All your house are belong to us

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:14:19 GMT, "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:


>> On a more serious note Cohen, I am personally deeply saddened at the
>> transformation of the two houses to Democratic control. The loony left
>> wing liberal majority will now set about their social engineering
>> agenda, to the disadvantage of the American people, who turned on
>> President Bush as a knee-jerk reaction to the parlous situation in
>> Iraq.
>
>For at least the next two years, they don't have a veto proof super
>majority. They can try all kinds of shit, but the looniest of it will be
>vetoed. After that, who knows?

Do you really expect Bush to veto illegal-immigrant amnesty? A renewal
of the Clinton-Feinstein Ugly Gun Ban? Minimum wage increases? More
welfare spending? I don't.

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:59:54 -0000, "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote:

>David Cohen wrote:
>> "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote
>>> Dally wrote:
>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>> "Dally" <Dally@myself.com> wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> I just wanted to say "Speaker Pelosi" out loud a few times.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll join you. "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>
>>>>> Just practicing. In two years, when you and I review all the things
>>>>> Democratic control of the Congress has caused, and who is to blame,
>>>>> I want to be well practiced.
>>>>>
>>>>> "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>
>>>> That is a downside. Last time we had the Presidency the nation got
>>>> hynotized and paralyzed by a blow job. (But peace and prosperity.)
>>>> The time before that, rampant inflation (but damn if that Middle
>>>> East Peace Treaty didn't save a couple million lives.)
>>>>
>>>> Face it, Bush needs some checks and balances. He's throwing the
>>>> baby out with the bathwater. Read non-U.S. based press, like the
>>>> Economist or BBC news or anything from Australia. We've lost the
>>>> moral high ground.
>>>
>>> Are you implying be this that you [US presumably] ever held the
>>> moral high ground?
>>
>> Bully, mein Freund, haben Sie ein kurzes Gedächtnis.
>>
>> What? You're not a native German speaker? My mistake
>>
>> David
>
>Of course not. We won THAT war, remember?

No, WE did.

Without US, as Kevin Kline pointed out in "A Fish Called Wanda", you'd
all be speaking German and/or would be the smallest province in the USSR.

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 08:55:33 GMT, "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote
>> David Cohen wrote:
>>> "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote
>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>> "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote
>>>>>> Dally wrote:
>>>>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Dally" <Dally@myself.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just wanted to say "Speaker Pelosi" out loud a few times.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'll join you. "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just practicing. In two years, when you and I review all the
>>>>>>>> things Democratic control of the Congress has caused, and who is
>>>>>>>> to blame, I want to be well practiced.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is a downside. Last time we had the Presidency the nation
>>>>>>> got hynotized and paralyzed by a blow job. (But peace and
>>>>>>> prosperity.) The time before that, rampant inflation (but damn if
>>>>>>> that Middle East Peace Treaty didn't save a couple million lives.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Face it, Bush needs some checks and balances. He's throwing the
>>>>>>> baby out with the bathwater. Read non-U.S. based press, like the
>>>>>>> Economist or BBC news or anything from Australia. We've lost the
>>>>>>> moral high ground.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you implying be this that you [US presumably] ever held the
>>>>>> moral high ground?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bully, mein Freund, haben Sie ein kurzes Gedächtnis.
>>>>>
>>>>> What? You're not a native German speaker? My mistake
>>>
>>>> Of course not. We won THAT war, remember?
>>>
>>> Indeed. I like to think the US had the moral high ground in that one.
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> What, with your boys over-here, over-paid etc.?
>
>Funny, you don't look French.

It's hard to tell. He's downwind.

On 9 Nov 2006 14:48:53 -0800, "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote:

>Cohen wrote:
>[...]
>
>> Does it bother you that every Islamic terrorist in
>> the world agrees with you?
>
>You've got a hotline, Cohen, to the Islamic terrorists of the world? If
>not, what magazines do you currently subscribe to. I need to
>edjuhmikate myself on these issues.
>>
>> <snip> believe Democratic control of Congress is
>> a good thing. That's fine. I'll wait two years. <snip>
>
>THREE *HUNDRED* ~*BIIIIIIIILLIIIIIIION*~ DOLLARS!
>
>How long will it take the Democratic control of the Congress to amass
>that kind of debt?

