I confess to heresy

"jacquie" <happikat694@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:13r2e2gedqocdbb@corp.supernews.com...
> Do you think George Bush made good decisions? This is a man who had
> Military
> training...although hubby just keeps calling him a "Stupid Fighter Pilot
> Jock" I think Clinton is able to make much better decisions then he has.
> She is a strong woman and has been around a long time...and knows exactly
> what is going on. She knows who to go to with questions . Whoever gets
> into
> office has to be able to make better decisions then what has been done in
> the past years. Well maybe not the other Fighter Pilot Jock that is
> running
>

I wouldn't call the prez a Fighter Pilot Jock, since he was just playing,
not fighting. At least the other did fight and endure. Our current guy
hasn't had to endure much of anything in his life, except for earned scorn.

Peahen wrote:
> "jacquie" <happikat694@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:13r2e2gedqocdbb@corp.supernews.com...
>> Do you think George Bush made good decisions? This is a man who had
>> Military
>> training...although hubby just keeps calling him a "Stupid Fighter Pilot
>> Jock" I think Clinton is able to make much better decisions then he has.
>> She is a strong woman and has been around a long time...and knows exactly
>> what is going on. She knows who to go to with questions . Whoever gets
>> into
>> office has to be able to make better decisions then what has been done in
>> the past years. Well maybe not the other Fighter Pilot Jock that is
>> running
>>
>
> I wouldn't call the prez a Fighter Pilot Jock, since he was just playing,
> not fighting. At least the other did fight and endure. Our current guy
> hasn't had to endure much of anything in his life, except for earned scorn.

I was thinking the same thing - didn't he go AWOL and miss out on
some required training? I thought the phrase was, "Stupid Frat Boy."

FurPaw


--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

On Feb 11, 9:09*pm, "Stacey Weinberger" <poppin...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
> "Eva" <EvaDStructio...@NOverizon.net> wrote in message
>
> news:s66sj.2641$CX2.1264@trndny09...
>
> >I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. *Maybe I
> >don't think a woman ought to be President after all. *Maybe I don't think
> >women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
> >truly terrible threat. *Is there anyone else here who has entertained a
> >thought like that? *(Of course I know Chris hasn't, but the rest of you..)
>
> > Eva
>
> I don't think the present man in the White House has those qualities.
>
> Stacey

I wouldn't call that a man.
Les

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:48:08 +0100, thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no
(Keera Ann Fox) wrote:

>Note: I'm assuming that if I were president, any glitches in my
>knowledge or decision-making would be filled in by my aids. I don't know
>everything. :-)


LOL. No?

Well, I don't think the citizens would have accepted anything less
than a full out attack on someone....didn't matter who, just someone.
Iraq was the easiest target.

I'm not sure FDR's tactics would have kept the peace in this era of
violence and evil. Remember when he was in charge there was very
little TV and everything came from radio (no images of the
destruction) and movie news reels.

I don't know what the answer would be in today's world. And maybe he
was given the wrong information before he got us into this war. After
all he is just one man with a lot of people advising him what they
think he should do. When it turns out wrong they head for the hills
and leave him standing alone to take the fallout...which he has done
without whining, so far.

