O/T: The Hammer Dropped

On Nov 24, 11:23=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court
> of law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
> Lew

That scumbag won't do time.

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:08:50 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>><[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 12:11:00 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>><[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>> Who, do you propose, would fill his place?
>>>>
>>>>Simple answer, the person that is doing all the work now. The people
>>>>that
>>>>are actually making things work despite the elected officials desires.
>>>>Except now he makes the decisions of what needs to be done instead of
>>>>carrying out orders form a politician. He does so until some one is
>>>>elected.
>>>
>>> So you want a lifetime bureaucrat making the laws as well as enforcing
>>> them?
>>> Silly.
>>
>>You might think so until you realize the systems that actually work and
>>please the most people are actually run that way.
>
> Name one.

I cannot divulge that information, there is a personal risk involved and we
are talking politics. Hope you understand.

On Nov 25, 9:29=A0am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:23:04 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court
> >of law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
> >Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
> http://americaswatchtower.com/2010/07/29/charlie-rangel-indicted-for-...h=
ttp://nlpc.org/stories/2010/08/02/rep-maxine-waters-charged-ethics-v...
> And that's only two -recent- democrats.
>
> It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
> wouldn't it?
>
> --
> Experience is a good teacher, but she send in terrific bills.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 -- Minna Thomas Antrim

Corruption and greed know no partisan affiliations. Neither does
stupidity.

J. Clarke wrote:

>
> A big problem with the current system is that nobody alive today had
> any real say in its creation, we inherited it and nobody ever asked
> us if we were cool with continuing it.

I'm not sure that defines it as a problem.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

On Nov 24, 11:04=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 11:23=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court
> > of law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
> > Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
> > Lew
>
> That scumbag won't do time.

I disagree. This was a *felony* conviction. He'll appeal, as he has
the right to do, but from what coverage I've seen in Austin and DFW
newspapers, he doesn't stand much chance of success.

On Nov 27, 9:12=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Robatoy" wrote:
> > Do try to keep things in context. People bitch about government and
>
> voting...so how do these assholes/losers get elected?
> -------------------------------
> Just bitching doesn't get much done.
>
> I don't agree with most of the "Tea Party" agenda; however, they
> represent a group that is unhappy with things as they are, and are
> doing something about it.
>
> We need more of that type of involvement, IMHO.
>
> Lew

Oh, I agree. More involvement is a good thing. but there are people
who carry the banner of "VOTE!! CHANGE!!"...and all *I* want to know
who has been voting these losers into power all along?

..nothing personal, you understand..

On 11/24/2010 09:23 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court
> of law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
>
> Lew
>
>

Takes decades to unmask the scumbags:


<http://politics.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/11/24/a-lonely-guilty-verdict-for-charlie-rangel.html>

"Robatoy" wrote:

> That scumbag won't do time.
----------------------------------
Texas courts have a reputation for handing down some interesting
rulings.

Remember Texaco V Pennzoil?"

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court of
> law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
>
> Lew
>
>


Texas has produced it's share of despicable politicians but Delay wins the
prize.

Max

On 11/25/2010 9:07 AM, Markem wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 06:29:17 -0800, Larry Jaques
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
>> wouldn't it?
>
> Ah yes I want term limits, and an added retirement bit at a federal
> prison all expenses paid from any politcal contributions left over.
>
> Mark

And I want "None Of The Above" as a choice on every ballot.

On 11/25/2010 9:14 AM, Zz Yzx wrote:
>> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
> The actual quote reads: "The wheels of the Gods grind slowly, but they
> grind exceedingly fine".
>
> Good adaptation though.
>
> -Zz
They also often grind exceedingly dumb.

"Leon" wrote:

> Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates
> don't recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to
> all involved. But then the politicians don't want that fact to come
> out in the open.

-------------------------------
Sitting back on ones hands and not participating in the voting process
is not a viable option.

IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.

As the old saying goes, "There ain't no free lunch", especially when
it comes to voting.

Off the box.

Lew

I wrote:

>> Sitting back on ones hands and not participating in the voting
>> process is not a viable option.
----------------------------------
"Leon" wrote:

> Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is
> better than not voting at all?
>
> You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and
> loose, or don't play the game.
>
> IMHO voting for some you you don't believe in sends the wrong
> message.

> I think just the opposite, you vote, you don't bitch. Goes with
> the adage, you made your bed, now lay in it.

-------------------------------------

Those comments border on IBS.

You don't like the way someone you voted for is doing their job, you
have right,
no an obligation to make your views known.

By voting, you earned that right.

If you don't like the candidates running for an office, then get
involved and get some
candidates you can support to run, but that means work over and above
voting.

As a side note, here in California, the race for state attorney
general has not yet offically
been decided; however, one of the candidates has conceded defeat
within the last
couple of days.

The two candidates could not have had more distinct differences.

The difference was about 50,000 out of several million votes cast.

Every vote made a difference.

Look at Alaska.

Lew

"George W Frost" wrote:

> I like castration of politicians better

----------------------------
Sarah would probably agree with you, but then that approach leaves
out a whole bunch of politicans.

Lew

Han wrote:

> That being said, the current system is constantly being revised
> (redistricting), and the elcting systems for at least US Senate and
> President has definitely changed (at least administratively).
--------------------------------------
Redistricting should be interesting here in California this time
around.

The voters voted in a new way of redistricting, a panel of private
citizens, not the elected politicians, get to establish the districts.

Since California will get some new seats in the house of
representatives due to population shifts, should be interesting now
that gerrymandering has less of a roll in the process.

Stay tuned...............

Lew

On 11/26/2010 8:18 AM, Leon wrote:
> "Han"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "Lobby Dosser"<[email protected]> wrote in news:icnaua$7u5$1
>> @news.eternal-september.org:
>>
>>> And 50+% of the total number of voters to win. None of this 47 to 33 and
>>> some leftovers and 47 wins.
>>
>> How about needing more than 1/3 of the total number of eligible voters?
>>
>> --
>> Best regards
>> Han
>> email address is invalid
>
>
> Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates don't
> recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to all involved.
> But then the politicians don't want that fact to come out in the open.
>
>
Not a valid assumption. A failure to vote could mean "Any of the
candidates are fine by me." OR it could mean "I'm just not interested
in politics." OR it could mean "I abstain because I don't know enough
to cast an intelligent vote."

On 11/26/2010 7:53 PM, Leon wrote:
> "Larry W"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article<[email protected]>,
>> Josepi<[email protected]> wrote:
>> <...snipped...>
>>> You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
>>> or don't play the game.
>>>
>>
>> I'm wondering, what is the difference between the 1st& 2nd choice there?
>
> You see the point! Voting for either is a loosing proposition if you don't
> like either candidate.
>

Which is precisely why the ballot should have "None Of The Above" as a
choice.

"Leon" wrote:

> And what in the last 50 years has that acomplished?

Surely you jest.

> We continue to get candidates that are taking us down the wrong
> path.

Define what in your opinion defines "wrong path."

> You have to step back and look at the big picture and determine what
> is really wrong with the system.

Other than Reagan's screwing of the middle class, what else is wrong?

> Simply complaining has not helped as far back as I remember.

No, you have to something in addition to just bitching.

> I absolutely think that every one should vote and I also believe
> that they should only vote if there is some one that they want to
> elect.

OK, it is also your obligation to insure you get candidates who
represent the majority of your views for which you can vote.