Given that the Democrats are responsible for the VAST majority of the
$multi-TRILLION debt (via transfer payments and the outfall of Great Society programs),
not long. Not long at all.

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:_d55h.5291$ig4.4486@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>
> "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote
>>> 'Course, I had the answer on September 12, 2001, but nobody listened to
>>> me.
>>>
>> Genocide is not the answer.
>
> When you're at war with an entire "geno"...Islam...then genocide actually
> is the answer, although coincidently.
>
> We didn't worry about "innocent civilians" when we firebombed Dresden, or
> carpet bombed Berlin, or Tokyo, or Hanoi, or nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
> Our enemy certainly doesn't differentiate between combatants and
> civilians.
>
> I agree with John Murtha: Step 1, immediately withdraw all of our troops
> from Iraq.
>
> He, and you, might have a problem with my Step 2.
>
> David

We are not at war with the entirety of Islam, we are at war with the most
fanatical Islamists. No matter how much land you "turn to glass", there will
be plenty left to launch sneak attacks on civilians, and quite a few more
will join their ranks after their relatives were vaporized.

"ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote
>> "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote
>>>> 'Course, I had the answer on September 12, 2001, but nobody listened to
>>>> me.
>>>>
>>> Genocide is not the answer.
>>
>> When you're at war with an entire "geno"...Islam...then genocide actually
>> is the answer, although coincidently.
>>
>> We didn't worry about "innocent civilians" when we firebombed Dresden, or
>> carpet bombed Berlin, or Tokyo, or Hanoi, or nuked Hiroshima and
>> Nagasaki. Our enemy certainly doesn't differentiate between combatants
>> and civilians.
>>
>> I agree with John Murtha: Step 1, immediately withdraw all of our troops
>> from Iraq.
>>
>> He, and you, might have a problem with my Step 2.
>
> We are not at war with the entirety of Islam, we are at war with the most
> fanatical Islamists.

I disagree. I believe this is an apocalyptic (atheist jews don't get to use
that word often) battle for the future of civilization. It's Islam versus
everybody else. It will end when Islam is reduced, technologically, to the
Dark Ages in which they live culturally.

David
No matter how much land you "turn to glass", there will
> be plenty left to launch sneak attacks on civilians, and quite a few more
> will join their ranks after their relatives were vaporized.
>

Cohen wrote:
[...]

> <snip> I believe this is an apocalyptic (atheist jews
> don't get to use that word often)

Isn't that an oxymoron? Not a joke, but a question from perhaps
ignorance - certainly you won't argue with my using the word ignorance
as it relates to my understanding of a subject, right, David? ;o)

An atheist jew? If you're truly an atheist, haven't you denounced
Judaism?

"According to traditional Jewish Law, someone is considered to be a Jew
if he or she was born of a Jewish mother or converted in accord with
Jewish Law. American Reform Judaism and British Liberal Judaism accept
the child of one Jewish parent (father or mother) as Jewish if the
parents raise the child as a Jew by Progressive standards. All
mainstream forms of Judaism today are open to sincere converts." From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism

Ah.

Never mind.

> battle for the future of civilization. It's Islam versus
> everybody else.

No. It is not. Imo, you've made a blanket statement and those types of
generalizations are rarely found to be true.

I believe you confuse all of Islam with a minority of its group.
Specifically, I believe you're demonstrating at least a certain degree
of _Islamophobia_ (there's a new word for me) due to "The use of
violence by Islamist militant organizations as a means of spreading
Islam." From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

> It will end

It will not.

> when Islam is reduced, technologically, to
> the Dark Ages in which they live culturally.

You are wrong.