Dana
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

"FurPaw" <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote in message
news:iLydnS2zNtGMhCzanZ2dnUVZ_uCinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Eva wrote:
>> "Susan" <nevermind@nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:61ccuiF1ulas6U2@mid.individual.net...
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>>
>>> Eva wrote:
>>>> I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. Maybe I
>>>> don't think a woman ought to be President after all. Maybe I don't
>>>> think women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation
>>>> faces a truly terrible threat. Is there anyone else here who has
>>>> entertained a thought like that? (Of course I know Chris hasn't, but
>>>> the rest of you.)
>
>>> Nope. I mean, I've given the differences consideration, and I think
>>> military action and strategy is about analytical thinking and problem
>>> solving. I don't think that a strong female presidential candidate, at
>>> least not this one, is without those strengths.
>
> I agree here. (It would be nice to have a president with analytical
> thinking and problem solving capabilities again. I didn't realize how
> much I would miss them.)
>
> I also think that the worst threats facing us are internal: our faltering
> economy, our sinking educational system, our crumbling infrastructure, the
> shrinking middle class, a national debt that's approaching $10 trillion
> (and doesn't include the trade deficit or Social Security commitments),
> our inability to respond effectively to crises like Katrina, our wholesale
> giveaway of manufacturing capability to other countries. The economic
> dislocations that our warming atmosphere will bring about. Bird flu, if
> it ever mutates to become transmissible between humans. Not so much from
> external armies or terrorists, unless we don't figure out a way to stop
> pissing off our allies.
>
>> ----------------
>> I have friends who support Clinton and blatantly say, "I loved Bill
>> Clinton, and I want to see him back in the White House." No feminism
>> there! They just assume he will be the power behind the throne, and
>> that's what they want.
>
> There are some who speculate that Hillary was the power behind the throne
> when Bill was president...
>
> FurPaw
>

A good President is one who can surround him or herself with intelligent and
effective advisors. I wouldn't expect a President to make every decision on
his/her own.

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 03:32:19 GMT, "Eva"
<EvaDStructionNO@NOverizon.net> wrote:

>
>"ratatosk" <ratatosk@don'tbother.tweakdsl.nl> wrote in message
>news:uas1r3peho34bgbj3i7cai0dj3ltivreom@4ax.com.. .
>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:53:44 GMT, "Eva"
>> <EvaDStructionNO@NOverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. Maybe I
>>>don't think a woman ought to be President after all. Maybe I don't think
>>>women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
>>>truly terrible threat. Is there anyone else here who has entertained a
>>>thought like that? (Of course I know Chris hasn't, but the rest of you.)
>>
>> We have a queen for a couple of generations and it works just fine.
>> :-))
>------------------
>What happened to Ayan Hirsi Ali?

She met Rita Verdonk.

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


R

Ratatosk, Jola
--

If you need to e-mail me, replace "don'tbother" with "zedicus"

Dana <AneeBear@ownmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 07:58:11 +0100, thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no
> (Keera Ann Fox) wrote:

>>It makes me incredibly sad that the US is still using such primitive
>>methods as military force to solve a problem. I'd love to see somebody
>>in charge who doesn't automatically think of violent solutions.

> What would you have suggested be done after the 9/11 attack? Say you
> are President. How would you calm the fears and anger of a nation as
> large and the US?

I think it would have helped a lot if he'd actually aimed the US armed
forces at Osama instead of Saddam, who had nothing to do with 9/11 and
was an enemy of al Quaeda.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

ellen <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 11, 7:53 pm, "Eva" <EvaDStructio...@NOverizon.net> wrote:
> Maybe I don't think a woman ought to be President after all. Maybe I
> don't think
>> women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
>> truly terrible threat.

> depends on the size of the wig.....

> after going through all this peri hell, i thought - no way would i
> put a woman with wacky hormones in office. & that was totally
> uncensored & shocking for me as someone who has gone toe to toe with
> guys in many ways (still played basketball with them until recently).
> but the reality is, while there are legitimate differences that stem
> from biology (& which i think we haven't been able to address out of
> fear of losing hard fought ground on equality issues), i don't think
> it means that a woman can't be a strong & capable leader. certainly
> men bring their own biological baggage -good & bad to the table & we
> don't question it.

> being severely impacted by hormones is a biological but individual
> situation & not applicable across the gender.

You don't think Bill Clinton was distracted by hormones from affairs
of state? :-)

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Wolfette <bosslady@scotlandmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 12, 12:53?am, "Eva" <EvaDStructio...@NOverizon.net> wrote:
>> I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. ?Maybe I
>> don't think a woman ought to be President after all. ?Maybe I don't think
>> women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
>> truly terrible threat. ?Is there anyone else here who has entertained a
>> thought like that? ?(Of course I know Chris hasn't, but the rest of you.)
>>
>> Eva

> Can't say it seemed to be a problem for Maggie Thatcher during the
> Falklands War. Being a peacetime Prime Minister - now that was
> difficult for her.