> And I believe that if the majority of eligible voters don't vote for
> any one in particular no candidate shoud win.

That's a crap out on your part, an excuse for not getting involved..

> The simple solution would be change the requirements to win.

Not really, that's just a crap out.

Lew

"Robatoy" wrote:
> So.... who has been electing this last batch of assholes?
--------------------------
Talk about teeing up a puff ball............

Lew

"Robatoy" wrote:

> Do try to keep things in context. People bitch about government and
voting...so how do these assholes/losers get elected?
-------------------------------
Just bitching doesn't get much done.

I don't agree with most of the "Tea Party" agenda; however, they
represent a group that is unhappy with things as they are, and are
doing something about it.

We need more of that type of involvement, IMHO.

Lew

"Robatoy" wrote:

Oh, I agree. More involvement is a good thing. but there are people
who carry the banner of "VOTE!! CHANGE!!"...and all *I* want to know
who has been voting these losers into power all along?

..nothing personal, you understand..
----------------------
Guess it depends on your definition of "loser".

IMHO, a whole bunch of losers are headed to DC this term.

Looks like lots of grid lock for the next 2 years.

Lew

On 11/27/2010 5:39 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Leon" wrote:
>
>> And what in the last 50 years has that acomplished?
>
> Surely you jest.
>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A5t5_O8hdA

"Robatoy" wrote in message
news:1244ce9a-ed56-40e0-9865-b80a690e898b@r21g2000pri.googlegroups.com...

On Nov 25, 9:29 am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:23:04 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court
<snip>> -- Minna Thomas Antrim

Corruption and greed know no partisan affiliations. Neither does
stupidity.

I whole heartily agree!

If the central government were chosen and paid by Ben's thoughts, corruption
and greed might be under tighter control:
They are of the People, and return again to mix with the People, having no
more durable preeminence than the different Grains of Sand in an Hourglass.
Such an Assembly cannot easily become dangerous to Liberty. They are the
Servants of the People, sent together to do the People's Business, and
promote the public Welfare; their Powers must be sufficient, or their Duties
cannot be performed. They have no profitable Appointments, but a mere
Payment of daily Wages, such as are scarcely equivalent to their Expences;
so that, having no Chance for great Places, and enormous Salaries or
Pensions, as in some Countries, there is no triguing or bribing for
Elections.
Benjamin Franklin, letter to George Whatley, May 23, 1785

Of course the children of all generations have to be taught...
It should be your care, therefore, and mine, to elevate the minds of our
children and exalt their courage; to accelerate and animate their industry
and activity; to excite in them an habitual contempt of meanness, abhorrence
of injustice and inhumanity, and an ambition to excel in every capacity,
faculty, and virtue. If we suffer their minds to grovel and creep in
infancy, they will grovel all their lives.
John Adams, Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, 1756

And the "PC" crowd has done much to suppress it...
Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is
the only foundation of republics. There must be a positive passion for the
public good, the public interest, honour, power and glory, established in
the minds of the people, or there can be no republican government, nor any
real liberty: and this public passion must be superior to all private
passions.
John Adams, letter to Mercy Warren, April 16, 1776

At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were
supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government.
Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most
dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal
gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions,
seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the
public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by
precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the
constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has
perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in
consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life,
if secured against all liability to account.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Monsieur A. Coray, Oct 31, 1823


Tom

Well we're finally getting to build here in TN, and an attached shop is
included... 29' X 29'.
I could only get 8' walls since the rest of the house has them, and the roof
would have looked weird to match a higher wall. My son in law is the
contractor, and I've been "swapping time" helping him with other houses
(plus trying to get a new practice going on a shoe string) so I haven't had
time to drop by the Wreck like I used to...
It's nice to see so many familiar names (and take a moment to remember those
that are longer with us).

"Tom B" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...



"Robatoy" wrote in message
news:1244ce9a-ed56-40e0-9865-b80a690e898b@r21g2000pri.googlegroups.com...

<lot'sa snippage (excuse my grammer ;<)

I don't have a clue why this didn't show up in the proper thread... my
apologies
Tom

"Leon" wrote:
>
> How are things in California these days?
-------------------------
It's 59F outside my window today.

That sucks.

Lew

"Just Wondering" wrote:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A5t5_O8hdA

-----------------------------
RIP 11/28/10

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court of
> law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
>
> Lew
>
>He will have a sore hand after it is slapped. ww

On Sat, 27 Nov 2010 07:31:52 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Nov 27, 8:50 am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:53:58 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >"Larry W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]...
>> >> In article <[email protected]>,
>> >> Josepi <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> <...snipped...>
>> >>>You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
>> >>>or don't play the game.
>>
>> >> I'm wondering, what is the difference between the 1st & 2nd choice there?
>>
>> >You see the point!   Voting for either is a loosing proposition if you don't
>> >like either candidate.
>>
>> Not true, Leon.  Voting for the candidate which most closely
>> represents your own views is the first step into turning that guy into
>> the candidate you want (by popular demand), and changing the system to
>> match (something we need DESPERATELY right now in this country.)
>>
>> Don't be so damned defeatist.  MAKE change happen, and I don't mean
>> that in the Obamunist way.  It's up to us voters to make the gov't we
>> want and need.
>>
>So.... who has been electing this last batch of assholes?

Too many Democrats.

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

The change will only be a loonie or toonie.

"FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
I voted for Rob Ford for Mayor, and little brother Doug for counselor.
They are both honest and good fiscal conservatives with real business
experience, not to mention real nice people.
Not sure where you are in Canada, but there is change coming here, I'll
bet my boots on it.


september.org...
On 11/26/10 1:39 PM, Josepi wrote:
> Silly argument.
>
> OK next time I will flip a coin and vote for the horse's ass that it falls
> on.
>
> I can still bitch because the idiot system allows the BS to still happen
> no
> matter who I vote for. I played their game and voted religiously (there's
> the problem) for 35 years and it got me jerks that I voted for and jerks
> that I opposed. They have no responsibilty once they get voted in and they
> have no knowledge of affairs (except Clinton) before they get voted in.
>

On Sat, 27 Nov 2010 08:10:07 -0600, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 11/27/2010 7:50 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
>
>> Don't be so damned defeatist. MAKE change happen, and I don't mean
>> that in the Obamunist way. It's up to us voters to make the gov't we
>> want and need.
>
>Driven on an urban freeway lately?

Once annually, if I'm lucky. I make the trek to the Bay Area of CA.


>Are those scofflaw idiots the kind of "voters" you want to "make the
>gov't we want and need"??

Why are they scofflaws? Speeding, tailgating, or felony phone use?


>Arguably the same that got us into this mess ...

Um, so who do -you- want to vote for us, Swingy?

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:40:33 -0800, "DGDevin"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>
>> http://americaswatchtower.com/2010/07/29/charlie-rangel-indicted-for-13-ethics-violations/
>> http://nlpc.org/stories/2010/08/02/rep-maxine-waters-charged-ethics-violations-house-committee
>
>> And that's only two -recent- democrats.
>
>> It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
>> wouldn't it?
>
>When it comes to corruption I don't see any difference between the parties.
>Whoever controls the committees that spend the money is targeted by special
>interests. So when the Dems controlled those committees for many long
>years, they got the bulk of indictments and convictions for corruption.
>When the Repubs controlled Congress it was their turn, can anyone say
>"Abramoff"?
>
>But in the cases you cite above please note there are no criminal charges
>involved. I don't doubt Rangel and Waters are bent, but they aren't in
>danger of being convicted of felonies, those are House ethics rules
>violations. DeLay, on the other hand, is now a convicted felon facing
>prison time--that's a significant difference. If we cast a wider net there
>is no problem finding Dem members of Congress convicted of felonies--Wm.
>Jefferson comes to mind--but the cases you mention don't qualify.

