sit down in your seats at the appointed time!
>
> That's you, and millions more of yoose non productive drains.
>
>> no talking!'
>
> If we could only put a cork in your maw. LOL

yes, i only wish i could only come close to your volume of productive,
well-thought-out posts here.

blake

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:02:55 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:29:52 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 10:31:14 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>> Like most states, CT is having a tough time with the budget. They are
>>> considering closing the two trade schools the state has.
>>>
>>> Now, this will probably upset a lot of people, but I have a suggestion. I
>>> understand there is only so much money and there has to be cuts. Why not
>>> keep the trade schools open and cut back sports in the other schools?
>>> Seems to me the state will be better off having some skilled workers than
>>> ex-football players with bad knees. Trade school graduates are the
>>> mechanics fixing our cars, wiring our homes, plumbing our toilets. We need
>>> them more than a kid that used to play basketball in junior high.
>>
>>i have some sympathy for what you are saying, but why not (gasp) provide
>>sufficient funds for football also?
>
> You're outta control. Where's the money coming from? The taxes YOU
> pay? HA! The school part of the tax bill from just my cottage is
> $1500. I don't even know where the schools are but I'd rather see the
> money training the kids for something productive. Sooner or later
> someone will have to actually pay for all the shit you and the freak
> from Canada think every parasite deserves. Tough times are ahead
> Blake and you're young enough it's going to effect you.
>

jesus, get a gripo on yourself, lou.

>>after all, we need some kind of gloss to obfuscate the idea that schools
>> are mainly aimed at turning out worker bees.
>
> I thought schools were only turning out little obama's. You know,
> little parasites who write books stupid people can read.
>

calling obama a parasite is a little over-the-top, don't you think? or do
you think he evaded taxes on the millions he has made?

>>'sit down in your seats at the appointed time! no talking!'
>
> Yep. Discipline is something you shouldn't teach kids. It ****s them
> up. All those rules!!! Gasp!
>
> Lou

discipline is fine. it'd be nice also to teach them how to think. (note:
not *what* to think.)

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:47:02 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 01:23:38 -0500, Lou Decruss
> > wrote:
>>
>>The pixie dust I spoke of last November is wearing off. I wish I had
>>been wrong.
>>
> Yeah, you're absolutely right. He's spending way too much time
> building bridges. You can't please everyone. Rebuild the Democratic
> Party now or there won't be a "next time", Mr. President!
>
> Republican "Wingers" may be few in number but they are certainly loud.
> I am a lifelong Republican who was tempted to admit how liberal I am
> and switch parties this time. I would love to see Obama kick some
> butt, unfortunately that's not his style. My Girl, Hillary, sure
> would have! Glad she's on the D team in a big way. Other than the
> Supreme Court, it was a perfect appointment.

a hillary appointment to the supreme court would have been immensely
entertaining. if the wingnuts are having a cow at the mild-mannered,
not-even-liberal sotomayor, they'd have an entire herd over clinton.

your pal,
blake

>
>> "Gregory Morrow" > wrote in message

>>>
>>> After awhiles the charm factor will wear off, folx will be asking "Where's
>>> the beef"...
>>>


Damned shame they never thought to ask Bush Lite that
during his first term.

gloria p

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:29:33 -0500, Becca > wrote:

>Right now I am registered as an Independent, there is no party for me.

Yeah, I understand completely. I tried being an Independent for a
couple of years but not being able to vote in the primaries made me go
back to my party.

>I am a fiscal conservative but I am liberal on social issues. Where I
>live, here in the Bible Belt, the "God Squad" has taken over the
>Republican party, they spend too much time focusing on issues like gays
>and abortion. Who cares if two men get married? We have bigger
>problems to worry about.

I hear you loud and clear. I'm not so conservative that I rule out
all taxes though. Basic services have to be paid for somehow.
Keeping our roads well paved and our streets clean will be a good
start, but fire, police, hospitals, libraries, post offices and parks
rank up there too.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

sf wrote:
>> I am a fiscal conservative but I am liberal on social issues. Where I
>> live, here in the Bible Belt, the "God Squad" has taken over the
>> Republican party, they spend too much time focusing on issues like gays
>> and abortion. Who cares if two men get married? We have bigger
>> problems to worry about.
>>
>
> I hear you loud and clear. I'm not so conservative that I rule out
> all taxes though. Basic services have to be paid for somehow.
> Keeping our roads well paved and our streets clean will be a good
> start, but fire, police, hospitals, libraries, post offices and parks
> rank up there too.


Paying taxes is not a problem for me, but I like a balanced budget and
we have not had that in 8 years. That bothers me.


Becca

Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:01:04 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> > wrote:
>
>> Yep...what do peeps expect from another slick Illannoy/Chicago Dem
>> machine politican in a nice suit.
>>
>> Now the whole United States - and the whole world - is getting a
>> dose of "Governance Illinois -style". It AIN'T pretty, folks...
>>
>> Most of the lefties I know who chastised me for not blindly
>> supporting Obama are now pretty "quiet"...the "reality" is sinking
>> in, especially since most of these folks are ***. He isn't doing
>> diddly - squat for the *** "community", but *I* knew that would come
>> to pass...same with health care, spending, our foreign wars, etc....
>
> The pixie dust I spoke of last November is wearing off. I wish I had
> been wrong.


Me too...every single day I pray that he doesn't screw up.

"Oh, well..."