> Also we've had a few queens as reigning monarchs during various wars
> over the centuries.

Elizabeth I. Boadicea.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

"Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23t8n@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:vze23t8n-9AFA0E.15553312022008@individual.net...
> In article <_vWdnWYRDbfVhSza4p2dnAA@giganews.com>,
>
> I think, from the way Bill Clinton's been campaigning, there's no way to
> get Clinton (f) without getting Clinton (m). I liked Clinton (m) when
> he was president, but I'd rather the first woman president win and
> govern on her own terms and with her own team.
>
> I'll vote for Clinton (f) if she gets the nomination, but I don't trust
> her. She looks to me like a totally political animal, and I don't know
> what she stands for. It looks to me like she stands for anything
> that'll advance her position.
-----------------
Priscilla, I don't think I've ever been in total agreement with two whole
paragraphs by *anyone* here, until now!

Eva
> Where's Jed Bartlett when you need him?
>
> Priscilla

"Chris Malcolm" <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:61f13gF1ul335U2@mid.individual.net...
> Wolfette <bosslady@scotlandmail.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 12, 12:53?am, "Eva" <EvaDStructio...@NOverizon.net> wrote:
>>> I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. ?Maybe I
>>> don't think a woman ought to be President after all. ?Maybe I don't
>>> think
>>> women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
>>> truly terrible threat. ?Is there anyone else here who has entertained a
>>> thought like that? ?(Of course I know Chris hasn't, but the rest of
>>> you.)
>>>
>>> Eva
>
>> Can't say it seemed to be a problem for Maggie Thatcher during the
>> Falklands War. Being a peacetime Prime Minister - now that was
>> difficult for her.
>
>> Also we've had a few queens as reigning monarchs during various wars
>> over the centuries.
>
> Elizabeth I. Boadicea.

I've always liked the latter's statue/monument which is on the Embankment at
Westminster in London.

Cathy


>
> --
> Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
> IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
>

"FurPaw" <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote in message
news:iLydnS2zNtGMhCzanZ2dnUVZ_uCinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> There are some who speculate that Hillary was the power behind the throne
> when Bill was president...
-----------
There were some who said that about Nancy Reagan, too. Now *that* was
scary.

Eva

"ratatosk" <ratatosk@don'tbother.tweakdsl.nl> wrote in message
news:04j4r3pq458mh6lm7hjh915hqfrv3c9051@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 03:32:19 GMT, "Eva"
> <EvaDStructionNO@NOverizon.net> wrote:
>
>>What happened to Ayan Hirsi Ali?
>
> She met Rita Verdonk.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rita_Verdonk
---------------
Wow! What a story! Thanks for the link.

Eva

What my husband means is the mindset of these Fighter pilots...He was
trained as a fighter pilot...That's all it takes
"Peahen" <Peahen1955@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fot1vt$61d$1@registered.motzarella.org...

"jacquie" <happikat694@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:13r2e2gedqocdbb@corp.supernews.com...
> Do you think George Bush made good decisions? This is a man who had
> Military
> training...although hubby just keeps calling him a "Stupid Fighter Pilot
> Jock" I think Clinton is able to make much better decisions then he has.
> She is a strong woman and has been around a long time...and knows exactly
> what is going on. She knows who to go to with questions . Whoever gets
> into
> office has to be able to make better decisions then what has been done in
> the past years. Well maybe not the other Fighter Pilot Jock that is
> running
>

I wouldn't call the prez a Fighter Pilot Jock, since he was just playing,
not fighting. At least the other did fight and endure. Our current guy
hasn't had to endure much of anything in his life, except for earned scorn.

Chris Malcolm wrote:
> Wolfette <bosslady@scotlandmail.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 12, 12:53?am, "Eva" <EvaDStructio...@NOverizon.net> wrote:
>>> I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. ?Maybe I
>>> don't think a woman ought to be President after all. ?Maybe I don't think
>>> women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
>>> truly terrible threat. ?Is there anyone else here who has entertained a
>>> thought like that? ?(Of course I know Chris hasn't, but the rest of you.)
>>>
>>> Eva
>
>> Can't say it seemed to be a problem for Maggie Thatcher during the
>> Falklands War. Being a peacetime Prime Minister - now that was
>> difficult for her.
>
>> Also we've had a few queens as reigning monarchs during various wars
>> over the centuries.
>
> Elizabeth I. Boadicea.
>

Victoria.

--
Jette Goldie
jette@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://wolfette.livejournal.com/
("reply to" is spamblocked - use the email addy in sig)

Dana© <AneeBear@ownmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:48:08 +0100, thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no
> (Keera Ann Fox) wrote:
>
> >Note: I'm assuming that if I were president, any glitches in my
> >knowledge or decision-making would be filled in by my aids. I don't know
> >everything. :-)
>
>
> LOL. No?

No LOL. That's how it works: Any leader has to have good advisors.

> Well, I don't think the citizens would have accepted anything less
> than a full out attack on someone....didn't matter who, just someone.
> Iraq was the easiest target.

Only because that was the solution offered the people.

> I'm not sure FDR's tactics would have kept the peace in this era of
> violence and evil. Remember when he was in charge there was very
> little TV and everything came from radio (no images of the
> destruction) and movie news reels.

I don't see how that's relevant. Communication is communication and the
radio is a good tool. Heck, some folks even today listen to it. :-)

Good leadership always brings out the best in people, whether we're
talking nations, cities, corporations or the military, regardless of
era. We haven't had good leadership in this crisis.

> I don't know what the answer would be in today's world. And maybe he
> was given the wrong information before he got us into this war. After
> all he is just one man with a lot of people advising him what they
> think he should do. When it turns out wrong they head for the hills
> and leave him standing alone to take the fallout...which he has done
> without whining, so far.

Contrary to popular belief (now, why didn't I hang onto that link?),
Dubya is not the marionette he is made out to be. He knows what
decisions he is associated with because he made them - in spite of his
advisors. That is just as scary as never having a will of your own.

And he damned well better take responsibility. Goes with the job.

--
Keera in Norway * Think big and then ask for more.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

FurPaw <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote:

> Keera Ann Fox wrote:
> > Dana© <AneeBear@ownmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> What would you have suggested be done after the 9/11 attack? Say you
> >> are President. How would you calm the fears and anger of a nation as
> >> large and the US?
> >
> > I'd try to emulate FDR because he was right: The only thing to fear is
> > fear itself. I would let the country grieve and I would encourage the
> > comaraderie that arises in shared grief, and I would also let Americans
> > enjoy the united (and unique) sympathy from the world community. But I'd
> > remind them that retaliation through violence or force would only fuel a
> > fire someone tried to start. I'd ask America to be bigger than such a
> > cowardly enemy. Finally, I would let Americans know that every effort
> > was being made to capture the ones responsible and bring them to justice
> > using our already established legal system.
> >
> > I would never invade Iraq. That country was always completely irrelevant
> > to 9/11. I would not go to war. Power (sometimes abused) and brute force
> > is what made us an attractive target in the first place.
> >
> > Note: I'm assuming that if I were president, any glitches in my
> > knowledge or decision-making would be filled in by my aids. I don't know
> > everything. :-)
>
> What she said!

Thanks! :-)

> One theme of this administration: "The only
> thing they [US citizens] need to fear is fear itself, and we know
> how to make them do it."

It annoys me no end that the real terrorists are our own leaders.

