George Leppla wrote:
>
> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> George wrote:
>>
>>>> "Rational persuasion" is something you will *never* see from cyber****.
>>>
>>> Somehow.... someone talking about "rational persuasion" while calling
>>> someone "cyber****" just doesn't ring true.
>>>
>>> Rational people don't have to resort to crap like that.
>>>
>>> I'm just saying.....
>>
>> It's possible to be completely rational and express contempt at the
>> same time. Do you disagree?
>
>
> You don't understand the difference between expressing contempt and
> simply calling someone a vulgar name? Let me help you:
>
> Bob, this sort of thing is beneath you. (contempt)
>
> Bob, you are a ****ing asshole. (vulgar name)
>
> Very simple. But if you like insulting people and having them insult
> you, have at it. It doesn't cost you much (except perhaps some lost
> respect) and it can be entertaining to the rest of us.
>
> George L
>

George - Even though I was a bit rude to you recently, you make a good
point here.

If more people spent time just being nice, doesn't it stand to reason,
that the posts will be more appropriate for all audiences? And also
possibly have more value to a Usenet group that should have an agenda
towards what it was created for?

I apologize for any rudeness I may have shared with you. I will try to
do better.

Bob

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> George wrote:
>
>>>>> "Rational persuasion" is something you will *never* see from
>>>>> cyber****.
>>>>
>>>> Somehow.... someone talking about "rational persuasion" while calling
>>>> someone "cyber****" just doesn't ring true.
>>>>
>>>> Rational people don't have to resort to crap like that.
>>>>
>>>> I'm just saying.....
>>>
>>> It's possible to be completely rational and express contempt at the same
>>> time. Do you disagree?
>>
>>
>> You don't understand the difference between expressing contempt and
>> simply
>> calling someone a vulgar name? Let me help you:
>>
>> Bob, this sort of thing is beneath you. (contempt)
>>
>> Bob, you are a ****ing asshole. (vulgar name)
>>
>> Very simple. But if you like insulting people and having them insult
>> you, have at it. It doesn't cost you much (except perhaps some lost
>> respect) and it can be entertaining to the rest of us.
>
> Then... TA-DAAAAAA! :-)
>
> Bob

Bob -

Don't you have something better to do than be abusive?

If not, why don't you pick up a different hobby aside from RFC. Just a
thought.

Bob

"Bob Muncie" > wrote in message
...
> George Leppla wrote:
>>
>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> George wrote:
>>>
>>>>> "Rational persuasion" is something you will *never* see from
>>>>> cyber****.
>>>>
>>>> Somehow.... someone talking about "rational persuasion" while calling
>>>> someone "cyber****" just doesn't ring true.
>>>>
>>>> Rational people don't have to resort to crap like that.
>>>>
>>>> I'm just saying.....
>>>
>>> It's possible to be completely rational and express contempt at the same
>>> time. Do you disagree?
>>
>>
>> You don't understand the difference between expressing contempt and
>> simply calling someone a vulgar name? Let me help you:
>>
>> Bob, this sort of thing is beneath you. (contempt)
>>
>> Bob, you are a ****ing asshole. (vulgar name)
>>
>> Very simple. But if you like insulting people and having them insult
>> you, have at it. It doesn't cost you much (except perhaps some lost
>> respect) and it can be entertaining to the rest of us.
>>
>> George L
>>
>
> George - Even though I was a bit rude to you recently, you make a good
> point here.
>
> If more people spent time just being nice, doesn't it stand to reason,
> that the posts will be more appropriate for all audiences? And also
> possibly have more value to a Usenet group that should have an agenda
> towards what it was created for?
>
> I apologize for any rudeness I may have shared with you. I will try to do
> better.


Bob,... my wife tells me that we are all works in progress and she is pretty
smart.

I think you and I had a misunderstanding and maybe we both got snarkey. I
read the other post you just made where you said:

>Can we start over on respecting each other now?

Absolutely. No harm, no foul.

George L

George Leppla wrote:
>
> "Bob Muncie" > wrote in message
> ...
>> George Leppla wrote:
>>>
>>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> George wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> "Rational persuasion" is something you will *never* see from
>>>>>> cyber****.
>>>>>
>>>>> Somehow.... someone talking about "rational persuasion" while
>>>>> calling someone "cyber****" just doesn't ring true.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rational people don't have to resort to crap like that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just saying.....
>>>>
>>>> It's possible to be completely rational and express contempt at the
>>>> same time. Do you disagree?
>>>
>>>
>>> You don't understand the difference between expressing contempt and
>>> simply calling someone a vulgar name? Let me help you:
>>>
>>> Bob, this sort of thing is beneath you. (contempt)
>>>
>>> Bob, you are a ****ing asshole. (vulgar name)
>>>
>>> Very simple. But if you like insulting people and having them
>>> insult you, have at it. It doesn't cost you much (except perhaps
>>> some lost respect) and it can be entertaining to the rest of us.
>>>
>>> George L
>>>
>>
>> George - Even though I was a bit rude to you recently, you make a good
>> point here.
>>
>> If more people spent time just being nice, doesn't it stand to reason,
>> that the posts will be more appropriate for all audiences? And also
>> possibly have more value to a Usenet group that should have an agenda
>> towards what it was created for?
>>
>> I apologize for any rudeness I may have shared with you. I will try to
>> do better.
>
>
> Bob,... my wife tells me that we are all works in progress and she is
> pretty smart.
>
> I think you and I had a misunderstanding and maybe we both got snarkey.
> I read the other post you just made where you said:
>
>> Can we start over on respecting each other now?
>
> Absolutely. No harm, no foul.
>
> George L