The bailouts of the banks and credit card companies are especially galling,
they are playing us for chumps. Last Friday Bill Maher on his show
commented, "Obama doesn't realize that he needs to do what FDR did - you
have to make *some* bankers mad...".

Health care "reform" is dead in the water. We have, what, around 50 million
uninsured...by the end of his first term that will have risen to 60 million
or even more...

I also am not optimistic for the survival of GM now that the government is
the primary owner. It's rumored that a number of GM dealers who were forced
to close were chosen because they were prominent Republican donors, don't
know the veracity of this claim but Obama is as venal as they come (read
John Kass' columns in the Chicago _Tribune_), so I wouldn't doubt it. Now
we have a bunch of non-business bureaucrats with political aims running that
show, not good. We need a Lee Iaccoca or two to shake up the US car
industry but they don't make 'em like that anymore, and so...

:-|


--
Best
Greg

Becca wrote:
> sf wrote:
>>> I am a fiscal conservative but I am liberal on social issues. Where
>>> I live, here in the Bible Belt, the "God Squad" has taken over the
>>> Republican party, they spend too much time focusing on issues like
>>> gays and abortion. Who cares if two men get married? We have bigger
>>> problems to worry about.
>>>
>>
>> I hear you loud and clear. I'm not so conservative that I rule out
>> all taxes though. Basic services have to be paid for somehow.
>> Keeping our roads well paved and our streets clean will be a good
>> start, but fire, police, hospitals, libraries, post offices and parks
>> rank up there too.
>
>
> Paying taxes is not a problem for me, but I like a balanced budget and
> we have not had that in 8 years. That bothers me.
>
> Becca
A little research shows that the last time the US budget was balanced
was in 1957. That's the year I graduated high school and went into the
Navy. I guess it's my fault the budget hasn't been balanced since. <G>

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:40:11 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>Health care "reform" is dead in the water.

72% of the American people support it, yet you say it's dead in the
water? What color is your sky?

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

sf wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:40:11 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> > wrote:
>
>> Health care "reform" is dead in the water.
>
> 72% of the American people support it, yet you say it's dead in the
> water? What color is your sky?
>
I would say it is reality colored. More and more folks are catching on
as to what this stuff will cost. During the campaign Obama explicitly
lied to everyone (he was a sitting senator and had all of the numbers)
that no tax increases would be required to pay for his health care plan
and even made attacking his rival's correct opinion that it would a key
issue.

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:40:11 -0500, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
> I also am not optimistic for the survival of GM now that the government is
> the primary owner. It's rumored that a number of GM dealers who were forced
> to close were chosen because they were prominent Republican donors, don't
> know the veracity of this claim but Obama is as venal as they come (read
> John Kass' columns in the Chicago _Tribune_), so I wouldn't doubt it.

it's pure bullshit, like most other republican claims:

A meme that is currently picking up traction in the conservative
blogosphere is that the list of dealerships to be shuttered as a result of
Chrysler's bankruptcy contains a disproportionate number donors to
Republican candidates. There have been furious efforts to prove this
contention by looking up campaign contributor lists at the Huffington Post,
Open Secrets, and other places.

There is just one problem with this theory. Nobody has bothered to look up
data for the control group: the list of dealerships which aren't being
closed. It turns out that all car dealers are, in fact, overwhelmingly more
likely to donate to Republicans than to Democrats -- not just those who are
having their doors closed.

[...]

Overall, 88 percent of the contributions from car dealers went to
Republican candidates and just 12 percent to Democratic candidates. By
comparison, the list of dealers on Doug Ross's list (which I haven't
vetted, but I assume is fine) gave 92 percent of their money to Republicans
-- not really a significant difference.

There's no conspiracy here, folks -- just some bad math.

It shouldn't be any surprise, by the way, that car dealers tend to vote --
and donate -- Republican. They are usually male, they are usually older
(you don't own an auto dealership in your 20s), and they have obvious
reasons to be pro-business, pro-tax cut, anti-green energy and anti-labor.
Car dealerships need quite a bit of space and will tend to be located in
suburban or rural areas. I can't think of too many other occupations that
are more natural fits for the Republican Party. Unfortunately, while we are
still a nation of drivers, we are not a nation of dealers.

(for more exact figure, see
<http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/05/news-flash-car-dealers-are-republicans.html>
)

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:56:46 -0400, George wrote:

> sf wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:40:11 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Health care "reform" is dead in the water.
>>
>> 72% of the American people support it, yet you say it's dead in the
>> water? What color is your sky?
>>
> I would say it is reality colored. More and more folks are catching on
> as to what this stuff will cost. During the campaign Obama explicitly
> lied to everyone (he was a sitting senator and had all of the numbers)
> that no tax increases would be required to pay for his health care plan
> and even made attacking his rival's correct opinion that it would a key
> issue.

well, bear in mind that as it stands now, we now pay twice what other
developed countries pay

United States $5711
Australia $2886
Austria $2958
Belgium $3044
Canada $2998
Denmark $2743
Finland $2104
France $3048
Germany $2983
Iceland $3159
Ireland $2466
Italy $2314
Japan $2249
Luxembourg $4611
Netherlands $2909
Norway $3769
Sweden $2745
Switzerland $3847
United Kingdom $2317

<http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh061809.shtml>

often, for worse outcomes:

<http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/05/news-flash-car-dealers-are-republicans.html>

note, that's *per capita* not per person that is covered. so maybe taxes
go up and premiums go down.

blake