--
Keera in Norway * Think big and then ask for more.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

Chris Malcolm wrote:
> Dana <AneeBear@ownmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 07:58:11 +0100, thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no
>> (Keera Ann Fox) wrote:
>
>>> It makes me incredibly sad that the US is still using such primitive
>>> methods as military force to solve a problem. I'd love to see somebody
>>> in charge who doesn't automatically think of violent solutions.
>
>> What would you have suggested be done after the 9/11 attack? Say you
>> are President. How would you calm the fears and anger of a nation as
>> large and the US?
>
> I think it would have helped a lot if he'd actually aimed the US armed
> forces at Osama instead of Saddam, who had nothing to do with 9/11 and
> was an enemy of al Quaeda.
>

Like finishing what was started in Afghanistan, mayhap?

--
Jette Goldie
jette@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://wolfette.livejournal.com/
("reply to" is spamblocked - use the email addy in sig)

On Feb 12, 3:41 pm, "Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23...@verizon.net>
wrote:
I think it'd be helpful for the
> President to occasionally say, "OK, everybody take 24 hours to calm down
> and get a new perspective. Naps, everyone, and maybe a good mystery
> novel. We'll pick this up again tomorrow."
>
> Priscilla, dreaming

actually, i thought the current president took alot of naps &
vacations. don't know about the reading, though...

On Feb 12, 3:50 pm, "Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23...@verizon.net>
wrote:
> In article <iLydnS2zNtGMhCzanZ2dnUVZ_uCin...@comcast.com>,
>
> FurPaw <furrealpaw...@gmaildog.com> wrote:
> > I also think that the worst threats facing us are internal: our
> > faltering economy, our sinking educational system, our crumbling
> > infrastructure, the shrinking middle class, a national debt
> > that's approaching $10 trillion (and doesn't include the trade
> > deficit or Social Security commitments), our inability to respond
> > effectively to crises like Katrina, our wholesale giveaway of
> > manufacturing capability to other countries. The economic
> > dislocations that our warming atmosphere will bring about. Bird
> > flu, if it ever mutates to become transmissible between humans.
> > Not so much from external armies or terrorists, unless we don't
> > figure out a way to stop pissing off our allies.
>
> I agree. I was daydreaming the other day about an inaugural speech in
> which the new President talked about tackling the job of repairing our
> national infrastructure, forming alliances of public transit systems to
> locate common solutions to common problems and of state highway systems
> for cost-effective solutions to crumbling bridges and highways. I want
> to hear a call for national responsibility in maintaining what prior
> generations built, for citizens to work together... blah blah blah....
> Yeah, likely. I wish.
>
> Priscilla

i am casting a write-in vote for a priscilla/furpaw ticket. you two
work it out as to who is pres & who is vicepres.

On Feb 12, 12:48 pm, thinkbig.shrinkto...@online.no (Keera Ann Fox)
wrote:
> ellen <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > but the reality is, while there are legitimate differences that stem
> > from biology (& which i think we haven't been able to address out of
> > fear of losing hard fought ground on equality issues), i don't think
> > it means that a woman can't be a strong & capable leader. certainly
> > men bring their own biological baggage -good & bad to the table & we
> > don't question it.
>
> This assumes that men aren't run by their hormones - or baser emotions
> or whatever.

i need to clarify myself. i meant that both men & women are impacted
by physiological/biological processes, which includes hormones. chris
gave a good example of that.
>
> > being severely impacted by hormones is a biological but individual
> > situation & not applicable across the gender.
>
> Honestly, even if I were PMS-ing to hell and back, I doubt I'd start a
> _war_. Give your own gender some credit!

i thought that i was. i think that there are obvious & not so obvious
differences between men & women that fall squarely in the nature
category of the nature/nurture argument. which gives each sex
strengths & weaknesses. i stated that i thought a woman is capable of
being a strong & competent leader.

as an individual struggling with an extreme example of the
consequences of what i'll simply refer to as endocrine/neuro
dysfunction (for whatever reason), i know that i would not be able to
competently take on a leadership position of any magnitude at this
time. that's an individual variation that doesn't apply to all
women. & it doesn't even apply to me across time, because even with
severe pms, i was able to aptly serve in positions of leadership.