Thanks George... You have a wise woman there. There is hope for you ;-)

Bob

P.S. I'll try harder in not coming off as though I'm telling you (or
anyone else) how to act.

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in message
m...
> Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>
>> Greg wrote:
>>
snip
> He mentioned that JFK and LBJ not only personally inspired those of his
> generation to action, but that they framed issues in the guise of moral
> imperatives, which Obama has not so far done with health care...and LBJ
> and
> JFK (and Truman and FDR and Teddy Roosevelt) had the GUTS to take action,
> knowing it might be very unpopular.
snip
> Best
> Greg
I can't imagine that a moral appeal would work in today's world. So much of
what I see on the news is citizens vocally denying any comfort to their
fellow man if there is even a hint that the money may come from their
pocket. It seems the world wants to be glutinously rich and socially
negligent.
Janet

Bob Muncie wrote:

> Don't you have something better to do than be abusive?
>
> If not, why don't you pick up a different hobby aside from RFC. Just a
> thought.

Don't *you* have something better to do than be a whiny little bitch trying
to tell everybody else how to behave?

If not, why don't you go **** yourself? Just a thought.

Anyway, didn't you put me in your "permanent killfile" twenty minutes before
you wrote this latest whine? Did you "forget"?

ObFood: Butter Brickle (posted by phaedrus a long time ago)
Lightly grease a large cookie sheet and then melt 4 tablespoons of butter in
a saucepan. Then add 1/2 cup sugar and 1 tablespoon water and bring to a
boil. Continue heating with constant stirring until the preparation reaches
300F. Remove from heat. Spread on the cookie sheet and when cool break into
small pieces.

Bob

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>
>> Don't you have something better to do than be abusive?
>>
>> If not, why don't you pick up a different hobby aside from RFC. Just a
>> thought.
>
> Don't *you* have something better to do than be a whiny little bitch trying
> to tell everybody else how to behave?
>
> If not, why don't you go **** yourself? Just a thought.
>
> Anyway, didn't you put me in your "permanent killfile" twenty minutes before
> you wrote this latest whine? Did you "forget"?
>
> ObFood: Butter Brickle (posted by phaedrus a long time ago)
> Lightly grease a large cookie sheet and then melt 4 tablespoons of butter in
> a saucepan. Then add 1/2 cup sugar and 1 tablespoon water and bring to a
> boil. Continue heating with constant stirring until the preparation reaches
> 300F. Remove from heat. Spread on the cookie sheet and when cool break into
> small pieces.
>
> Bob
>
>
>

Bob - No offense intended. But did you take whatever meds your doctor
prescribed to keep you from random bursts of seriously bad feelings?

And since you asked, I just last night emptied my filters, except for
two people.

Hope you get some help soon,
Bob

"George Leppla" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bob Muncie" > wrote in message
> ...
>> George Leppla wrote:
>>>
>>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> George wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> "Rational persuasion" is something you will *never* see from
>>>>>> cyber****.
>>>>>
>>>>> Somehow.... someone talking about "rational persuasion" while calling
>>>>> someone "cyber****" just doesn't ring true.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rational people don't have to resort to crap like that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just saying.....
>>>>
>>>> It's possible to be completely rational and express contempt at the
>>>> same time. Do you disagree?
>>>
>>>
>>> You don't understand the difference between expressing contempt and
>>> simply calling someone a vulgar name? Let me help you:
>>>
>>> Bob, this sort of thing is beneath you. (contempt)
>>>
>>> Bob, you are a ****ing asshole. (vulgar name)
>>>
>>> Very simple. But if you like insulting people and having them insult
>>> you, have at it. It doesn't cost you much (except perhaps some lost
>>> respect) and it can be entertaining to the rest of us.
>>>
>>> George L
>>>
>>
>> George - Even though I was a bit rude to you recently, you make a good
>> point here.
>>
>> If more people spent time just being nice, doesn't it stand to reason,
>> that the posts will be more appropriate for all audiences? And also
>> possibly have more value to a Usenet group that should have an agenda
>> towards what it was created for?
>>
>> I apologize for any rudeness I may have shared with you. I will try to do
>> better.
>
>
> Bob,... my wife tells me that we are all works in progress and she is
> pretty smart.
>
> I think you and I had a misunderstanding and maybe we both got snarkey. I
> read the other post you just made where you said:
>
>>Can we start over on respecting each other now?
>
> Absolutely. No harm, no foul.
>

haha, hugs all around, you assholes! Just kidding. *Spitting on ****wiliger
on my way past.*