> David

--
Curt

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:14:19 GMT, "David Cohen"
<sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>
>"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote
>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote
>>>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>>"Dally" <Dally@myself.com> wrote
>>>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, your choice of header..."All your house are belong to us...was
>>>>>>> ironically amusing. Tell me why.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It doesn't mean what you think it means. It's not terrorists taking
>>>>>> over
>>>>>> bases. (By the way, the term "terrorist" doesn't actually apply to
>>>>>> insurgents fighting off an invasion of their country. "Terrorists"
>>>>>> means
>>>>>> something different.)
>>>>>
>>>>>Nope. Not even close.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here's a hint: rhymes with kocialism.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is that a political euphemism for strict adherence to the dietary laws
>>>> of Judaism?
>>>
>>>It's a political euphemism for The Government requiring strict adherence
>>>to
>>>the dietary laws of Judaism because it's the best diet for the most
>>>people,
>>>and productive members of society will pay for the kosher food of the
>>>parasites.
>>>
>> "Let them eat cake", as it was suggested that Marie Antoinette once
>> famously said.
>>
>> On a more serious note Cohen, I am personally deeply saddened at the
>> transformation of the two houses to Democratic control. The loony left
>> wing liberal majority will now set about their social engineering
>> agenda, to the disadvantage of the American people, who turned on
>> President Bush as a knee-jerk reaction to the parlous situation in
>> Iraq.
>
>For at least the next two years, they don't have a veto proof super
>majority. They can try all kinds of shit, but the looniest of it will be
>vetoed. After that, who knows?
>
>> However, now it's up to the Democrats to come up with a solution to
>> Iraq, and if they are successful in that endeavour then I too will
>> applaud them!
>
>As will I.
>
>'Course, I had the answer on September 12, 2001, but nobody listened to me.
>
I was in complete agreement with you, David.

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 13:14:58 -0800, Lucas Buck
<sbcpark@earthlink.NOSPAM.net> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

> A renewal of the Clinton-Feinstein Ugly Gun Ban?

I wonder if the Dems will even try to go there. I'll tell you a
little story. Back in 2000, I did some work for Minnesota's DFL party
chair. This was in October, if I remember correctly. Anyhoo, he had
a good deal of respect for me after working with me for a few days and
we got on the subject of politics. I flat out told him that I only
vote on the 2nd Amendment and explained why. I also made clear to him
why the Repubs were swept into office in 1994 and how proud I was to
be a part of that (it was guns, damn it). Well, lo and behold if Mark
Dayton didn't make an unplanned trip up to Minnesota's Iron Range
(social conservatives and fiscal liberals and they do love their guns
up there) and declare that he was a lover of the 2nd Amendment and
would never vote to ban guns in any way shape or form.

Mark Dayton won that election after trailing in the polls right up
until his trip to the Iron Range and unseated a sitting Senator. Every
election since then, no successful politician in this country has ever
come out against guns except in the People's Republic of Kalifornia
and even then it's been against the legal ownership of the scary .50
caliber which has never been used in a crime in this country.

John Hanson wrote:
> "David Cohen" wrote:
[...]

re a solution to Iraq

> >'Course, I had the answer on September 12, 2001,
> >but nobody listened to me.
> >
> I was in complete agreement with you, David.

Well, you two geniuses, what was that answer on September 12, 2001.
Because if it was to drop a frigging nuclear bomb on the "guilty,"
well, did anyone know where to unload one on that particular date? Was
anyone certain of the attackers' identity and home address?

Timothy McVeigh much?

And, yeah, from the Barking Moonbat Files:
http://www.hermes-press.com/keys9_11.htm

Otoh, what's fact, what's fiction, and who decides?

Rhetorical, dammit.

--
Curt

>>How long will it take the Democratic control of the Congress to amass
>>that kind of debt?
>
>Given that the Democrats are responsible for the VAST majority of the
>$multi-TRILLION debt (via transfer payments and the outfall of Great Society
pro
>grams),
>not long. Not long at all.
>
I think you are in error. See:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
Feel free to provide a counter cite.