True. I forget how the meaning of "indictment" can vary so widely.
AFAIC, all politicians are scum and are criminal elements.

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:53:58 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"Larry W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Josepi <[email protected]> wrote:
>> <...snipped...>
>>>You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
>>>or don't play the game.
>>>
>>
>> I'm wondering, what is the difference between the 1st & 2nd choice there?
>
>You see the point! Voting for either is a loosing proposition if you don't
>like either candidate.

Not true, Leon. Voting for the candidate which most closely
represents your own views is the first step into turning that guy into
the candidate you want (by popular demand), and changing the system to
match (something we need DESPERATELY right now in this country.)

Don't be so damned defeatist. MAKE change happen, and I don't mean
that in the Obamunist way. It's up to us voters to make the gov't we
want and need.

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:16:37 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Lobby Dosser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> "Just Wondering" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> On 11/25/2010 9:07 AM, Markem wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 06:29:17 -0800, Larry Jaques
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
>>>>> wouldn't it?
>>>>
>>>> Ah yes I want term limits, and an added retirement bit at a federal
>>>> prison all expenses paid from any politcal contributions left over.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>
>>> And I want "None Of The Above" as a choice on every ballot.
>>
>>
>> And 50+% of the total number of voters to win. None of this 47 to 33 and
>> some leftovers and 47 wins.
>
>
>
>I think +50% of "Eligible" voters to win. If not enough voters show up the
>election is not counted and the person in office steps aside.

Who, do you propose, would fill his place?

Lew Hodgett wrote:

> Redistricting should be interesting here in California this time
> around.
>
> The voters voted in a new way of redistricting, a panel of private
> citizens, not the elected politicians, get to establish the districts.
>
> Since California will get some new seats in the house of
> representatives due to population shifts, should be interesting now
> that gerrymandering has less of a roll in the process.
>
> Stay tuned...............

It will be interesting - but only if the panel of private citizens is
selected by some means other than appointment, or some other politically
related process. Otherwise - business as usual.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 12:11:00 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> Who, do you propose, would fill his place?
>
>Simple answer, the person that is doing all the work now. The people that
>are actually making things work despite the elected officials desires.
>Except now he makes the decisions of what needs to be done instead of
>carrying out orders form a politician. He does so until some one is
>elected.

So you want a lifetime bureaucrat making the laws as well as enforcing them?
Silly.

>I don't have all the answers and there are probably better solutions but the
>system is compromised and will never work for the people as a whole.

The system of voting is not what's broken.

...and forcing people to do *anything* is NOT a solution. If they're too lazy
to vote, personally, I don't want them to. ...and "early voting" just
simplifies fraud.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 06:29:17 -0800, Larry Jaques
<[email protected]> wrote:

>It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
>wouldn't it?

Ah yes I want term limits, and an added retirement bit at a federal
prison all expenses paid from any politcal contributions left over.

Mark

"Larry Jaques" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 10:05:50 -0700, "Max"
> <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas
>>> court of
>>> law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>>>
>>> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind
>>> fine.
>>>
>>Texas has produced it's share of despicable politicians but Delay
>>wins the
>>prize.
>
> The idiot gets an "A" in Irony with the last sentence in this most
> quotable of statements:
>
> "This is an abuse of power. It's a miscarriage of justice, and I
> still
> maintain that I am innocent. The criminalization of politics
> undermines our very system and I'm very disappointed in the
> outcome."
>
> Gall, wot?

Hey, didn't Caesar say "All Gall is divided into three parts: I, me
and mine are always right"?
If Delay gets hammertime behind the new perspective of bars is anyone
taking odds on his
repentant apology to the people whom elected him to an office of
public trust?

Regards,

EH

On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 14:09:19 -0600, "Tom B"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Robatoy" wrote in message
>news:1244ce9a-ed56-40e0-9865-b80a690e898b@r21g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
>On Nov 25, 9:29 am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:23:04 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court
><snip>> -- Minna Thomas Antrim
>
>Corruption and greed know no partisan affiliations. Neither does
>stupidity.
>
>I whole heartily agree!
>
>If the central government were chosen and paid by Ben's thoughts, corruption
>and greed might be under tighter control:
>They are of the People, and return again to mix with the People, having no
>more durable preeminence than the different Grains of Sand in an Hourglass.
>Such an Assembly cannot easily become dangerous to Liberty. They are the
>Servants of the People, sent together to do the People's Business, and
>promote the public Welfare; their Powers must be sufficient, or their Duties
>cannot be performed. They have no profitable Appointments, but a mere
>Payment of daily Wages, such as are scarcely equivalent to their Expences;
>so that, having no Chance for great Places, and enormous Salaries or
>Pensions, as in some Countries, there is no triguing or bribing for
>Elections.
>Benjamin Franklin, letter to George Whatley, May 23, 1785

Savvy man, that Ben.


>Of course the children of all generations have to be taught...
>It should be your care, therefore, and mine, to elevate the minds of our
>children and exalt their courage; to accelerate and animate their industry
>and activity; to excite in them an habitual contempt of meanness, abhorrence
>of injustice and inhumanity, and an ambition to excel in every capacity,
>faculty, and virtue. If we suffer their minds to grovel and creep in
>infancy, they will grovel all their lives.
>John Adams, Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, 1756

John knew what the gov't welfare roles would turn out, didn't he?


>And the "PC" crowd has done much to suppress it...
>Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is
>the only foundation of republics. There must be a positive passion for the
>public good, the public interest, honour, power and glory, established in
>the minds of the people, or there can be no republican government, nor any
>real liberty: and this public passion must be superior to all private
>passions.
>John Adams, letter to Mercy Warren, April 16, 1776

I don't think I can name one single CONgresscritter who feels that
way. It's all "ME, ME, ME, more for me!"


>At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were
>supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government.
>Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most
>dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal
>gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions,
>seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the
>public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by
>precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the
>constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has
>perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in
>consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life,
>if secured against all liability to account.
>Thomas Jefferson, letter to Monsieur A. Coray, Oct 31, 1823

I hadn't realized that judicial corruption was that entrenched way
back then.


>Well we're finally getting to build here in TN, and an attached shop is
>included... 29' X 29'.
>I could only get 8' walls since the rest of the house has them, and the roof
>would have looked weird to match a higher wall. My son in law is the

One word: EXCAVATE! then pour an 18" sunken slab (perhaps with a sump
pump in the corner, just in case.)


>contractor, and I've been "swapping time" helping him with other houses

Cool!


>(plus trying to get a new practice going on a shoe string) so I haven't had
>time to drop by the Wreck like I used to...

Practice? Ain'tcha got it down _yet_?


>It's nice to see so many familiar names (and take a moment to remember those
>that are longer with us).

Welcome back, Tom. <waves>

--
Happiness comes of the capacity to feel deeply, to enjoy
simply, to think freely, to risk life, to be needed.
-- Storm Jameson

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...


> http://americaswatchtower.com/2010/07/29/charlie-rangel-indicted-for-13-ethics-violations/
> http://nlpc.org/stories/2010/08/02/rep-maxine-waters-charged-ethics-violations-house-committee

> And that's only two -recent- democrats.

> It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
> wouldn't it?

When it comes to corruption I don't see any difference between the parties.
Whoever controls the committees that spend the money is targeted by special
interests. So when the Dems controlled those committees for many long
years, they got the bulk of indictments and convictions for corruption.
When the Repubs controlled Congress it was their turn, can anyone say
"Abramoff"?

But in the cases you cite above please note there are no criminal charges
involved. I don't doubt Rangel and Waters are bent, but they aren't in
danger of being convicted of felonies, those are House ethics rules
violations. DeLay, on the other hand, is now a convicted felon facing
prison time--that's a significant difference. If we cast a wider net there
is no problem finding Dem members of Congress convicted of felonies--Wm.
Jefferson comes to mind--but the cases you mention don't qualify.

Why can't every issue have a referendum online. It can be done but somebody
wants to have the glory.


"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Simple answer, the person that is doing all the work now. The people that
are actually making things work despite the elected officials desires.
Except now he makes the decisions of what needs to be done instead of
carrying out orders form a politician. He does so until some one is
elected.

I don't have all the answers and there are probably better solutions but the
system is compromised and will never work for the people as a whole.

"Larry W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Josepi <[email protected]> wrote:
> <...snipped...>
>>You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
>>or don't play the game.
>>
>
> I'm wondering, what is the difference between the 1st & 2nd choice there?

You see the point! Voting for either is a loosing proposition if you don't
like either candidate.

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I wrote:
>
>>> Sitting back on ones hands and not participating in the voting process
>>> is not a viable option.
> ----------------------------------
> "Leon" wrote:
>
>> Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is better
>> than not voting at all?
>>
>> You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and
>> loose, or don't play the game.
>>
>> IMHO voting for some you you don't believe in sends the wrong message.
>
>> I think just the opposite, you vote, you don't bitch. Goes with the
>> adage, you made your bed, now lay in it.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> Those comments border on IBS.
>
> You don't like the way someone you voted for is doing their job, you have
> right,
> no an obligation to make your views known.

And what in the last 50 years has that acomplished? We continue to get
candidates that are taking us down the wrong path. You have to step back
and look at the big picture and determine what is really wrong with the
system. Simply complaining has not helped as far back as I remember.

I absolutely think that every one should vote and I also believe that they
should only vote if there is some one that they want to elect. And I
believe that if the majority of eligible voters don't vote for any one in
particular no candidate shoud win.


>
> By voting, you earned that right.

sure..


>
> If you don't like the candidates running for an office, then get involved
> and get some
> candidates you can support to run, but that means work over and above
> voting.

The simple solution would be change the requirements to win.

On 11/26/2010 9:41 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Leon" wrote:
>
>> Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates
>> don't recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to
>> all involved. But then the politicians don't want that fact to come
>> out in the open.
>
> -------------------------------
> Sitting back on ones hands and not participating in the voting process
> is not a viable option.
>
> IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.
>
> As the old saying goes, "There ain't no free lunch", especially when
> it comes to voting.

Got stopped, at machine gun point, in Venezuela in 1963 at least half a
dozen times because my thumb was not green.

When you voted in their elections, which was compulsory, your thumb was
dipped in green ink that stayed visible for days. If you were a citizen
of voting age, you damned well better have a green thumb for a few days
after the election.

Then again, look where that practice got the Venezuelans ...

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Leon wrote:
>
>
>
> I think +50% of "Eligible" voters to win. If not enough voters show
> up the election is not counted and the person in office steps aside.

Most election laws provide that a person remains in office until "his
successor be qualified." This means that when no election is held, or no one
wins, or an ineligible candidate prevails, the current office holder
continues in office.

There have been more than a few instances in which a dead person was
elected, so the situation is not that unusual.

Well said.

If you never apply the stain you can't bitch about the colour (ooops. color)

"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is better than
not voting at all?

You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
or don't play the game.

IMHO voting for some you you don't believe in sends the wrong message.


>
> IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.

I think just the opposite, you vote, you don't bitch. Goes with the adage,
you made your bed, now lay in it.

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Leon" wrote:
>
>> And what in the last 50 years has that acomplished?
>
> Surely you jest.
>



How are things in California these days?

I much prefer the "tight" ones.


"Larry W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Actually, I'm kind of liking the loose and loosing proposition part more
and more...


--
When the game is over, the pawn and the king are returned to the same box.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

Silly argument.

OK next time I will flip a coin and vote for the horse's ass that it falls
on.

I can still bitch because the idiot system allows the BS to still happen no
matter who I vote for. I played their game and voted religiously (there's
the problem) for 35 years and it got me jerks that I voted for and jerks
that I opposed. They have no responsibilty once they get voted in and they
have no knowledge of affairs (except Clinton) before they get voted in.

Vote "No" and follow your own advise.

BTW: I don't vote in your country anyway so you are safe from my vote
cancelling yours and a few others...LOL



"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Sitting back on ones hands and not participating in the voting process
is not a viable option.

IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.

As the old saying goes, "There ain't no free lunch", especially when
it comes to voting.

Off the box.

Lew

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]..
>
> .
> > Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is better
> > than not voting at all?
>
>
> Yes. It's called damage control.

So let's see, you've got a choice between Hitler and Stalin and you
consider voting for one or the other to be "damage control"?

> Say you have a fire in your kitchen. Do you:
> A) Say "oh well, the damage is done so there is no need to put it out".
> B) Put the fire out knowing that the kitchen has sustained damage but at
> least you can save the rest of the house.

Bad analogy. Your kitchen is on fire and you have a bucket of diesel
fuel and a bucket of JP-4. So what do you do, do you pour one of them
on the fire for "damage control" or do you admit that you don't have a
means of putting the fire out and leave the building?

> There is a difference between having a reason and having and excuse. There
> are many reasons for not voting but very few excuses.
> If you can honestly say that you are incapable of making an informed,
> intelligent decision, that is an excuse. "I don't like either of them" is a
> reason, not an excuse.

In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
@swbell.dotnet says...
>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Who, do you propose, would fill his place?
>
> Simple answer, the person that is doing all the work now. The people that
> are actually making things work despite the elected officials desires.
> Except now he makes the decisions of what needs to be done instead of
> carrying out orders form a politician. He does so until some one is
> elected.
>
> I don't have all the answers and there are probably better solutions but the
> system is compromised and will never work for the people as a whole.

A big problem with the current system is that nobody alive today had any
real say in its creation, we inherited it and nobody ever asked us if we
were cool with continuing it.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> On 11/26/2010 8:18 AM, Leon wrote:
> > "Han"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> "Lobby Dosser"<[email protected]> wrote in news:icnaua$7u5$1
> >> @news.eternal-september.org:
> >>
> >>> And 50+% of the total number of voters to win. None of this 47 to 33 and
> >>> some leftovers and 47 wins.
> >>
> >> How about needing more than 1/3 of the total number of eligible voters?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards
> >> Han
> >> email address is invalid
> >
> >
> > Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates don't
> > recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to all involved.
> > But then the politicians don't want that fact to come out in the open.
> >
> >
> Not a valid assumption. A failure to vote could mean "Any of the
> candidates are fine by me." OR it could mean "I'm just not interested
> in politics." OR it could mean "I abstain because I don't know enough
> to cast an intelligent vote."

I'd like to see "shoot 'em all" on the ballot as an option. Possibly
"horsewhip 'em all" as well. Be interesting to see what that did for
voter turnout.

In article <1244ce9a-ed56-40e0-9865-
[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...


> > It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
> > wouldn't it?


> Corruption and greed know no partisan affiliations. Neither does
> stupidity.

...and it crosses all national boundaries.

In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
@swbell.dotnet says...


> > How about needing more than 1/3 of the total number of eligible voters?
> >
> > --
> > Best regards
> > Han
> > email address is invalid
>
>
> Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates don't
> recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to all involved.

...but the effect is one of saying yes to the worst of a bad lot.

"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]..
>
> .
>> Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is better
>> than not voting at all?
>
>
> Yes. It's called damage control.
> Say you have a fire in your kitchen. Do you:
> A) Say "oh well, the damage is done so there is no need to put it out".
> B) Put the fire out knowing that the kitchen has sustained damage but at
> least you can save the rest of the house.
> There is a difference between having a reason and having and excuse. There
> are many reasons for not voting but very few excuses.
> If you can honestly say that you are incapable of making an informed,
> intelligent decision, that is an excuse. "I don't like either of them" is
> a reason, not an excuse.
>

This is assuming that the candidate and his short comings is as obvious as
whether to put out a fire or not. Candidates are not as predictable as a
fire.

The trouble with voting for damage control is that the winner thinks you
actually wanted him to win because of his policy, not because you wanted the
other guy to not win.

I much prefer the "tight" ones.


"Larry W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Actually, I'm kind of liking the loose and loosing proposition part more
and more...


--
When the game is over, the pawn and the king are returned to the same box.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

HeyBub wrote:
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas
>> court of law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>>
>> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>>
>>
>
> A bit of history here. In 2001 the Texas House consisted of 78
> Democrats and 72 Republicans, and Congressional House seats were
> 17-15 in favor of the Democrats.
>
> DeLay (and others) set out to elect more Republicans to the Texas
> House so that they could redistrict the Congressional seats more to
> the benefit of the Republicans.
>
> Sure enough, the 2002 elections resulted in a Republican majority in
> the Texas House. The state legislature then redistricted the
> Congressional seats in time for the 2006 elections. The result of
> this is that the Texas congressional delegation in January will
> consist of 9 Democrats and 23 Republicans. a shift of eight seats
> from Democrats to the GOP.
> Amongst the machinations (and court challenges) involved in this
> effort was $190,000 raised by the DeLay group to assist Republican
> Texas House candidates. Prohibited by law, DeLay's group could not
> give the money they raised directly to the Republican candidates, but
> the Republican National Committee could. So DeLay's group donated the
> money they raised to the RNC and the RNC turned around and gave the
> money to the Texas Republican Committee (TRC), who, in turn,
> disbursed it to the candidates.
> It was this hop DeLay-RNC-TRC-candidates that got DeLay charged, and
> subsequently convicted, of money laundering.

Further refreshing of my memory reveals that Texas law regarding "money
laundering" at the time specified that the money laundered had to be the
result of an illegal activity. Inasmuch as the money raised by DeLay's group
was in no way the fruit of an illegal effort, I suspect DeLay's convictions
will be overturned as a matter of law.

Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court
> of law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
>

A bit of history here. In 2001 the Texas House consisted of 78 Democrats and
72 Republicans, and Congressional House seats were 17-15 in favor of the
Democrats.

DeLay (and others) set out to elect more Republicans to the Texas House so
that they could redistrict the Congressional seats more to the benefit of
the Republicans.

Sure enough, the 2002 elections resulted in a Republican majority in the
Texas House. The state legislature then redistricted the Congressional seats
in time for the 2006 elections. The result of this is that the Texas
congressional delegation in January will consist of 9 Democrats and 23
Republicans. a shift of eight seats from Democrats to the GOP.

Amongst the machinations (and court challenges) involved in this effort was
$190,000 raised by the DeLay group to assist Republican Texas House
candidates. Prohibited by law, DeLay's group could not give the money they
raised directly to the Republican candidates, but the Republican National
Committee could. So DeLay's group donated the money they raised to the RNC
and the RNC turned around and gave the money to the Texas Republican
Committee (TRC), who, in turn, disbursed it to the candidates.

It was this hop DeLay-RNC-TRC-candidates that got DeLay charged, and
subsequently convicted, of money laundering.

"Han" wrote in message news:[email protected]...


> The first time I voted in Holland after coming of age, so to speak, it
> was also compulsory. Maybe we should get a $25 tax credit for voting,
> but unfortunately that doesn't guarantee candidates that you wold want to
> vote for.


How about they add $500 to your taxes, and you only get it refunded if you
attach your voting receipt to your tax return.

"Larry Blanchard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 17:40:30 -0800, Larry Jaques wrote:
>
>> "This is an abuse of power. It's a miscarriage of justice, and I still
>> maintain that I am innocent. The criminalization of politics undermines
>> our very system and I'm very disappointed in the outcome."
>>
>> Gall, wot?
>
> I especially liked "criminalization of politics" :-).
>


I like castration of politicians better

"Lobby Dosser" <[email protected]> wrote in news:icnaua$7u5$1
@news.eternal-september.org:

> And 50+% of the total number of voters to win. None of this 47 to 33 and
> some leftovers and 47 wins.

How about needing more than 1/3 of the total number of eligible voters?

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On 11/26/2010 9:41 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> "Leon" wrote:
>>
>>> Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates
>>> don't recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to
>>> all involved. But then the politicians don't want that fact to come
>>> out in the open.
>>
>> -------------------------------
>> Sitting back on ones hands and not participating in the voting process
>> is not a viable option.
>>
>> IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.
>>
>> As the old saying goes, "There ain't no free lunch", especially when
>> it comes to voting.
>
> Got stopped, at machine gun point, in Venezuela in 1963 at least half a
> dozen times because my thumb was not green.
>
> When you voted in their elections, which was compulsory, your thumb was
> dipped in green ink that stayed visible for days. If you were a citizen
> of voting age, you damned well better have a green thumb for a few days
> after the election.
>
> Then again, look where that practice got the Venezuelans ...

The first time I voted in Holland after coming of age, so to speak, it
was also compulsory. Maybe we should get a $25 tax credit for voting,
but unfortunately that doesn't guarantee candidates that you wold want to
vote for.



--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> A big problem with the current system is that nobody alive today had any
> real say in its creation, we inherited it and nobody ever asked us if we
> were cool with continuing it.

There are many problems wiith the current system, the biggest (IMNSHO) is
the amount of money, much of it unaccounted for, that is involved. Elected
persons should be accountable for performing for the best interests of the
people (broad classification). The next biggest is (again IMNSHO) that
candidates nowadays have to aim for the lowest common denominator, ie the
most people who don't object. There is little if any room for the
consideration of more than 2 viewpoints. Any 3rd of more viewpoint is
immediately a "spoiler" for one or the other.

That being said, the current system is constantly being revised
(redistricting), and the elcting systems for at least US Senate and
President has definitely changed (at least administratively).


--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:bI-
[email protected]:

> On 11/26/2010 5:16 PM, Han wrote:
>
>> That being said, the current system is constantly being revised
>> (redistricting), and the elcting systems for at least US Senate and
>> President has definitely changed (at least administratively).
>
> Do not expect rational processes from an essentially dumbed down,
> ignorant electorate.

Amen!

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

"Lobby Dosser" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> "DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>> "Han" wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>> The first time I voted in Holland after coming of age, so to speak,
>>> it was also compulsory. Maybe we should get a $25 tax credit for
>>> voting, but unfortunately that doesn't guarantee candidates that you
>>> wold want to vote for.
>>
>>
>> How about they add $500 to your taxes, and you only get it refunded
>> if you attach your voting receipt to your tax return.
>
>
> If someone needs financial incentive, they shouldn't be voting to
> begin with.

a) I have so far never received a receipt for voting, either in NY or
NJ.

b) I really do think that financial incentives are very important in
voting behavior, though so far mostly indirectly. "Tax the other guy,
not me".

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On Nov 27, 8:50=A0am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:53:58 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >"Larry W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> Josepi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> <...snipped...>
> >>>You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and lo=
ose,
> >>>or don't play the game.
>
> >> I'm wondering, what is the difference between the 1st & 2nd choice the=
re?
>
> >You see the point! =A0 Voting for either is a loosing proposition if you=
don't
> >like either candidate.
>
> Not true, Leon. =A0Voting for the candidate which most closely
> represents your own views is the first step into turning that guy into
> the candidate you want (by popular demand), and changing the system to
> match (something we need DESPERATELY right now in this country.)
>
> Don't be so damned defeatist. =A0MAKE change happen, and I don't mean
> that in the Obamunist way. =A0It's up to us voters to make the gov't we
> want and need.
>
So.... who has been electing this last batch of assholes?

On 11/26/2010 5:16 PM, Han wrote:

> That being said, the current system is constantly being revised
> (redistricting), and the elcting systems for at least US Senate and
> President has definitely changed (at least administratively).

Do not expect rational processes from an essentially dumbed down,
ignorant electorate.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Leon" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...


> Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is better
> than not voting at all?

Yes, because it's better than the greater of two evils being elected.

> You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
> or don't play the game.

Actually that's only two choices, as one and two have the same outcome. And
you're assuming that elections never have positive outcomes, while at the
very least some elections prevent something even worse from happening.

> IMHO voting for some you you don't believe in sends the wrong message.

Not voting sends a worse message, it tells politicians people don't care
what happens and so the politicians can do as they please.

>> IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.

> I think just the opposite, you vote, you don't bitch. Goes with the
> adage, you made your bed, now lay in it.

How about the best of both worlds, we all vote and we all bitch.

On Nov 27, 7:45=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Robatoy" wrote:
> > So.... who has been electing this last batch of assholes?
>
> --------------------------
> Talk about teeing up a puff ball............
>
> Lew

Do try to keep things in context. People bitch about government and
voting...so how do these assholes/losers get elected?

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 23:09:27 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>J. Clarke wrote:
>
>>
>> A big problem with the current system is that nobody alive today had
>> any real say in its creation, we inherited it and nobody ever asked
>> us if we were cool with continuing it.
>
>I'm not sure that defines it as a problem.

I'm with you, Mike. I don't think there's a politician allive who had
the intelligence, foresight, determination, call of duty, self-
lessness, or moral ethics of our forefathers. And, unfortunately, I
don't expect to ever see that from a politician in my lifetime.

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

On Nov 26, 2:04=A0pm, FrozenNorth <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On 11/26/10 1:39 PM, Josepi wrote:> Silly argument.
>
> > OK next time I will flip a coin and vote for the horse's ass that it fa=
lls
> > on.
>
> > I can still bitch because the idiot system allows the BS to still happe=
n no
> > matter who I vote for. I played their game and voted religiously (there=
's
> > the problem) for 35 years and it got me jerks that I voted for and jerk=
s
> > that I opposed. They have no responsibilty once they get voted in and t=
hey
> > have no knowledge of affairs (except Clinton) before they get voted in.
>
> I voted for Rob Ford for Mayor, and little brother Doug for counselor.
> They are both honest and good fiscal conservatives with real business
> experience, not to mention real nice people.
> Not sure where you are in Canada, but there is change coming here, I'll
> bet my boots on it.
>
> --
> Froz...
>
> The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.

I lived in TO for 16+ years and I would have voted for Ford...so he
got himself into a bit of pickle have had a few too many in
Flawrida...shiat man, who hasn't?

On 11/27/2010 7:50 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:

> Don't be so damned defeatist. MAKE change happen, and I don't mean
> that in the Obamunist way. It's up to us voters to make the gov't we
> want and need.

Driven on an urban freeway lately?

Are those scofflaw idiots the kind of "voters" you want to "make the
gov't we want and need"??

Arguably the same that got us into this mess ...

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Lobby Dosser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Just Wondering" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 11/25/2010 9:07 AM, Markem wrote:
>>> On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 06:29:17 -0800, Larry Jaques
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
>>>> wouldn't it?
>>>
>>> Ah yes I want term limits, and an added retirement bit at a federal
>>> prison all expenses paid from any politcal contributions left over.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>
>> And I want "None Of The Above" as a choice on every ballot.
>
>
> And 50+% of the total number of voters to win. None of this 47 to 33 and
> some leftovers and 47 wins.



I think +50% of "Eligible" voters to win. If not enough voters show up the
election is not counted and the person in office steps aside.

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 17:19:21 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 17:40:30 -0800, Larry Jaques wrote:
>
>> "This is an abuse of power. It's a miscarriage of justice, and I still
>> maintain that I am innocent. The criminalization of politics undermines
>> our very system and I'm very disappointed in the outcome."
>>
>> Gall, wot?
>
>I especially liked "criminalization of politics" :-).

Yeah, AS IF!

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Leon" wrote:
>
>> Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates don't
>> recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to all
>> involved. But then the politicians don't want that fact to come out in
>> the open.
>
> -------------------------------
> Sitting back on ones hands and not participating in the voting process is
> not a viable option.

Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is better than
not voting at all?

You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
or don't play the game.

IMHO voting for some you you don't believe in sends the wrong message.


>
> IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.

I think just the opposite, you vote, you don't bitch. Goes with the adage,
you made your bed, now lay in it.

Very slippery defence but a viscous penalty.


"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

"Robatoy" wrote:

> That scumbag won't do time.
----------------------------------
Texas courts have a reputation for handing down some interesting
rulings.

Remember Texaco V Pennzoil?"

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court of
> law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>
>
> Lew
>
>


He's not in jail yet.

--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...

"Just Wondering" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 11/25/2010 9:07 AM, Markem wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 06:29:17 -0800, Larry Jaques
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
>>> wouldn't it?
>>
>> Ah yes I want term limits, and an added retirement bit at a federal
>> prison all expenses paid from any politcal contributions left over.
>>
>> Mark
>
> And I want "None Of The Above" as a choice on every ballot.


And 50+% of the total number of voters to win. None of this 47 to 33 and
some leftovers and 47 wins.

--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...

On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 17:40:30 -0800, Larry Jaques wrote:

> "This is an abuse of power. It's a miscarriage of justice, and I still
> maintain that I am innocent. The criminalization of politics undermines
> our very system and I'm very disappointed in the outcome."
>
> Gall, wot?

I especially liked "criminalization of politics" :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On 11/26/10 1:39 PM, Josepi wrote:
> Silly argument.
>
> OK next time I will flip a coin and vote for the horse's ass that it falls
> on.
>
> I can still bitch because the idiot system allows the BS to still happen no
> matter who I vote for. I played their game and voted religiously (there's
> the problem) for 35 years and it got me jerks that I voted for and jerks
> that I opposed. They have no responsibilty once they get voted in and they
> have no knowledge of affairs (except Clinton) before they get voted in.
>
I voted for Rob Ford for Mayor, and little brother Doug for counselor.
They are both honest and good fiscal conservatives with real business
experience, not to mention real nice people.
Not sure where you are in Canada, but there is change coming here, I'll
bet my boots on it.

--
Froz...


The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.

In article <[email protected]>,
Josepi <[email protected]> wrote:
<...snipped...>
>You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
>or don't play the game.
>

I'm wondering, what is the difference between the 1st & 2nd choice there?



--
Make it as simple as possible, but not simpler. (Albert Einstein)

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

In article <[email protected]>,
Josepi <[email protected]> wrote:
>Why can't every issue have a referendum online. It can be done but somebody
>wants to have the glory.
>

We might very well still have slavery in this country had a similar system
been implemented instead of our republic. One of the most important reasons
that our constitution has a bill of rights and created a representative
form of government was to prevent (I believe de Tocqueville's phrase)
a "tyranny of the majority."


--
Make it as simple as possible, but not simpler. (Albert Einstein)

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Leon" wrote:
>
>> Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates don't
>> recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to all
>> involved. But then the politicians don't want that fact to come out in
>> the open.
>
> -------------------------------
> Sitting back on ones hands and not participating in the voting process is
> not a viable option.
>
> IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.
>
> As the old saying goes, "There ain't no free lunch", especially when it
> comes to voting.
>
> Off the box.
>
> Lew
>
>

Is it Australia that Fines you for Not voting?

--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...

In article <[email protected]>,
Just Wondering <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 11/26/2010 7:53 PM, Leon wrote:
>> "Larry W"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>> Josepi<[email protected]> wrote:
>>> <...snipped...>
>>>> You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and loose,
>>>> or don't play the game.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm wondering, what is the difference between the 1st& 2nd choice there?
>>
>> You see the point! Voting for either is a loosing proposition if you don't
>> like either candidate.
>>
>
>Which is precisely why the ballot should have "None Of The Above" as a
>choice.

Actually, I'm kind of liking the loose and loosing proposition part more
and more...


--
When the game is over, the pawn and the king are returned to the same box.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

On Sat, 27 Nov 2010 05:57:03 -0800, Larry Jaques wrote:

> I'm with you, Mike. I don't think there's a politician allive who had
> the intelligence, foresight, determination, call of duty, self-
> lessness, or moral ethics of our forefathers. And, unfortunately, I
> don't expect to ever see that from a politician in my lifetime.

There's something in what you say, but remember that politicians back
then didn't have mass media and modern marketing techniques. Who knows
how they would have behaved with those tools.

And some of our history is legend. All countries have them and they may
or may not have much of a basis in fact. For example, Washington may not
have wanted to be king, but he supported Adams who wrote the quote below.
And moral ethics? Check out Ben Franklin in France :-). Always remember
that the winners write the history books.

“Democracy... while it lasts is more bloody than either [aristocracy or
monarchy]. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes,
exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not
commit suicide.” John Adams





--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Sat, 27 Nov 2010 06:05:04 -0500, J. Clarke wrote:

> I'd like to see "shoot 'em all" on the ballot as an option. Possibly
> "horsewhip 'em all" as well. Be interesting to see what that did for
> voter turnout.

I'd settle for "none of the above".

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On 11/27/2010 8:32 PM, Robatoy wrote:
> On Nov 27, 9:12 pm, "Lew Hodgett"<[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Robatoy" wrote:
>>> Do try to keep things in context. People bitch about government and
>>
>> voting...so how do these assholes/losers get elected?
>> -------------------------------
>> Just bitching doesn't get much done.
>>
>> I don't agree with most of the "Tea Party" agenda; however, they
>> represent a group that is unhappy with things as they are, and are
>> doing something about it.
>>
>> We need more of that type of involvement, IMHO.
>>
>> Lew
>
> Oh, I agree. More involvement is a good thing. but there are people
> who carry the banner of "VOTE!! CHANGE!!"...and all *I* want to know
> who has been voting these losers into power all along?
>
> ..nothing personal, you understand..

That's twice in the same thread you've said "losers" instead of "loosers". I'm
impressed. :-)

--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

"Robatoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Nov 27, 7:45 pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Robatoy" wrote:
> > So.... who has been electing this last batch of assholes?
>
> --------------------------
> Talk about teeing up a puff ball............
>
> Lew

Do try to keep things in context. People bitch about government and
voting...so how do these assholes/losers get elected?

-------------------------------------------------------

Some other Moron from somewhere else votes for them! :()


--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...

"Robatoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:47115665-8116-46ec-b255-60a7ca9f6031@l32g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 27, 9:12 pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Robatoy" wrote:
> > Do try to keep things in context. People bitch about government and
>
> voting...so how do these assholes/losers get elected?
> -------------------------------
> Just bitching doesn't get much done.
>
> I don't agree with most of the "Tea Party" agenda; however, they
> represent a group that is unhappy with things as they are, and are
> doing something about it.
>
> We need more of that type of involvement, IMHO.
>
> Lew

Oh, I agree. More involvement is a good thing. but there are people
who carry the banner of "VOTE!! CHANGE!!"...and all *I* want to know
who has been voting these losers into power all along?

..nothing personal, you understand..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The last Bozo elected campaigned on nothing but Hope and Change. We're still
hoping we can undo the few changes ...

--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...

"Larry Jaques" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 23:09:27 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> A big problem with the current system is that nobody alive today had
>>> any real say in its creation, we inherited it and nobody ever asked
>>> us if we were cool with continuing it.
>>
>>I'm not sure that defines it as a problem.
>
> I'm with you, Mike. I don't think there's a politician allive who had
> the intelligence, foresight, determination, call of duty, self-
> lessness, or moral ethics of our forefathers. And, unfortunately, I
> don't expect to ever see that from a politician in my lifetime.
>


Excuse me! Every damn one of them was in it for the money! Do you
disremember what started it?

--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...

"DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> "Han" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>
>> The first time I voted in Holland after coming of age, so to speak, it
>> was also compulsory. Maybe we should get a $25 tax credit for voting,
>> but unfortunately that doesn't guarantee candidates that you wold want to
>> vote for.
>
>
> How about they add $500 to your taxes, and you only get it refunded if you
> attach your voting receipt to your tax return.


If someone needs financial incentive, they shouldn't be voting to begin
with.

--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...

"DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> "Leon" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>> Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is better
>> than not voting at all?
>
> Yes, because it's better than the greater of two evils being elected.
>
>> You have 3 choices, play the game you cannot win, play the game and
>> loose, or don't play the game.
>
> Actually that's only two choices, as one and two have the same outcome.
> And you're assuming that elections never have positive outcomes, while at
> the very least some elections prevent something even worse from happening.
>
>> IMHO voting for some you you don't believe in sends the wrong message.
>
> Not voting sends a worse message, it tells politicians people don't care
> what happens and so the politicians can do as they please.
>
>>> IMHO, if you don't vote, don't bitch should apply.
>
>> I think just the opposite, you vote, you don't bitch. Goes with the
>> adage, you made your bed, now lay in it.
>
> How about the best of both worlds, we all vote and we all bitch.
>
>


Human nature says everyone will bitch about anything and everything whether
or not they are asked to vote on it.

--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...

>Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.

The actual quote reads: "The wheels of the Gods grind slowly, but they
grind exceedingly fine".

Good adaptation though.

-Zz

I much prefer the "tight" ones.


"Larry W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Actually, I'm kind of liking the loose and loosing proposition part more
and more...


--
When the game is over, the pawn and the king are returned to the same box.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Who, do you propose, would fill his place?

Simple answer, the person that is doing all the work now. The people that
are actually making things work despite the elected officials desires.
Except now he makes the decisions of what needs to be done instead of
carrying out orders form a politician. He does so until some one is
elected.

I don't have all the answers and there are probably better solutions but the
system is compromised and will never work for the people as a whole.

On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:23:04 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court
>of law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>
>Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.

http://americaswatchtower.com/2010/07/29/charlie-rangel-indicted-for-13-ethics-violations/
http://nlpc.org/stories/2010/08/02/rep-maxine-waters-charged-ethics-violations-house-committee
And that's only two -recent- democrats.

It would appear that -all- our elected officials all wanton criminals,
wouldn't it?

--
Experience is a good teacher, but she send in terrific bills.
-- Minna Thomas Antrim

"Han" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Lobby Dosser" <[email protected]> wrote in news:icnaua$7u5$1
> @news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> And 50+% of the total number of voters to win. None of this 47 to 33 and
>> some leftovers and 47 wins.
>
> How about needing more than 1/3 of the total number of eligible voters?
>
> --
> Best regards
> Han
> email address is invalid


Totally agree but I would like to see 50%. Seems the candidates don't
recognise the fact that no shows are actually saying "no" to all involved.
But then the politicians don't want that fact to come out in the open.

On Sat, 27 Nov 2010 18:18:03 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sat, 27 Nov 2010 06:05:04 -0500, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> I'd like to see "shoot 'em all" on the ballot as an option. Possibly
>> "horsewhip 'em all" as well. Be interesting to see what that did for
>> voter turnout.

It would probably net the closest to 100% turnout in history.
I -like- it! <evil grinne>


>I'd settle for "none of the above".

How about electing 1 person from each 1,000 seen in Google Earth's
photos? I'm sure anyone, from a homeless beggar on the streets to a
CEO of a corporation, could do better than the fecal material we have
representing us in CONgress today, though today is better than last
month.

--
Education should provide the tools for a widening and deepening
of life, for increased appreciation of all one sees or experiences.
It should equip a person to live life well, to understand what is
happening around him, for to live life well one must live life with
awareness. -- Louis L'Amour

The change will only be a loonie or toonie.

"FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
I voted for Rob Ford for Mayor, and little brother Doug for counselor.
They are both honest and good fiscal conservatives with real business
experience, not to mention real nice people.
Not sure where you are in Canada, but there is change coming here, I'll
bet my boots on it.


september.org...
On 11/26/10 1:39 PM, Josepi wrote:
> Silly argument.
>
> OK next time I will flip a coin and vote for the horse's ass that it falls
> on.
>
> I can still bitch because the idiot system allows the BS to still happen
> no
> matter who I vote for. I played their game and voted religiously (there's
> the problem) for 35 years and it got me jerks that I voted for and jerks
> that I opposed. They have no responsibilty once they get voted in and they
> have no knowledge of affairs (except Clinton) before they get voted in.
>

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 12:11:00 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>><[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> Who, do you propose, would fill his place?
>>
>>Simple answer, the person that is doing all the work now. The people that
>>are actually making things work despite the elected officials desires.
>>Except now he makes the decisions of what needs to be done instead of
>>carrying out orders form a politician. He does so until some one is
>>elected.
>
> So you want a lifetime bureaucrat making the laws as well as enforcing
> them?
> Silly.

You might think so until you realize the systems that actually work and
please the most people are actually run that way.

>
>>I don't have all the answers and there are probably better solutions but
>>the
>>system is compromised and will never work for the people as a whole.
>
> The system of voting is not what's broken.
>
> ...and forcing people to do *anything* is NOT a solution. If they're too
> lazy
> to vote, personally, I don't want them to. ...and "early voting" just
> simplifies fraud.

Too lazy to vote. LOL... What effort does it take that you would think it
is hard? I am simply not going to vote for the sake of voting.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 10:05:50 -0700, "Max" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Tom "The Hammer" Delay was finally found guilty today in a Texas court of
>> law today of money laundering ($190K) committed in 2002.
>>
>> Sometimes the wheels of justice grind slow, but they also grind fine.
>>
>Texas has produced it's share of despicable politicians but Delay wins the
>prize.

The idiot gets an "A" in Irony with the last sentence in this most
quotable of statements:

"This is an abuse of power. It's a miscarriage of justice, and I still
maintain that I am innocent. The criminalization of politics
undermines our very system and I'm very disappointed in the outcome."

Gall, wot?

--
Experience is a good teacher, but she send in terrific bills.
-- Minna Thomas Antrim

"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..

.
> Do you actually think that voting for the lessor of two evils is better
> than not voting at all?


Yes. It's called damage control.
Say you have a fire in your kitchen. Do you:
A) Say "oh well, the damage is done so there is no need to put it out".
B) Put the fire out knowing that the kitchen has sustained damage but at
least you can save the rest of the house.
There is a difference between having a reason and having and excuse. There
are many reasons for not voting but very few excuses.
If you can honestly say that you are incapable of making an informed,
intelligent decision, that is an excuse. "I don't like either of them" is a
reason, not an excuse.

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:08:50 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 12:11:00 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>> Who, do you propose, would fill his place?
>>>
>>>Simple answer, the person that is doing all the work now. The people that
>>>are actually making things work despite the elected officials desires.
>>>Except now he makes the decisions of what needs to be done instead of
>>>carrying out orders form a politician. He does so until some one is
>>>elected.
>>
>> So you want a lifetime bureaucrat making the laws as well as enforcing
>> them?
>> Silly.
>
>You might think so until you realize the systems that actually work and
>please the most people are actually run that way.

Name one.

>>>I don't have all the answers and there are probably better solutions but
>>>the
>>>system is compromised and will never work for the people as a whole.
>>
>> The system of voting is not what's broken.
>>
>> ...and forcing people to do *anything* is NOT a solution. If they're too
>> lazy
>> to vote, personally, I don't want them to. ...and "early voting" just
>> simplifies fraud.
>
>Too lazy to vote. LOL... What effort does it take that you would think it
>is hard? I am simply not going to vote for the sake of voting.

Voting isn't hard but plenty can't be bothered. KNOWING who to vote for is a
lot harder. If the lazy bums can't be bothered to vote they're certainly not
going to bother to figure out who to vote for. That's exactly how we get
government by sound bite. It's why politicians promise "free" stuff. ...and
you want more of it.

The change will only be a loonie or toonie.

"FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
I voted for Rob Ford for Mayor, and little brother Doug for counselor.
They are both honest and good fiscal conservatives with real business
experience, not to mention real nice people.
Not sure where you are in Canada, but there is change coming here, I'll
bet my boots on it.


september.org...
On 11/26/10 1:39 PM, Josepi wrote:
> Silly argument.
>
> OK next time I will flip a coin and vote for the horse's ass that it falls
> on.
>
> I can still bitch because the idiot system allows the BS to still happen
> no
> matter who I vote for. I played their game and voted religiously (there's
> the problem) for 35 years and it got me jerks that I voted for and jerks
> that I opposed. They have no responsibilty once they get voted in and they
> have no knowledge of affairs (except Clinton) before they get voted in.
>