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:45:51 -0500, Gregory Morrow wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:34:47 -0400, MtnTraveler wrote:
>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>
>>>> why I should feel grief over the death of a stranger? I am amenable
>>>> to
>>>> rational persuasion.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>> Perhaps there is another path to take here.
>>> One without need for grief but at the same time, no need to be happy
>>> about the death. Many people die each day yet the living feel no
>>> need to disparage the dead. They simply ignore them. No need to feel
>>> grief if you do not have that feeling for someone.
>>>
>>> Not disparaging Mr. Kennedy's behavior is not the same thing as
>>> condoning it.
>>>
>>> I think all 'cybercat' and Blake Murphy are saying is, 'there is no
>>> need to speak badly of the dead.' If you did not care for him while
>>> he was alive, simply ignore his passing. Do not enjoy it. That would
>>> seem more in line with the subject heading of 'Humanity 101.'
>>
>> exactly. i'm not wearing sackcloth and ashes (and i don't intent to
>> watch/read the eulogies), but it's kind of tacky to say 'good
>> riddance, drunken murderer.'
>>
>> i might have a quiet snort when george bush shuffles off, though.
>>
>
> See, folks, there's that liberal 'humanity' that the lefties are always
> extolling, lol...
>
> Bush's terms in office are increasingly looking like a "Golden Era" compared
> to what we've got now, I wouldn't be planning to "gloat", blake...

having a drink isn't the same as posting 'hahaha!!! i'm glad the drunken
murdered is dead' on usenet.

blake

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:47:58 -0600, Gloria P wrote:

> Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>>
>> Bush's terms in office are increasingly looking like a "Golden Era" compared
>> to what we've got now, I wouldn't be planning to "gloat", blake...
>>
>
> Creating two wars and a global depression on your way out of office
> is "Golden Era"? I'd hate to see what you call famine, flood, and
> plagues of insects.
>
> gloria p

a typical republican administration.

your pal,
blake

"Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq." > wrote in message
...
> Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq. wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Fortunatly nobodies waiting for me to come up with the solution. The
>> equation of serindipity.
>>
> Which of course is obvious in any serindipitiouse and/or accidentaly
> perfect phenomina.
>
> Much as i would like to think its all about me.
>
> One is forced to consider the alternatives
>
> That im an insignificant, ephemeral part that would not be missed ....
> Intellectualy i understaned that....
> And its a cross "newsgroup" e-list, kind of thing. Not just RFC.
>
> I think i was always more taken by the machine than i was its content.
> That we are having this conversation is more amazing than any thing yet
> said.
>
> Now i think im getting bored by the phenomina. I have been here so long
> seen so many cycles i think its about time to get off this ride.
>

Long as you get back on from time to time, Joseph. I know it is hard to
suffer these types of fools, but you would be missed.

"Bob Muncie" > wrote in message
...
> Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>
>>> Don't you have something better to do than be abusive?
>>>
>>> If not, why don't you pick up a different hobby aside from RFC. Just a
>>> thought.
>>
>> Don't *you* have something better to do than be a whiny little bitch
>> trying
>> to tell everybody else how to behave?
>>
>> If not, why don't you go **** yourself? Just a thought.
>>
>> Anyway, didn't you put me in your "permanent killfile" twenty minutes
>> before
>> you wrote this latest whine? Did you "forget"?
>>
>> ObFood: Butter Brickle (posted by phaedrus a long time ago)
>> Lightly grease a large cookie sheet and then melt 4 tablespoons of butter
>> in
>> a saucepan. Then add 1/2 cup sugar and 1 tablespoon water and bring to a
>> boil. Continue heating with constant stirring until the preparation
>> reaches
>> 300F. Remove from heat. Spread on the cookie sheet and when cool break
>> into
>> small pieces.
>>
>> Bob
>
> Bob - No offense intended. But did you take whatever meds your doctor
> prescribed to keep you from random bursts of seriously bad feelings?
>
> And since you asked, I just last night emptied my filters, except for two
> people.
>
> Hope you get some help soon,
> Bob

hahaha! Kumbaya, bitches.

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:53:39 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>Lou Decruss wrote:

>> I didn't see it but read about it. Isn't it nice to know Chicago has
>> moved to the white house?

>Yup..peeps should be scared - *very* scared...

They should, be but most aren't aware enough to understand what's
really going on. The handful of people here who spout off in these OT
threads are hardly typical of common political apathy. People watch
the evening news twice a week, read an article or two online and talk
to someone who agrees with them politically at work at the water
cooler and consider themselves "informed." I could go on but I'm
"trying" to stay out of these threads.

>In other nooze former Cicero mayor Betty Loren - Maltese has been released
>from the federal pokey and is now in a half - way house in Las Vegas...

It will be interesting to see what she does next. What a beast.