i must be pms-ing beyond hell & back - cause all bets are off when i'm
in that state. but i usually know that i'm beyond hell & that i need
to just get through it & not make major decisions while i'm there. i
suspect most women don't struggle with such extremes - i am on the
edge of the bell curve (which i think should be my motto, but would
make a poor campaign slogan).

ellen


>
> --
> Keera in Norway * Think big and then ask for more.http://home.online.no/~kafox/

"ellen" <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:89828910-5989-40ee-9748-20b56d3a4900@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 12, 3:41 pm, "Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
> I think it'd be helpful for the
>> President to occasionally say, "OK, everybody take 24 hours to calm down
>> and get a new perspective. Naps, everyone, and maybe a good mystery
>> novel. We'll pick this up again tomorrow."
>>
>> Priscilla, dreaming
>
> actually, i thought the current president took alot of naps &
> vacations. don't know about the reading, though...
>

My Pet Goat

ellen wrote:

> i am casting a write-in vote for a priscilla/furpaw ticket. you two
> work it out as to who is pres & who is vicepres.
>

Heh heh heh. Priscilla can be president. I want to be able to
stay in the background and concoct nefarious schemes to increase
presidential powers far beyond what the Constitution offers and
plot a coup to stage a military-industrial takeover of the
government, ensuring that all the low-lifes of the country and
ultimately the world will toil in poverty to enrich the coffers
of me and my buddies forever. heh heh heh

FurPaw


--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

sage hen <desertnymph@cwo.com> wrote:

> On Feb 11, 9:09 pm, "Stacey Weinberger" <poppin...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
> > "Eva" <EvaDStructio...@NOverizon.net> wrote in message
> >
> > news:s66sj.2641$CX2.1264@trndny09...
> >
> > >I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. Maybe I
> > >don't think a woman ought to be President after all. Maybe I don't think
> > >women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
> > >truly terrible threat. Is there anyone else here who has entertained a
> > >thought like that? (Of course I know Chris hasn't, but the rest of you.)
> >
> > > Eva
> >
> > I don't think the present man in the White House has those qualities.
> >
> > Stacey
>
> I wouldn't call that a man.

*splork!*

--
Keera in Norway * Think big and then ask for more.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

Priscilla H. Ballou <vze23t8n@verizon.net> wrote:

> In article <s66sj.2641$CX2.1264@trndny09>,
> "Eva" <EvaDStructionNO@NOverizon.net> wrote:
>
> > I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. Maybe I
> > don't think a woman ought to be President after all. Maybe I don't think
> > women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
> > truly terrible threat. Is there anyone else here who has entertained a
> > thought like that? (Of course I know Chris hasn't, but the rest of you.)
>
> I think it would be refreshing if, in a time of crisis, our national
> leader didn't send troops anywhere or order anything destroyed or anyone
> killed.
>
> As to the hormone thing, I know when my hormones are causing problems I
> tend to shut my life down for a day. I think it'd be helpful for the
> President to occasionally say, "OK, everybody take 24 hours to calm down
> and get a new perspective. Naps, everyone, and maybe a good mystery
> novel. We'll pick this up again tomorrow."
>
> Priscilla, dreaming

I like your dreams. I hope they come true!

--
Keera in Norway * Think big and then ask for more.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

ellen <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Feb 12, 12:48 pm, thinkbig.shrinkto...@online.no (Keera Ann Fox)
> wrote:
> > ellen <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > but the reality is, while there are legitimate differences that stem
> > > from biology (& which i think we haven't been able to address out of
> > > fear of losing hard fought ground on equality issues), i don't think
> > > it means that a woman can't be a strong & capable leader. certainly
> > > men bring their own biological baggage -good & bad to the table & we
> > > don't question it.
> >
> > This assumes that men aren't run by their hormones - or baser emotions
> > or whatever.
>
> i need to clarify myself. i meant that both men & women are impacted
> by physiological/biological processes, which includes hormones. chris
> gave a good example of that.

Which is how it has always been. I don't see a problem - or rather, more
of a problem than usual. :-)

> > > being severely impacted by hormones is a biological but individual
> > > situation & not applicable across the gender.
> >
> > Honestly, even if I were PMS-ing to hell and back, I doubt I'd start a
> > _war_. Give your own gender some credit!
>
> i thought that i was. i think that there are obvious & not so obvious
> differences between men & women that fall squarely in the nature
> category of the nature/nurture argument. which gives each sex
> strengths & weaknesses. i stated that i thought a woman is capable of
> being a strong & competent leader.

As long as she's not (peri)menopausal, right?

> as an individual struggling with an extreme example of the
> consequences of what i'll simply refer to as endocrine/neuro
> dysfunction (for whatever reason), i know that i would not be able to
> competently take on a leadership position of any magnitude at this
> time. that's an individual variation that doesn't apply to all
> women. & it doesn't even apply to me across time, because even with
> severe pms, i was able to aptly serve in positions of leadership.
>
> i must be pms-ing beyond hell & back - cause all bets are off when i'm
> in that state. but i usually know that i'm beyond hell & that i need
> to just get through it & not make major decisions while i'm there. i
> suspect most women don't struggle with such extremes - i am on the
> edge of the bell curve (which i think should be my motto, but would
> make a poor campaign slogan).

As you said, there are individual differences. :-)

--
Keera in Norway * Think big and then ask for more.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

FurPaw <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote:

> ellen wrote:
>
> > i am casting a write-in vote for a priscilla/furpaw ticket. you two
> > work it out as to who is pres & who is vicepres.
> >
>
> Heh heh heh. Priscilla can be president. I want to be able to
> stay in the background and concoct nefarious schemes to increase
> presidential powers far beyond what the Constitution offers and
> plot a coup to stage a military-industrial takeover of the
> government, ensuring that all the low-lifes of the country and
> ultimately the world will toil in poverty to enrich the coffers
> of me and my buddies forever. heh heh heh

Can we all be in your cabinet? ;-)

--
Keera in Norway * Think big and then ask for more.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

On Feb 12, 3:51*pm, "Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23...@verizon.net>
wrote:
> I was under the impression that there's no real problem with Social
> Security, that those who said there was were inventing problems so they
> could change the system to how they wanted it to work.
>
> Priscilla

I don't think this is the case. As I understand it, Social Security
money collected from people isn't really saved for the individuals
paying it (unlike a 401K), all the money is put into one big
"pot" (for lack of a better word). Retirees collecting it get money
out of the big pot. SS being paid by workers goes into the pot. In the
past there has been more money going in than going out because there
were plenty of workers and not so many retirees so the pot had plenty
in it and was growing larger all the time.

But the baby boomer generation is large and the workers in later
generations aren't as numerous. Also people are living longer and
collecting benefits longer, in many cases collecting more than they
put in. So the fear is that at some point we'll have more money going
out than coming in (or maybe we're already there) and the extra that
has built up in the pot will eventually be gone and then the money
coming in from workers won't be enough to pay the benefits expected by
retirees.

-- Zip

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:43:27 +0100, thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no
(Keera Ann Fox) wrote:

>I don't see how that's relevant. Communication is communication and the
>radio is a good tool. Heck, some folks even today listen to it. :-)

Oh, I think its very important. The media today is in your face 24/7,
back then it might take several days to get word of any kind of crap
going on. When you are bombarded with images and a running dialog
about the loss of American lives it inflames the population. They
want revenge, NOW. With FDR they didn't have all the graphic images
and details fed to them 24/7 and they had time to listen to reason and
consider what was being said without seeing dead Americans being
pulled from what was left of an American property. Also you have to
admit that in WW2 none of the death and destruction was on our
soil...it was all overseas. That makes it easier to deal with too.

Dana
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:43:48 -0700, FurPaw
<furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote:

>Heh heh heh. Priscilla can be president. I want to be able to
>stay in the background and concoct nefarious schemes to increase
>presidential powers far beyond what the Constitution offers and
>plot a coup to stage a military-industrial takeover of the
>government, ensuring that all the low-lifes of the country and
>ultimately the world will toil in poverty to enrich the coffers
>of me and my buddies forever. heh heh heh

Wow, you have really thought this through. You sound like someone's
advisor.

Dana

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:36:10 GMT, Jette <bosslady@scotlandmail.com>
wrote:

>Chris Malcolm wrote:
>> Wolfette <bosslady@scotlandmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Feb 12, 12:53?am, "Eva" <EvaDStructio...@NOverizon.net> wrote:
>>>> I had a thought the other day that actually rather alarmed me. ?Maybe I
>>>> don't think a woman ought to be President after all. ?Maybe I don't think
>>>> women are capable of commanding armies in a time when our nation faces a
>>>> truly terrible threat. ?Is there anyone else here who has entertained a
>>>> thought like that? ?(Of course I know Chris hasn't, but the rest of you.)
>>>>
>>>> Eva
>>
>>> Can't say it seemed to be a problem for Maggie Thatcher during the
>>> Falklands War. Being a peacetime Prime Minister - now that was
>>> difficult for her.
>>
>>> Also we've had a few queens as reigning monarchs during various wars
>>> over the centuries.
>>
>> Elizabeth I. Boadicea.
>>
>
>Victoria.


Wilhelmina

R

Ratatosk, Jola
--

If you need to e-mail me, replace "don'tbother" with "zedicus"

On Feb 13, 1:23 pm, "Peahen" <Peahen1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "ellen" <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:89828910-5989-40ee-9748-20b56d3a4900@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Feb 12, 3:41 pm, "Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23...@verizon.net>
> > wrote:
> > I think it'd be helpful for the
> >> President to occasionally say, "OK, everybody take 24 hours to calm down
> >> and get a new perspective. Naps, everyone, and maybe a good mystery
> >> novel. We'll pick this up again tomorrow."
>
> >> Priscilla, dreaming
>
> > actually, i thought the current president took alot of naps &
> > vacations. don't know about the reading, though...
>
> My Pet Goat

LOL! well done.

On Feb 13, 2:08*pm, Dana© <AneeB...@ownmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:43:48 -0700, FurPaw
>
> <furrealpaw...@gmaildog.com> wrote:
> >Heh heh heh. *Priscilla can be president. *I want to be able to
> >stay in the background and concoct nefarious schemes to increase
> >presidential powers far beyond what the Constitution offers and
> >plot a coup to stage a military-industrial takeover of the
> >government, ensuring that all the low-lifes of the country and
> >ultimately the world will toil in poverty to enrich the coffers
> >of me and my buddies forever. *heh heh heh
>
> Wow, you have really thought this through. You sound like someone's
> advisor. *
>
> Dana
>
> Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
> for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

I wouldn't dare extrapolate my own experiences with hormonal ups and
downs to other middle-aged women, including Hillary. I started
frequenting this forum because all the meno-age women I know breezed
through with few symptoms. The statistics I've seen claim that 75 or
80 percent of women have a pretty mild menopause, so we have no
business assuming that all women our age would be incapacitated or
handicapped in a leadership position.

Re Social Security, I've read several recent books on the subject.
The Social Security surplus has all been spent, and exists only as
IOUs. In a few years, probably not more than five, SS will stop
running any pretense of a surplus. I recently saw a figure of $40
trillion for the deficit Social Security and Medicare will run by 2042
at the present rate taxes are being collected.

As far as the American lives lost in the conflicts we're presently
involved in around the world, they're only a tiny fraction of the
local civilian lives lost. When was the last time a 14 year old girl
was raped and murdered, along with her family, by Iraqi soldiers on
American soil? We're not the only ones who have something to be mad
about.

Les