"John Hanson" <jhanson@northernlinks.com> wrote
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote
>>"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote
>>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote
>>>>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>>>"Dally" <Dally@myself.com> wrote
>>>>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BTW, your choice of header..."All your house are belong to us...was
>>>>>>>> ironically amusing. Tell me why.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It doesn't mean what you think it means. It's not terrorists taking
>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>> bases. (By the way, the term "terrorist" doesn't actually apply to
>>>>>>> insurgents fighting off an invasion of their country. "Terrorists"
>>>>>>> means
>>>>>>> something different.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nope. Not even close.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Here's a hint: rhymes with kocialism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that a political euphemism for strict adherence to the dietary laws
>>>>> of Judaism?
>>>>
>>>>It's a political euphemism for The Government requiring strict adherence
>>>>to
>>>>the dietary laws of Judaism because it's the best diet for the most
>>>>people,
>>>>and productive members of society will pay for the kosher food of the
>>>>parasites.
>>>>
>>> "Let them eat cake", as it was suggested that Marie Antoinette once
>>> famously said.
>>>
>>> On a more serious note Cohen, I am personally deeply saddened at the
>>> transformation of the two houses to Democratic control. The loony left
>>> wing liberal majority will now set about their social engineering
>>> agenda, to the disadvantage of the American people, who turned on
>>> President Bush as a knee-jerk reaction to the parlous situation in
>>> Iraq.
>>
>>For at least the next two years, they don't have a veto proof super
>>majority. They can try all kinds of shit, but the looniest of it will be
>>vetoed. After that, who knows?
>>
>>> However, now it's up to the Democrats to come up with a solution to
>>> Iraq, and if they are successful in that endeavour then I too will
>>> applaud them!
>>
>>As will I.
>>
>>'Course, I had the answer on September 12, 2001, but nobody listened to
>>me.
>>
> I was in complete agreement with you, David.

That is true. As was Larry. I should have specified, "nobody with any
megatons at their disposal listened to me".

My position is pretty clear: it's going to come to that eventually, might as
well get it over with now.

David

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:i%95h.4980$L6.3428@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
>
> "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote
>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote
>>> "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote
>>>>> 'Course, I had the answer on September 12, 2001, but nobody listened
>>>>> to me.
>>>>>
>>>> Genocide is not the answer.
>>>
>>> When you're at war with an entire "geno"...Islam...then genocide
>>> actually is the answer, although coincidently.
>>>
>>> We didn't worry about "innocent civilians" when we firebombed Dresden,
>>> or carpet bombed Berlin, or Tokyo, or Hanoi, or nuked Hiroshima and
>>> Nagasaki. Our enemy certainly doesn't differentiate between combatants
>>> and civilians.
>>>
>>> I agree with John Murtha: Step 1, immediately withdraw all of our troops
>>> from Iraq.
>>>
>>> He, and you, might have a problem with my Step 2.
>>
>> We are not at war with the entirety of Islam, we are at war with the most
>> fanatical Islamists.
>
> I disagree. I believe this is an apocalyptic (atheist jews don't get to
> use that word often) battle for the future of civilization. It's Islam
> versus everybody else. It will end when Islam is reduced, technologically,
> to the Dark Ages in which they live culturally.
>
> David

Don't you work with any Muslims? Do you believe they are part of this
battle?

ATP* wrote:
> "David Cohen" wrote
[...]

re the statement "We are not at war with the entirety of Islam, we are
at war with the most fanatical Islamists."

> > I disagree. I believe this is an apocalyptic <snip>
> > battle for the future of civilization. It's Islam versus
> > everybody else. It will end when Islam is reduced,
> > technologically, to the Dark Ages in which they
> > live culturally.
>
> Don't you work with any Muslims? Do you believe they
> are part of this battle?

Perhaps David was only attempting to build on a "joke" as he attempted
poorly elsewhere in this ng recently. I'm giving him the benefit of the
doubt, but still hoping he doesn't get within reach of any of those
megatons he mentioned previously.

--
Curt

ATP* wrote:
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote
> > "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote
> >> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote
> >>> "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote
> >>>>> 'Course, I had the answer on September 12, 2001, but nobody listened
> >>>>> to me.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Genocide is not the answer.
> >>>
> >>> When you're at war with an entire "geno"...Islam...then genocide
> >>> actually is the answer, although coincidently.
> >>>
> >>> We didn't worry about "innocent civilians" when we firebombed Dresden,
> >>> or carpet bombed Berlin, or Tokyo, or Hanoi, or nuked Hiroshima and
> >>> Nagasaki. Our enemy certainly doesn't differentiate between combatants
> >>> and civilians.
> >>>
> >>> I agree with John Murtha: Step 1, immediately withdraw all of our troops
> >>> from Iraq.
> >>>
> >>> He, and you, might have a problem with my Step 2.
> >>
> >> We are not at war with the entirety of Islam, we are at war with the most
> >> fanatical Islamists.
> >
> > I disagree. I believe this is an apocalyptic (atheist jews don't get to
> > use that word often) battle for the future of civilization. It's Islam
> > versus everybody else. It will end when Islam is reduced, technologically,
> > to the Dark Ages in which they live culturally.