Lou

"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
...
snip

>
> They should, be but most aren't aware enough to understand what's
> really going on. The handful of people here who spout off in these OT
> threads are hardly typical of common political apathy. People watch
> the evening news twice a week, read an article or two online and talk
> to someone who agrees with them politically at work at the water
> cooler and consider themselves "informed." I could go on but I'm
> "trying" to stay out of these threads.
snip
> Lou
You give the typical citizen more credit than they deserve. I sincerely
doubt that they pay as much attention as you speculate.
Janet

Janet Bostwick wrote:

> "Lou Decruss" wrote in message
> ...
> snip
>
>
> >They should, be but most aren't aware enough to understand what's
> >really going on. The handful of people here who spout off in these OT
> >threads are hardly typical of common political apathy. People watch
> >the evening news twice a week, read an article or two online and talk
> >to someone who agrees with them politically at work at the water
> >cooler and consider themselves "informed." I could go on but I'm
> >"trying" to stay out of these threads.
>
> snip
>
> >Lou
>
> You give the typical citizen more credit than they deserve. I sincerely
> doubt that they pay as much attention as you speculate.
> Janet
>

You are makeing a possibly erronious assumption, intelligence is over rated.

Pleanty of genius's sweeping floors. The brutal and ruthless survive
and now a days support an itellectual elite that has let a genie out of
a bottle, so called 'intelligence' has discovered several ways to make
the species even more miserable than its ever been before, even,
theoreticaly, to destroy itself.

And i expect, accidentaly, at that.

"Oops..."
--

Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.

Domine, dirige nos.
Let the games begin!
http://fredeeky.typepad.com/fredeeky.../sf_anthem.mp3

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 18:10:24 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:21:12 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:08:39 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>Could you please explain to me in terms that an oyster would
>>>understand why I should feel grief over the death of a stranger? I am amenable
>>>to rational persuasion.
>>
>> I feel that way that every time a Hollywood RIP OT hits rfc. At least
>> Kennedy managed to redeem himself and made a difference the last few
>> decades.
>
>you know, if i had seen two of my politician brothers murdered, i might of
>said 'screw this. i don't have to work, i'll just sail, drink and chase
>women.' kennedy didn't.

Good lard Blake. He didn't work and did all those things anyway. I
don't believe for a second he considered what he did a job or work. I
don't believe not doing it would have even been an option. He was
addicted to the power and the fame and in spite of all the pain that
life handed him and his family I think it's obvious he absolutely
loved life and lived it with incredible passion. I envy that even
though I don't agree with much of his viewpoint.

Lou

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 18:16:45 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:13:41 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

>>I'm surprised the finger
>> pointers here haven't blamed teddy's brain rot on Bush not finding a
>> cure for cancer.
>>
>
>come on, lou - this is bullshit.

hyperbole

>> When wacko jacko died there were may disparaging comments about him
>> made here. If people were upset by them I must have missed the posts.
>> But because a politician is involved people feel the need to jump on
>> the band-wagon. Pretty weird if you ask me.
>>
>> Lou
>
>no, people jumped on because andy (and others) posted a typical
>over-the-top rant.

Not seeing Andy's posts makes this group a much more sensible place to
be. But why didn't people say anything about the child molester
comments about wacko jacko?

Lou

Janet Bostwick wrote:

> I can't imagine that a moral appeal would work in today's world. So much of
> what I see on the news is citizens vocally denying any comfort to their
> fellow man if there is even a hint that the money may come from their
> pocket. It seems the world wants to be glutinously rich and socially
> negligent.
>
>
>


Absolutely, and it's disgusting, especially when it comes from those who
pat themselves on the back for being good Christians.

It has also become a political scare tactic. "Take all you can get and
be careful not to give any away." Our grandparents would be horrified
and I hope our grandchildren will be, too, because it will mean the
pendulum is beginning to swing back.

gloria p

Bob Muncie wrote:

> Bob - No offense intended. But did you take whatever meds your doctor
> prescribed to keep you from random bursts of seriously bad feelings?

Ummm.. isn't this the kind of rude remark you keep complaining about?

Gloria P wrote:

> Absolutely, and it's disgusting, especially when it comes from those who
> pat themselves on the back for being good Christians.
>
> It has also become a political scare tactic. "Take all you can get and
> be careful not to give any away." Our grandparents would be horrified
> and I hope our grandchildren will be, too, because it will mean the
> pendulum is beginning to swing back.
>
> gloria p

Wait a minute here- there is a difference between "giving" which implies
some choice and voluntary action. Then there is "taking away" in the
name of "giving". Just because someone doesn't agree with Obama on how
this health care issue needs to be changed hardly means they're not
giving to others.

Stu wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 05:29:10 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
> > wrote:
>
> -->George wrote:
> -->
> -->>>>> "Rational persuasion" is something you will *never* see from cyber****.
> -->>>>
> -->>>> Somehow.... someone talking about "rational persuasion" while calling
> -->>>> someone "cyber****" just doesn't ring true.
> -->>>>
> -->>>> Rational people don't have to resort to crap like that.
> -->>>>
> -->>>> I'm just saying.....
> -->>>
> -->>> It's possible to be completely rational and express contempt at the same
> -->>> time. Do you disagree?
> -->>
> -->>
> -->> You don't understand the difference between expressing contempt and simply
> -->> calling someone a vulgar name? Let me help you:
> -->>
> -->> Bob, this sort of thing is beneath you. (contempt)
> -->>
> -->> Bob, you are a ****ing asshole. (vulgar name)
> -->>
> -->> Very simple. But if you like insulting people and having them insult
> -->> you, have at it. It doesn't cost you much (except perhaps some lost
> -->> respect) and it can be entertaining to the rest of us.
> -->
> -->Then... TA-DAAAAAA! :-)
> -->
> -->Bob
>
>
> It literally can become a gong show and quite entertaining

My question is why haven't you gone off-stage yet...

Bob

Goomba wrote:
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>
>> Bob - No offense intended. But did you take whatever meds your doctor
>> prescribed to keep you from random bursts of seriously bad feelings?
>
> Ummm.. isn't this the kind of rude remark you keep complaining about?

I don't consider it one as I was genuinely asking. Why do you assume I
was not being nice?

Bob

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:08:21 -0600, "Janet Bostwick"
> wrote:

>
>"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
.. .
>snip
>
>>
>> They should, be but most aren't aware enough to understand what's
>> really going on. The handful of people here who spout off in these OT
>> threads are hardly typical of common political apathy. People watch
>> the evening news twice a week, read an article or two online and talk
>> to someone who agrees with them politically at work at the water
>> cooler and consider themselves "informed." I could go on but I'm
>> "trying" to stay out of these threads.
>snip
>> Lou
>You give the typical citizen more credit than they deserve. I sincerely
>doubt that they pay as much attention as you speculate.

Or course you are probably correct. Sometimes my optimism gets in the
way of reality. Unfortunately the under-informed tend to be single
issue voters.

Lou

Bob Muncie wrote:

> Bob - No offense intended. But did you take whatever meds your doctor
> prescribed to keep you from random bursts of seriously bad feelings?

Considering the source, no offense taken. I am not taking any mood-altering
narcotics, and I never have. Inasmuch as my job requires a Top Secret
clearance and lives depend on my competent performance, I am held to a
higher standard than you. You don't seem to know the difference between
insanity and irascibility, which implies that maybe your grip on reality is
a bit tenuous. I can tell that you have *not* been taking the appropriate
medication for that; I urge you to seek out a mental health professional at
the earliest opportunity so that you can be diagnosed and dosed.


> And since you asked, I just last night emptied my filters, except for two
> people.

Right: You lied, and I caught you at it.


> Hope you get some help soon,

I hope you get a clue soon!


ObFood: Zucchini, Onion, and Tomato Salad with Saffron and Cinnamon[1]

A nice accompaniment to grilled sea bass, scallops or shrimp.

1 tablespoon olive oil (preferably extra-virgin)
1 pound zucchini (about 4 medium), trimmed, cut diagonally into 1/2-inch
slices
2 medium onions, cut into 1/2-inch wedges
4 large garlic cloves, minced
1 cinnamon stick, broken in half
1/4 teaspoon crushed saffron threads
12 ounces tomatoes, cored, cut into 1/4-inch wedges
2 tablespoons chopped fresh parsley
2 tablespoons chopped fresh mint
1 tablespoon fresh lemon juice

Heat oil in large nonstick skillet over medium heat. Add zucchini, onions,
garlic, cinnamon stick and saffron. Cover; cook until zucchini is tender and
onions are almost tender, stirring occasionally, about 8 minutes. Remove
from heat. Stir in tomatoes, parsley and mint. Cool to room temperature.
(Can be made 2 hours ahead. Let stand at room temperature.) Mix in lemon
juice. Season with salt and pepper and serve.

Serves 4

[1] I don't remember where I got this recipe, but it's on epicurious.com
now. I've got it as part of a file named "Moroccan Salads."

Bob

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:17:45 -0700, "Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq."
> wrote:

>Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
>> "Lou Decruss" wrote in message
>> ...
>> snip
>>
>>
>> >They should, be but most aren't aware enough to understand what's
>> >really going on. The handful of people here who spout off in these OT
>> >threads are hardly typical of common political apathy. People watch
>> >the evening news twice a week, read an article or two online and talk
>> >to someone who agrees with them politically at work at the water
>> >cooler and consider themselves "informed." I could go on but I'm
>> >"trying" to stay out of these threads.
>>
>> snip
>>
>> >Lou
>>
>> You give the typical citizen more credit than they deserve. I sincerely
>> doubt that they pay as much attention as you speculate.
>> Janet
>>
>
>You are makeing a possibly erronious assumption, intelligence is over rated.
>
>Pleanty of genius's sweeping floors. The brutal and ruthless survive
>and now a days support an itellectual elite that has let a genie out of
>a bottle, so called 'intelligence' has discovered several ways to make
>the species even more miserable than its ever been before, even,
>theoreticaly, to destroy itself.
>
>And i expect, accidentaly, at that.
>
>"Oops..."

Are you saying society is better off if we behave as ants or bees?

Lou

"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:08:21 -0600, "Janet Bostwick"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
. ..
>>snip
>>
>>>
>>> They should, be but most aren't aware enough to understand what's
>>> really going on. The handful of people here who spout off in these OT
>>> threads are hardly typical of common political apathy. People watch
>>> the evening news twice a week, read an article or two online and talk
>>> to someone who agrees with them politically at work at the water
>>> cooler and consider themselves "informed." I could go on but I'm
>>> "trying" to stay out of these threads.
>>snip
>>> Lou
>>You give the typical citizen more credit than they deserve. I sincerely
>>doubt that they pay as much attention as you speculate.
>
> Or course you are probably correct. Sometimes my optimism gets in the
> way of reality. Unfortunately the under-informed tend to be single
> issue voters.
>
> Lou

The single issue voters are shamefully and very easily manipulated by
scoundrels.
Janet

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>
>> Bob - No offense intended. But did you take whatever meds your doctor
>> prescribed to keep you from random bursts of seriously bad feelings?
>
> Considering the source, no offense taken. I am not taking any mood-altering
> narcotics, and I never have. Inasmuch as my job requires a Top Secret
> clearance and lives depend on my competent performance, I am held to a
> higher standard than you. You don't seem to know the difference between
> insanity and irascibility, which implies that maybe your grip on reality is
> a bit tenuous. I can tell that you have *not* been taking the appropriate
> medication for that; I urge you to seek out a mental health professional at
> the earliest opportunity so that you can be diagnosed and dosed.
>
>
>> And since you asked, I just last night emptied my filters, except for two
>> people.
>
> Right: You lied, and I caught you at it.
>
>
>> Hope you get some help soon,
>
> I hope you get a clue soon!
>
>
> ObFood: Zucchini, Onion, and Tomato Salad with Saffron and Cinnamon[1]
>
> A nice accompaniment to grilled sea bass, scallops or shrimp.
>
> 1 tablespoon olive oil (preferably extra-virgin)
> 1 pound zucchini (about 4 medium), trimmed, cut diagonally into 1/2-inch
> slices
> 2 medium onions, cut into 1/2-inch wedges
> 4 large garlic cloves, minced
> 1 cinnamon stick, broken in half
> 1/4 teaspoon crushed saffron threads
> 12 ounces tomatoes, cored, cut into 1/4-inch wedges
> 2 tablespoons chopped fresh parsley
> 2 tablespoons chopped fresh mint
> 1 tablespoon fresh lemon juice
>
> Heat oil in large nonstick skillet over medium heat. Add zucchini, onions,
> garlic, cinnamon stick and saffron. Cover; cook until zucchini is tender and
> onions are almost tender, stirring occasionally, about 8 minutes. Remove
> from heat. Stir in tomatoes, parsley and mint. Cool to room temperature.
> (Can be made 2 hours ahead. Let stand at room temperature.) Mix in lemon
> juice. Season with salt and pepper and serve.
>
> Serves 4
>
> [1] I don't remember where I got this recipe, but it's on epicurious.com
> now. I've got it as part of a file named "Moroccan Salads."
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>

Wow.. I would not know how to respond to your reply.

I had a TS/SBI, and was SCI cleared on several projects(you know of
course what I am talking about), where the FBI actually talk to the
neighbors of you when you were a peanut) , so your inference that the
government approval is somehow tied to your ability to be rational, is
something I would contest. In fact, in your case, I would doubt.

What is the problem with you? Is drugs not an option to clear your mind,
or prevent the level of unbalance you are exhibiting?

If I were you, or your spouse, I would seek help for you.

Bob

Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:17:45 -0700, "Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq."
> wrote:
>
>
> >Janet Bostwick wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"Lou Decruss" wrote in message
> . ..
> >>snip
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>They should, be but most aren't aware enough to understand what's
> >>>really going on. The handful of people here who spout off in these OT
> >>>threads are hardly typical of common political apathy. People watch
> >>>the evening news twice a week, read an article or two online and talk
> >>>to someone who agrees with them politically at work at the water
> >>>cooler and consider themselves "informed." I could go on but I'm
> >>>"trying" to stay out of these threads.
> >>
> >>snip
> >>
> >>
> >>>Lou
> >>
> >>You give the typical citizen more credit than they deserve. I sincerely
> >>doubt that they pay as much attention as you speculate.
> >>Janet
> >>
> >
> >You are makeing a possibly erronious assumption, intelligence is over
> rated.
> >
> >Pleanty of genius's sweeping floors. The brutal and ruthless survive
> >and now a days support an itellectual elite that has let a genie out of
> >a bottle, so called 'intelligence' has discovered several ways to make
> >the species even more miserable than its ever been before, even,
> >theoreticaly, to destroy itself.
> >
> >And i expect, accidentaly, at that.
> >
> >"Oops..."
>
>
> Are you saying society is better off if we behave as ants or bees?
>
> Lou
>
>
Lemmings? And you are saying we dont?

But no, im saying that not only is "inteligence" over rated but its also
very rare and a mixed blessing at best. Espicaly as any assement of it
is inextrivably wraped up in the ubiquitious point of view. And not
necessarily rational/logical in its expresion.

One persons genius is another person damned fool.

Granted, the fat lady has not sang .... yet, but i think i can hear her
warming up in the wings

As much as i tend to 'feel' there is something special about the human
animale that sets it apart from the other animales, espicaly its ability
to understand its envinronment, to explore & exploit it micro and
macro-cosmicaly yet at the same time, i am not, at this time optimistic
about its potential.

Seems to me fear, ignorance and greed while not having the upper hand
any more now than in the past, has tools of mass destruction that are
relatively new.

And not just local destruction but planet wide catastrophe and given my
sense of things, i expect it to be a stupid accident rather than an evil
plot.

Hopefully we wont destroy the biosphere, hopefully we will just regress
to begin again but .... we now have the technology to destory the biosphere.

If the sun dont go supernova or we dont get slamed by an astroid.

After all, in the vast, infinate universe how important CAN this planet
be? insignificant is to flatter it, meaningless is more closely
descriptive of any relative value the earth and its life can have to the
entire universe.
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.

Domine, dirige nos.
Let the games begin!
http://fredeeky.typepad.com/fredeeky.../sf_anthem.mp3

"Bob Muncie" > wrote in message
...
> Goomba wrote:
>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>
>>> Bob - No offense intended. But did you take whatever meds your doctor
>>> prescribed to keep you from random bursts of seriously bad feelings?
>>
>> Ummm.. isn't this the kind of rude remark you keep complaining about?
>
> I don't consider it one as I was genuinely asking. Why do you assume I was
> not being nice?
>
Note that "Goomba" will speak out against a remark like this, and yet never
speak out against the lovely things Fatboy ****wiliger says.

"Gloria P" > wrote in message
...
> Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
>> I can't imagine that a moral appeal would work in today's world. So much
>> of what I see on the news is citizens vocally denying any comfort to
>> their fellow man if there is even a hint that the money may come from
>> their pocket. It seems the world wants to be glutinously rich and
>> socially negligent.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Absolutely, and it's disgusting, especially when it comes from those who
> pat themselves on the back for being good Christians.
>
> It has also become a political scare tactic. "Take all you can get and be
> careful not to give any away." Our grandparents would be horrified
> and I hope our grandchildren will be, too, because it will mean the
> pendulum is beginning to swing back.
>
You are an optimist. That is beautiful.

Bob Muncie wrote:

> Wow.. I would not know how to respond to your reply.

Yet somehow, you managed to blather on...


> I had a TS/SBI, and was SCI cleared on several projects(you know of course
> what I am talking about), where the FBI actually talk to the neighbors of
> you when you were a peanut) , so your inference that the government
> approval is somehow tied to your ability to be rational, is something I
> would contest. In fact, in your case, I would doubt.

Whether or not rationality was necessary for me to GET my job, it is a vital
necessity for me to KEEP my job and my clearance, which I have done for the
last 15 years. Doesn't sound like you can relate even in a distant
theoretical fashion.


> What is the problem with you? Is drugs not an option to clear your mind,
> or prevent the level of unbalance you are exhibiting?

I have no problem. My mind is not clouded, and I am not unbalanced. Exactly
what psychiatric qualifications do you have to even presume to make a
diagnosis of that nature based on my Usenet posts, or have you simply spent
too much time watching Doctor Phil?


> If I were you, or your spouse, I would seek help for you.

If I were you, I'd shrivel with embarrassment at the realization of my own
inadequacy. If I were your spouse, I'd probably do exactly what your spouse
*is* doing -- or should that be I would do exactly *who* your spouse is
doing?

Bob

Lou wrote:

> Are you saying society is better off if we behave as ants or bees?

The thing I find most chilling about many religions, and Islam in
particular, is that the behavior of the ceremonial participants *is* very
insect-like.

Bob

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>

<Totally worthless stuff deleted.>

>
> Bob

Given that you have the capacity to be nice, and chose to be an ass, I
will consider your comments with the weight they are worth.

Good-bye Bob

"Bob Muncie" ha scritto nel messaggio
> Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>> Bob Muncie wrote:

Back and forth and in every thread.. you are beginning to resemble a small
and yappy dog who follows us around to correct us into a shape you like.
It's not attractive. It's not attractive when the other Bob does it either.
Why is it neither of you can withdraw and leave a thread alone?

Giusi wrote:
> "Bob Muncie" ha scritto nel messaggio
>> Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>
> Back and forth and in every thread.. you are beginning to resemble a small
> and yappy dog who follows us around to correct us into a shape you like.
> It's not attractive. It's not attractive when the other Bob does it either.
> Why is it neither of you can withdraw and leave a thread alone?
>
>

Giusi -

Actually, you haven't heard me say anything untoward for at least a
week. Bob T was filtered until yesterday when I deleted all but two. I
clean out the filters on a monthly basis assuming that one or more that
I filtered, are at last worth listening to again.

And I'd be happy to ignore him if he'd just shut his trap.

BTW, there is no beauty contest on the internet. I could always come up
with a better picture :-)

Bob

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 13:43:18 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 18:16:45 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:13:41 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>>>I'm surprised the finger
>>> pointers here haven't blamed teddy's brain rot on Bush not finding a
>>> cure for cancer.
>>>
>>
>>come on, lou - this is bullshit.
>
> hyperbole
>
>>> When wacko jacko died there were may disparaging comments about him
>>> made here. If people were upset by them I must have missed the posts.
>>> But because a politician is involved people feel the need to jump on
>>> the band-wagon. Pretty weird if you ask me.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>>no, people jumped on because andy (and others) posted a typical
>>over-the-top rant.
>
> Not seeing Andy's posts makes this group a much more sensible place to
> be. But why didn't people say anything about the child molester
> comments about wacko jacko?
>
> Lou

i think it's a little harder to empathize with a child molester (which i'm
not sure is true, but never mind) than someone who once drank too much and
chased women.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 16:47:01 -0400, Bob Muncie wrote:

> Goomba wrote:
>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>
>>> Bob - No offense intended. But did you take whatever meds your doctor
>>> prescribed to keep you from random bursts of seriously bad feelings?
>>
>> Ummm.. isn't this the kind of rude remark you keep complaining about?
>
> I don't consider it one as I was genuinely asking. Why do you assume I
> was not being nice?
>
> Bob

yep, implying an untreated mental illness is always the height of
politesse.

blake

Janet Bostwick wrote:

>
> Your grandparents didn't live in a vacuum. Without a country and its
> government, there would have been no railroad to jump, no way to distribute
> crops to support his family. And yeah, I've heard the stories. My mother
> recounted the wonderful Christmas that all the children were given one
> orange each as gifts. Times were tough and all the immigrants struggled to
> get along. Taxes give us amenities that make life livable in this country.
> Janet
>
>


That's exactly what I mean when I say no one gets rich independently
unless he prints money in the basement. Society should act as an
interconnected web both for opportunity and as a safety net. No one
should be homeless, hungry, or lack medical care in this country.

And no one should be entitled to so much money they have to hide it
in Switzerland or the Caribbean to avoid paying their fair share of
taxes. How much is "enough"? And why are those in the financial
community already making million+ salaries being paid multi-millions in
bonuses when their companies are on the verge of collapse? Is it really
socialism to think that way or common sense?

gloria p

"Gloria P" > wrote in message
...
> Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
>>
>> Your grandparents didn't live in a vacuum. Without a country and its
>> government, there would have been no railroad to jump, no way to
>> distribute crops to support his family. And yeah, I've heard the
>> stories. My mother recounted the wonderful Christmas that all the
>> children were given one orange each as gifts. Times were tough and all
>> the immigrants struggled to get along. Taxes give us amenities that make
>> life livable in this country.
>> Janet
>
>
> That's exactly what I mean when I say no one gets rich independently
> unless he prints money in the basement. Society should act as an
> interconnected web both for opportunity and as a safety net. No one
> should be homeless, hungry, or lack medical care in this country.
>
> And no one should be entitled to so much money they have to hide it
> in Switzerland or the Caribbean to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.
> How much is "enough"? And why are those in the financial community
> already making million+ salaries being paid multi-millions in bonuses when
> their companies are on the verge of collapse? Is it really socialism to
> think that way or common sense?
>
> gloria p

I'm not anywhere as extreme as you are, but I understand your sentiments.
The same people who whine about paying taxes also bitch because the road has
potholes. You can't have it both ways.
Janet

"Gloria P" > wrote in message
> That's exactly what I mean when I say no one gets rich independently
> unless he prints money in the basement. Society should act as an
> interconnected web both for opportunity and as a safety net. No one
> should be homeless, hungry, or lack medical care in this country.

Agreed. Only exception are the lazy. If you don't want to contribute (one
way or another) you don't reap the benefits. I'm talking the few lazy, not
the incapable from mental or physical disability.


>
> And no one should be entitled to so much money they have to hide it
> in Switzerland or the Caribbean to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.
> How much is "enough"? And why are those in the financial community
> already making million+ salaries being paid multi-millions in bonuses when
> their companies are on the verge of collapse? Is it really socialism to
> think that way or common sense?

I have no qualms about people making tons of money if earned, but if your
company is losing money, the CEO should be working for $10 an hour, not
$100million a year.

Our tax structure is pitiful. Too many loopholes and hiding places for the
big money people with lots of lawyers. I'm a flat tax advocate. The entire
income tax code could be printed in a few paragraphs on one side of a paper.

It would take some study to get the proper numbers, but something like:
$0 to $20,000 no tax
$20,000 to XXX 5%
XXX to ZZZ 10%
No deductions, no excuses. Given how our lawmakers work, this will never
happen as it puts to many accountants and lawyers out of work.

Healthcare can be done with a mix of private and possibly government
programs. Toss in some tort reform and you free up some money that can go
to treating patients rather than paying for insurance and questionable
claims.