> Don't you work with any Muslims? Do you believe they are part of this
> battle?

Casualties of war.

David

Curt wrote:
> ATP* wrote:
> > "David Cohen" wrote
> [...]
>
> re the statement "We are not at war with the entirety of Islam, we are
> at war with the most fanatical Islamists."
>
> > > I disagree. I believe this is an apocalyptic <snip>
> > > battle for the future of civilization. It's Islam versus
> > > everybody else. It will end when Islam is reduced,
> > > technologically, to the Dark Ages in which they
> > > live culturally.
> >
> > Don't you work with any Muslims? Do you believe they
> > are part of this battle?
>
> Perhaps David was only attempting to build on a "joke" as he attempted
> poorly elsewhere in this ng recently. I'm giving him the benefit of the
> doubt, but still hoping he doesn't get within reach of any of those
> megatons he mentioned previously.

I have previously posted, in detail, my "Don't Fuck With Us, We're
Nuts" proposed US foreign policy. Your google skills will have to find
it, if you're interested.

And I don't know how many more ways I can say "I'm not joking".

David

Lucas Buck wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:59:54 -0000, "Bully"
> <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote:
>
>> David Cohen wrote:
>>> "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote
>>>> Dally wrote:
>>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>>> "Dally" <Dally@myself.com> wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just wanted to say "Speaker Pelosi" out loud a few times.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll join you. "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just practicing. In two years, when you and I review all the
>>>>>> things Democratic control of the Congress has caused, and who is
>>>>>> to blame, I want to be well practiced.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>
>>>>> That is a downside. Last time we had the Presidency the nation
>>>>> got hynotized and paralyzed by a blow job. (But peace and
>>>>> prosperity.) The time before that, rampant inflation (but damn if
>>>>> that Middle East Peace Treaty didn't save a couple million lives.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Face it, Bush needs some checks and balances. He's throwing the
>>>>> baby out with the bathwater. Read non-U.S. based press, like the
>>>>> Economist or BBC news or anything from Australia. We've lost the
>>>>> moral high ground.
>>>>
>>>> Are you implying be this that you [US presumably] ever held the
>>>> moral high ground?
>>>
>>> Bully, mein Freund, haben Sie ein kurzes Gedächtnis.
>>>
>>> What? You're not a native German speaker? My mistake
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> Of course not. We won THAT war, remember?
>
> No, WE did.
>
> Without US, as Kevin Kline pointed out in "A Fish Called Wanda", you'd
> all be speaking German and/or would be the smallest province in the
> USSR.

Hey, what's with the US and THEM atttitude. We were all in it together, so
WE ALL won that war !

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 18:55:57 -0500, "ATP*"
<waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>
>"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:_d55h.5291$ig4.4486@newsread2.news.pas.earth link.net...
>>
>> "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote
>>>> 'Course, I had the answer on September 12, 2001, but nobody listened to
>>>> me.
>>>>
>>> Genocide is not the answer.
>>
>> When you're at war with an entire "geno"...Islam...then genocide actually
>> is the answer, although coincidently.
>>
>> We didn't worry about "innocent civilians" when we firebombed Dresden, or
>> carpet bombed Berlin, or Tokyo, or Hanoi, or nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
>> Our enemy certainly doesn't differentiate between combatants and
>> civilians.
>>
>> I agree with John Murtha: Step 1, immediately withdraw all of our troops
>> from Iraq.
>>
>> He, and you, might have a problem with my Step 2.
>>
>> David
>
>We are not at war with the entirety of Islam, we are at war with the most
>fanatical Islamists. No matter how much land you "turn to glass", there will
>be plenty left to launch sneak attacks on civilians, and quite a few more
>will join their ranks after their relatives were vaporized.
>
That's why we need to put the Germans in charge of ground operations.

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 09:37:55 -0000, "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote:

>Lucas Buck wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:59:54 -0000, "Bully"
>> <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote:
>>
>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>> "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote
>>>>> Dally wrote:
>>>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>>>> "Dally" <Dally@myself.com> wrote
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I just wanted to say "Speaker Pelosi" out loud a few times.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'll join you. "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just practicing. In two years, when you and I review all the
>>>>>>> things Democratic control of the Congress has caused, and who is
>>>>>>> to blame, I want to be well practiced.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is a downside. Last time we had the Presidency the nation
>>>>>> got hynotized and paralyzed by a blow job. (But peace and
>>>>>> prosperity.) The time before that, rampant inflation (but damn if
>>>>>> that Middle East Peace Treaty didn't save a couple million lives.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Face it, Bush needs some checks and balances. He's throwing the
>>>>>> baby out with the bathwater. Read non-U.S. based press, like the
>>>>>> Economist or BBC news or anything from Australia. We've lost the
>>>>>> moral high ground.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you implying be this that you [US presumably] ever held the
>>>>> moral high ground?
>>>>
>>>> Bully, mein Freund, haben Sie ein kurzes Gedächtnis.
>>>>
>>>> What? You're not a native German speaker? My mistake
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>
>>> Of course not. We won THAT war, remember?
>>
>> No, WE did.
>>
>> Without US, as Kevin Kline pointed out in "A Fish Called Wanda", you'd
>> all be speaking German and/or would be the smallest province in the
>> USSR.
>
>Hey, what's with the US and THEM atttitude. We were all in it together, so
>WE ALL won that war !

Oh, RIGHT! You pansy-asses were all on our side when we were the only thing
keeping your butts alive... but we haven't forgotten about the little things such
as when you BURNED OUR CAPITOL.

Of course, once Pelosi & Co. take over, feel free to burn it then.

Lucas Buck wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 09:37:55 -0000, "Bully"
> <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote:
>
>> Lucas Buck wrote:
>>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:59:54 -0000, "Bully"
>>> <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote:
>>>
>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>> "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote
>>>>>> Dally wrote:
>>>>>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Dally" <Dally@myself.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just wanted to say "Speaker Pelosi" out loud a few times.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'll join you. "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just practicing. In two years, when you and I review all the
>>>>>>>> things Democratic control of the Congress has caused, and who
>>>>>>>> is to blame, I want to be well practiced.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "SPEAKER PELOSI"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is a downside. Last time we had the Presidency the nation
>>>>>>> got hynotized and paralyzed by a blow job. (But peace and
>>>>>>> prosperity.) The time before that, rampant inflation (but damn
>>>>>>> if that Middle East Peace Treaty didn't save a couple million
>>>>>>> lives.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Face it, Bush needs some checks and balances. He's throwing the
>>>>>>> baby out with the bathwater. Read non-U.S. based press, like
>>>>>>> the Economist or BBC news or anything from Australia. We've
>>>>>>> lost the moral high ground.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you implying be this that you [US presumably] ever held the
>>>>>> moral high ground?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bully, mein Freund, haben Sie ein kurzes Gedächtnis.
>>>>>
>>>>> What? You're not a native German speaker? My mistake
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>
>>>> Of course not. We won THAT war, remember?
>>>
>>> No, WE did.
>>>
>>> Without US, as Kevin Kline pointed out in "A Fish Called Wanda",
>>> you'd all be speaking German and/or would be the smallest province
>>> in the USSR.
>>
>> Hey, what's with the US and THEM atttitude. We were all in it
>> together, so WE ALL won that war !
>
> Oh, RIGHT! You pansy-asses were all on our side when we were the
> only thing keeping your butts alive... but we haven't forgotten
> about the little things such as when you BURNED OUR CAPITOL.

Well, if you will go around pissing people off...

>
> Of course, once Pelosi & Co. take over, feel free to burn it then.



--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss