OT-Bill Clinton

I loved the line in an article I read. It showed that Clinton reputation is
alive and kicking.

It said, New York Post declared, "Bubba gets the chicks."

The other line I heard was, Slick Willie wasn't going to pass up the
oppoertunity to save two asian chicks.

My concern is that this looks an awful like responding to state sponsored
terrorism. And we have always had the policy of not negotiating with
terrorists. Wanna bet that there are some terrorists getting some ideas
about this?

I think he is just on his game so he has shed some pounds so he can
play whilst Hillary is busy galvanting around the globe.

Also, I can just here his internal dialog on this "journalist" issue.
"Hey, why leave two hot looking asian chicks all locked up in jail. I
bet I can go get them out and maybe get a little sumtin in exchange."

Polictical comment: I guess the Obama administration didn't have
anybody up to the job.

On Aug 4, 1:27=A0pm, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
> I just saw a couple of news article regarding Bill Clinton's role in
> getting the US journalists released from N. Korea (apparently he was
> successful).
>
> Is it just me or has he aged considerably during the past several
> months? =A0I thought he looked rather thin and gaunt.
>
> RonB

Ahh, the ol' 2-for-1 deal. Just like when Bill was pres we got Hillary
for free, now Bill comes as part of the package.

Honestly, I had been surprised by Hillary during the campaign and
thought maybe she had some chops. I also thought maybe she would shine
in this current position. Unlike the do-nothing type job one has in
the Senate which doesn't really show off ones weakness, in this
current position she ain't gettin it done and it shows; and now she
has to call in Billy to close the deal. Weak. I have the greatest
respect for Bill (as a politician) but Hillary just lost a few notches
in my ranking.

On Aug 4, 2:58=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Aug 4, 4:44=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I think he is just on his game so he has shed some pounds so he can
> > play whilst Hillary is busy galvanting around the globe.
>
> > Also, I can just here his internal dialog on this "journalist" issue.
> > "Hey, why leave two hot looking asian chicks all locked up in jail. I
> > bet I can go get them out and maybe get a little sumtin in exchange."
>
> > Polictical comment: I guess the Obama administration didn't have
> > anybody up to the job.
>
> > On Aug 4, 1:27=A0pm, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I just saw a couple of news article regarding Bill Clinton's role in
> > > getting the US journalists released from N. Korea (apparently he was
> > > successful).
>
> > > Is it just me or has he aged considerably during the past several
> > > months? =A0I thought he looked rather thin and gaunt.
>
> > > RonB
>
> They did: Bill Clinton.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

On Aug 4, 4:44=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think he is just on his game so he has shed some pounds so he can
> play whilst Hillary is busy galvanting around the globe.
>
> Also, I can just here his internal dialog on this "journalist" issue.
> "Hey, why leave two hot looking asian chicks all locked up in jail. I
> bet I can go get them out and maybe get a little sumtin in exchange."
>
> Polictical comment: I guess the Obama administration didn't have
> anybody up to the job.
>
> On Aug 4, 1:27=A0pm, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I just saw a couple of news article regarding Bill Clinton's role in
> > getting the US journalists released from N. Korea (apparently he was
> > successful).
>
> > Is it just me or has he aged considerably during the past several
> > months? =A0I thought he looked rather thin and gaunt.
>
> > RonB

They did: Bill Clinton.

On Aug 5, 4:09=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think calling someone a "white robed fig sucker" is not in any way
> recognizing the bigotry of others. It is just a racist slur, at best.

Hardly.

> I don't dispute that their backwards thinking in terms of basic human
> rights, specifically as it relates to women is diplorable, but that
> doesn't give anyone a freedom to degrade them.

Well well,well. Didn't we just swallow a whole box full of Political
Correctness Cereal.
Look, if you want to talk shop with a coal miner, you send in a coal
miner, not a seamstress.
I have some knowledge how some of these off-the-wall zealots think.
They get the same respect from me as I get from them...or what my wife
would get from them. I am getting sick and tired of our side reaching
out our hand just to have it slapped over and over again.
The City Of Toronto is full of people who insist we change to be
tolerant of them but won't learn the language of the country they
chose over theirs. Same with your immigrants from Mexico. It is
courtesy to communicate at the level of your host. Sending in Hillary
to Saudi Arabia precludes her from having any sort of standing
regardless HOW much *I* believe women are equal to any of us. They
don't. Period.
Stop assuming that your sense of women's rights bears any weight in
Saudi Arabia. It doesn't. To call them white-robed fig-suckers is no
different than my being called a Woodboot or Windmill mechanic.
There's richness in ethnicity.
Unfortunately, there have been too many tofu-sucking-Birkenstock-Volvo
driving-macramay assholes who have tried to cloud the diversity by
being weak-assed, spineless legislating morons trying to force Utopia
down our throats.

So put down that pork sandwich because you are offending somebody
somewhere!

And HOW is calling somebody a white-robed fig-sucker degrading? Huh?
Huh? You blue-jean wearing hamburger muncher, you!

Don't get me started.
>
> Also, I think you are very backwards to think we shouldn't put a women
> in any position simply because she is a woman.

That is BULLSHIT! A woman deserves all the rights in this
society....*T*H*I*S* society. You see, it does not matter what I think
about women's rights... it's the other side of the bargaining table
that has a problem with women. Not me. Get it?

> We know that their
> feelings on this are wrong. Even better to put it in their face and
> show the proper respect to any intelligent human by picking whoever is
> best for a job regardless of gender.

Good luck with that.
>
> You need to join the 21st century and stop thinking like those 12
> century idealogs.

Really??

He has a heart?!!!

On Aug 4, 3:11=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "RonB" wrote:
> >I just saw a couple of news article regarding Bill Clinton's role in
> > getting the US journalists released from N. Korea (apparently he was
> > successful).
>
> > Is it just me or has he aged considerably during the past several
> > months? =A0I thought he looked rather thin and gaunt.
>
> After his heart surgery, he has been very public about changes he has
> made to his diet as well as the resulting weight loss.
>
> Lew

[email protected] wrote:
> What a PC asshole you are. Where do you teach? Harvard? Yale?
> Berkley? Or are you in the Obama administration?
> If you are offended by "fig suckers" how about sand niggers or rag
> heads, camel humpers, slayers of infidels (jews, christians,
> buddhists, et al). Saudis do not say bad things about Americans. They
> simply crash planes into our iconic buildings. Go fuck yourself,
> shithead.
>

Please don't use profanity when replying to a progressive; you will not only
be fighting on their grounds, but will be hopelessly outclassed.

No parallels? Now you are starting to sound like a communist, refuting
the truth in the face of it hoping no one will notice.

What were we talking about... uhh, Bill being sent to Korea instead of
Hillary. So how on fucking earth does your coal miner\seamstress
anaology not apply. Pretty transparent.

Then another common tactic of those without a valid case, take some
small insignificant tangential point and blow it up into some
seemingly irrifutable fact of misstatment of you opponent.

The surrogate mother thing is ridiculous. And then in your firemen
statement you say it right there, you don't think there are a "lot" of
women who could carry your fat ass and then also state the same might
be true for men. Exactly! It doesn't matter if you are a woman or a
man, it matters if you can do the job. Hillary can stand up to those
bastards and say you deal with me or you don't deal at all. Fuck them
if they don't want to hear it from a woman.

By the way, from your clear condesention to women, I doubt there woudl
be many who would want to save you from a fire.

P.S. if you need another tangential issue maybe you can attack my
spelling or punctuation.

On Aug 5, 5:02=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Aug 5, 7:51=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Well... it was more than hinted at, it was fairly explicit. You used
> > the analogy of the coal miner and the seamstress. Bill Clinton and the
> > Koreans being the the coal miners and Hillary the seamstress. What
> > difference is there other than Bill is a man and Hillary a woman? So
> > your analogy says don't send a woman to do a man's job. So no,
> > admittediy not every woman is a seamstress and you didn't say so but
> > you clearly indicate there are jobs suited to a woman and jobs suited
> > to a man. Pretty clear. Pretty sexist.
>
> Man, you got some serious issues.
> I pointed out via analogy that when the party at the other side of the
> negotiating table is hostile to women, don't send one if you want to
> make any headway. No parallels between Bill and Coal miners, NO
> parallels between seamstresses and Hillary... where on earth do you
> dream up shit like that?
>
> Now, just for shits and giggles, are you suggesting that all jobs that
> men can do can be done by women and visa versa?
> I would concede on 99% of them, but..... I don't think I could pass as
> a surrogate mother.... nor do I think that there are a lot of women
> who could carry me down a fireman's ladder.... in fact few men
> could....
>
> But you're not really THAT stupid are you?
>
> > If the logic of my
> > interpretation is flawed, in your opinion, then please explain.
>
> > Piss on that.
>
> Just did.

Complicated? No not so much. You're pretty simplistic really.

No one, at least not I, have at all justified any of the view points
or actions of the musilm fundamentalists. I am simply trying to get
you to see that your hate driven viewpoint of them and your
capitualitation to their viewpoint regarding women by letting their
disregard for women drive your decision on who we shlould put into
positions of authority in our official relationships with them are
exactly the same type of blind "ism" that drives them.

I think we should only put women in such positions just to spite them.
If they want our money, they can deal with our women and I wish them
luck.

On Aug 5, 3:47=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Aug 5, 6:08=A0pm, Morris Dovey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Robatoy wrote:
> > > A great deal of her effectiveness is going to waste because she is
> > > female. Those white-robed fig-suckers in Saudi aren't going to pay
> > > attention to anything she says and that holds true in many parts of
> > > the world. " Don't need no lip from no biatch!"
>
> > Hmm. I don't think your stereotyping is particularly productive (nor
> > accurate)
>
> Then somebody explain to me that when my BIL worked in Saudi, my
> sister did not get a visa to visit him in case she (and many others)
> shed some of her western cooties on the Saudi women. Yet Hillary is
> supposed to be able to sit down and talk turkey about US interests
> with that same crowd? That would make them what? Hypocrites?
> I guess it is okay for those Middle Eastern nations to slurp up
> western dollars in exchange for oil even though some of that oil goes
> to Jimmy Swaggart powering his car on his way to a hooker or some
> factory using oil-based plastics to make dildos.
> Makes sense to me. Let's defend the culture of Africa's cannibals
> while we are at it. Female circumcision is cool because THEY think it
> is cool.
>
> There is a certain type of t-shirt which is referred to as a 'wife-
> beater'. That disgusts me.
> Very close friends of Ang and I work in the fields of domestic
> violence and fight the denigration of women.
> So, for me to label somebody a white-robed fig sucker is somehow
> offensive but to set a woman on fire for being in a car with somebody
> who isn't her husband isn't?
>
> That whole culture that treats their camels or yaks with more respect
> than their women disgusts me.
> But not enough to justify the senseless killing that goes on with the
> Palestinians.
> Complicated, eh?

On Aug 5, 6:08=A0pm, Morris Dovey <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > A great deal of her effectiveness is going to waste because she is
> > female. Those white-robed fig-suckers in Saudi aren't going to pay
> > attention to anything she says and that holds true in many parts of
> > the world. " Don't need no lip from no biatch!"
>
> Hmm. I don't think your stereotyping is particularly productive (nor
> accurate)

Then somebody explain to me that when my BIL worked in Saudi, my
sister did not get a visa to visit him in case she (and many others)
shed some of her western cooties on the Saudi women. Yet Hillary is
supposed to be able to sit down and talk turkey about US interests
with that same crowd? That would make them what? Hypocrites?
I guess it is okay for those Middle Eastern nations to slurp up
western dollars in exchange for oil even though some of that oil goes
to Jimmy Swaggart powering his car on his way to a hooker or some
factory using oil-based plastics to make dildos.
Makes sense to me. Let's defend the culture of Africa's cannibals
while we are at it. Female circumcision is cool because THEY think it
is cool.

There is a certain type of t-shirt which is referred to as a 'wife-
beater'. That disgusts me.
Very close friends of Ang and I work in the fields of domestic
violence and fight the denigration of women.
So, for me to label somebody a white-robed fig sucker is somehow
offensive but to set a woman on fire for being in a car with somebody
who isn't her husband isn't?

That whole culture that treats their camels or yaks with more respect
than their women disgusts me.
But not enough to justify the senseless killing that goes on with the
Palestinians.
Complicated, eh?

On Aug 5, 8:01=A0pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Scott Lurndal wrote:
> > "HeyBub" <[email protected]> writes:
> >> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> >>> I really shouldn't reply here on this subject and just let it go
> >>> but I don't want anyone to think I could support such language.
> >>> Frankly I find the comment about the Saudis, for whom I have no
> >>> great love in general, quite distasteful and somewhat bigoted. I
> >>> realize there are some Saudis who might say similar or worse things
> >>> about Americans or maybe even just westerners in general, but you
> >>> sir have just proven yourself to be the same.
>
> >> It's not bigotry to recognize bigotry in others. The facts are that
> >> the Saudis regard women as something significantly less than men.
> >> Right or wrong, that is a fact.
>
> > How about this then:
>
> > =A0The facts are that the Republicans regard Democrats as something
> > =A0significantly less than Republicans.
>
> > is that also bigotry? =A0If not, why?
>
> Sure. As I said, right or wrong, it is a fact. Now "bigotry" does not mea=
n
> denial of facts; it means treating some others with hatred and intoleranc=
e.
> This is sometimes a Good Thing(TM), as in the dirty Japs of WW2.
>
> Be that as it may, it is still counterproductive to send an emissary to
> negotiate when you know the other party will treat your representative wi=
th
> barely concealed contempt and disdain, take nothing they say seriously, a=
nd
> view your surrogate as an insult to them, their religion, and their way o=
f
> life.
>
> It may even be that the reason the Iranians won't negotiate is that they
> simply cannot negotiate with a woman! Doing so would be against their
> religion and 1500 years of tradition. That leaves them only one choice:
> continue to build a nuclear weapon.
>
> So the Iranians work towards the bomb, Israel attacks, Iran counter-attac=
ks,
> maybe millions die, and it's all the fault of Bush and Obama for having
> Secretaries of State who squat to pee.
>
> Like the Trojans and the Greeks, another war over (a couple of) women. At
> least this war would have a reason better than some.

Somebody slap me. I am in complete agreement with what you just said.

On Aug 4, 7:12=A0pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> > I think he is just on his game so he has shed some pounds so he can
> > play whilst Hillary is busy galvanting around the globe.
>
> > Also, I can just here his internal dialog on this "journalist" issue.
> > "Hey, why leave two hot looking asian chicks all locked up in jail. I
> > bet I can go get them out and maybe get a little sumtin in exchange."
>
> > Polictical comment: I guess the Obama administration didn't have
> > anybody up to the job.
>
> There's always Jimmy Carter.
>
> And the journalists aren't free yet (and may never be).
>
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/675806

I know you wanted him to fail, like your buddy Rush wanted all libs to
fail......but better luck next time, eh?

"HeyBub" <[email protected]> writes:
>SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>> I really shouldn't reply here on this subject and just let it go but I
>> don't want anyone to think I could support such language. Frankly I
>> find the comment about the Saudis, for whom I have no great love in
>> general, quite distasteful and somewhat bigoted. I realize there are
>> some Saudis who might say similar or worse things about Americans or
>> maybe even just westerners in general, but you sir have just proven
>> yourself to be the same.
>>
>
>It's not bigotry to recognize bigotry in others. The facts are that the
>Saudis regard women as something significantly less than men. Right or
>wrong, that is a fact.

How about this then:

The facts are that the Republicans regard Democrats as something
significantly less than Republicans.

is that also bigotry? If not, why?

s

"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> writes:
>I loved the line in an article I read. It showed that Clinton reputation is
>alive and kicking.
>
>It said, New York Post declared, "Bubba gets the chicks."
>
>The other line I heard was, Slick Willie wasn't going to pass up the
>oppoertunity to save two asian chicks.
>
>My concern is that this looks an awful like responding to state sponsored
>terrorism.

I'm not sure one would class North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism.

Which terrorists are being sponsored?

Certainly NK is in violation of several arms-control regimes, particularly
with respect to Scud-derivitive missile and nuclear technology[*]. But I'm not aware
of NK sponsoring terrorism, per se.

In anycase, dislike it as we might, KJI _is_ the government of North
Korea and one should always attempt to talk with governments, even
Iran. Dictating to a foreign government has never worked, Cuba has
shown the futility of embargo as a tool for regime change and Bush
Jr. has shown the futility of forced regime change.

scott

[*] Most of which came from AQ Khan and Pakistan, to whom we give
foreign aid.

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

>
> I was so frustrated over the whole sorry affair that, when I got off duty,
> I went home and beat my wife.
>
>

You didn't kick the dog first?

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

"RonB" wrote:

>I just saw a couple of news article regarding Bill Clinton's role in
> getting the US journalists released from N. Korea (apparently he was
> successful).
>
> Is it just me or has he aged considerably during the past several
> months? I thought he looked rather thin and gaunt.


After his heart surgery, he has been very public about changes he has
made to his diet as well as the resulting weight loss.

Lew

On Aug 4, 9:58=A0pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Aug 4, 7:12 pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Rush doesn't want all libs to fail. You should listen to his program and =
you
> wouldn't have such wrong ideas. .

The right has lost its way. They're just bitter, vindictive and in
Rush's case, insane.
I have listened to Rush...I think the Oxycontin has fried him beyond
repair.

I really shouldn't reply here on this subject and just let it go but I
don't want anyone to think I could support such language. Frankly I
find the comment about the Saudis, for whom I have no great love in
general, quite distasteful and somewhat bigoted. I realize there are
some Saudis who might say similar or worse things about Americans or
maybe even just westerners in general, but you sir have just proven
yourself to be the same.

On Aug 4, 3:54=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Aug 4, 6:11=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Ahh, the ol' 2-for-1 deal. Just like when Bill was pres we got Hillary
> > for free, now Bill comes as part of the package.
>
> > Honestly, I had been surprised by Hillary during the campaign and
> > thought maybe she had some chops. I also thought maybe she would shine
> > in this current position. Unlike the do-nothing type job one has in
> > the Senate which doesn't really show off ones weakness, in this
> > current position she ain't gettin it done and it shows; and now she
> > has to call in Billy to close the deal. Weak. I have the greatest
> > respect for Bill (as a politician) but Hillary just lost a few notches
> > in my ranking.
>
> > On Aug 4, 2:58=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 4, 4:44=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > I think he is just on his game so he has shed some pounds so he can
> > > > play whilst Hillary is busy galvanting around the globe.
>
> > > > Also, I can just here his internal dialog on this "journalist" issu=
e.
> > > > "Hey, why leave two hot looking asian chicks all locked up in jail.=
I
> > > > bet I can go get them out and maybe get a little sumtin in exchange=
."
>
> > > > Polictical comment: I guess the Obama administration didn't have
> > > > anybody up to the job.
>
> > > > On Aug 4, 1:27=A0pm, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > I just saw a couple of news article regarding Bill Clinton's role=
in
> > > > > getting the US journalists released from N. Korea (apparently he =
was
> > > > > successful).
>
> > > > > Is it just me or has he aged considerably during the past several
> > > > > months? =A0I thought he looked rather thin and gaunt.
>
> > > > > RonB
>
> > > They did: Bill Clinton.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> A great deal of her effectiveness is going to waste because she is
> female. Those white-robed fig-suckers in Saudi aren't going to pay
> attention to anything she says and that holds true in many parts of
> the world. " Don't need no lip from no biatch!"
>
> I don't like Bill and never have, but he is good at certain things. I
> wonder what he was authorized to promise that Kim Jong Il.- Hide quoted t=
ext -
>
> - Show quoted text -

On Aug 5, 7:51=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well... it was more than hinted at, it was fairly explicit. You used
> the analogy of the coal miner and the seamstress. Bill Clinton and the
> Koreans being the the coal miners and Hillary the seamstress. What
> difference is there other than Bill is a man and Hillary a woman? So
> your analogy says don't send a woman to do a man's job. So no,
> admittediy not every woman is a seamstress and you didn't say so but
> you clearly indicate there are jobs suited to a woman and jobs suited
> to a man. Pretty clear. Pretty sexist.

Man, you got some serious issues.
I pointed out via analogy that when the party at the other side of the
negotiating table is hostile to women, don't send one if you want to
make any headway. No parallels between Bill and Coal miners, NO
parallels between seamstresses and Hillary... where on earth do you
dream up shit like that?

Now, just for shits and giggles, are you suggesting that all jobs that
men can do can be done by women and visa versa?
I would concede on 99% of them, but..... I don't think I could pass as
a surrogate mother.... nor do I think that there are a lot of women
who could carry me down a fireman's ladder.... in fact few men
could....

But you're not really THAT stupid are you?

> If the logic of my
> interpretation is flawed, in your opinion, then please explain.
>
> Piss on that.
>
Just did.

On Aug 5, 8:33=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> No parallels? Now you are starting to sound like a communist, refuting
> the truth in the face of it hoping no one will notice.
>
> What were we talking about... uhh, Bill being sent to Korea instead of
> Hillary. So how on fucking earth does your coal miner\seamstress
> anaology not apply. Pretty transparent.
>
> Then another common tactic of those without a valid case, take some
> small insignificant tangential point and blow it up into some
> seemingly irrifutable fact of misstatment of you opponent.
>
> The surrogate mother thing is ridiculous. And then in your firemen
> statement you say it right there, you don't think there are a "lot" of
> women who could carry your fat ass and then also state the same might
> be true for men. Exactly! It doesn't matter if you are a woman or a
> man, it matters if you can do the job. Hillary can stand up to those
> bastards and say you deal with me or you don't deal at all. Fuck them
> if they don't want to hear it from a woman.
>
> By the way, from your clear condesention to women, I doubt there woudl
> be many who would want to save you from a fire.
>
> P.S. if you need another tangential issue maybe you can attack my
> spelling or punctuation.
>

Boys-o-boys.. you must be a librul..all that cussin'...

On Aug 5, 8:19=A0am, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Aug 4, 9:58 pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Robatoy wrote:
> >>> On Aug 4, 7:12 pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Rush doesn't want all libs to fail. You should listen to his program
> >> and you wouldn't have such wrong ideas. .
>
> > The right has lost its way. They're just bitter, vindictive and in
> > Rush's case, insane.
> > I have listened to Rush...I think the Oxycontin has fried him beyond
> > repair.
>
> Bitter? Yes. And clinging to guns or religiion and expressing an antipath=
y
> to those that are not like them.
>
> But that's normal.
>
> Check out "Jane's Law." Jane's Law states: "The party IN power is arrogan=
t;
> the party OUT of power is merely insane."

Well then, snuggle up to Jane, but please..PLEASE don't have any
children.

On Aug 5, 8:00=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Robatoy" wrote:
> > Same with your immigrants from Mexico. It is
>
> courtesy to communicate at the level of your host.
>
> I have always maintained that the price of admission is to learn the
> language.
>
> Expressed this idea to my auto mechanic, a man of Mexican extraction,
> indicating that there appears to be a lack of desire of the Mexican
> immigrants to learn our language.
>
> Mechanic responded, "Lew you have to understand that for the most
> part, these people have had almost no formal education of any kind and
> are barely literate in Spanish."
>
> Puts a whole different light on things.
>
> Lew

Fair enough. BUT... don't brow-beat me when *I* don't speak Spanish.
That's all I am saying.

Robatoy wrote:
> On Aug 4, 7:12 pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>>> I think he is just on his game so he has shed some pounds so he can
>>> play whilst Hillary is busy galvanting around the globe.
>>
>>> Also, I can just here his internal dialog on this "journalist"
>>> issue. "Hey, why leave two hot looking asian chicks all locked up
>>> in jail. I bet I can go get them out and maybe get a little sumtin
>>> in exchange."
>>
>>> Polictical comment: I guess the Obama administration didn't have
>>> anybody up to the job.
>>
>> There's always Jimmy Carter.
>>
>> And the journalists aren't free yet (and may never be).
>>
> http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/675806
>
> I know you wanted him to fail, like your buddy Rush wanted all libs to
> fail......but better luck next time, eh?

Rush doesn't want all libs to fail. You should listen to his program and you
wouldn't have such wrong ideas. The way I understand it, Rush wants most
liberal PROGRAMS to fail, not the liberals themselves.

Regarding the hostages, it's a little more complicated.

I wanted the ladies out, but I didn't want our government to grovel before a
tyrant. Now Bill Clinton is not the government, of course, but he IS the
spouse of the Secretary of State. In my mind, therefore, Clinton was an
exceedingly poor choice for the mission. Likewise Jimmy Carter or George
Bush would have also been poor choices. So who would I have encouraged to
go?

1. Soupy Sales
2. Dan Rather
3. Kathy Griffin
4. Willie Nelson or The Dixie Chicks
5. Duane Chapman ("Dog the Bounty Hunter")
6. R. Lee Ermey (Mail Call, Full Metal Jacket) *

If none were available, I could probably come up with some other
suggestions.

There's also an alternative. When faced with a similar situation, a
Republican president proclaimed: "America wants Pedicaris alive, or Raisuli
dead!"

And this same president said, a little later, "Gentlemen, nothing in this
world is certain - absolutely nothing. The fate of the nation will be
decided by the American people in November, and the fate of Morocco will be
decided tomorrow by me."

------------------
* Here's a story about Ermey:

A few years ago, Ermey appeard at the NRA convention in Houston. He was
signing autographs at the Glock booth as I eased up beside him and said:
"Lee, a legislator in Michigan has proposed a bill allowing an open season
on feral cats. I'm putting together a tape of celebrity cat-calls. Would you
be interested in saying 'Here, kitty-kitty' for the project?"

He turned his head, looked at me, and said: "That is the most fucked-up idea
I EVER heard!"

Oh well, I thought. Maybe Charlton Heston...

"Robatoy" wrote:

>Fair enough. BUT... don't brow-beat me when *I* don't speak Spanish.
That's all I am saying.

Ever since I escaped Mrs, Joss's Latin classes in high school, decided
trying to learn a foreign language was something I'd let others do.

That policy is still in force.

Lew

"Robatoy" wrote:

> Same with your immigrants from Mexico. It is
courtesy to communicate at the level of your host.

I have always maintained that the price of admission is to learn the
language.

Expressed this idea to my auto mechanic, a man of Mexican extraction,
indicating that there appears to be a lack of desire of the Mexican
immigrants to learn our language.

Mechanic responded, "Lew you have to understand that for the most
part, these people have had almost no formal education of any kind and
are barely literate in Spanish."

Puts a whole different light on things.

Lew

In article <14ff15ae-67ed-4647-b672-a4c5fbf29d68
@m3g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, [email protected] says...

> He has a heart?!!!

Clearly, or it wouldn't have needed surgery.

If they'd gone in and found none, think of the headlines.

"Scott Lurndal" wrote:

> How about this then:
>
> The facts are that the Republicans regard Democrats as something
> significantly less than Republicans.
>
> is that also bigotry? If not, why?

You simply consider the source and move on.

Lew

Robatoy wrote:
> On Aug 5, 8:19 am, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> On Aug 4, 9:58 pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Robatoy wrote:
>>>>> On Aug 4, 7:12 pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> Rush doesn't want all libs to fail. You should listen to his
>>>> program and you wouldn't have such wrong ideas. .
>>
>>> The right has lost its way. They're just bitter, vindictive and in
>>> Rush's case, insane.
>>> I have listened to Rush...I think the Oxycontin has fried him beyond
>>> repair.
>>
>> Bitter? Yes. And clinging to guns or religion and expressing an
>> antipathy to those that are not like them.
>>
>> But that's normal.
>>
>> Check out "Jane's Law." Jane's Law states: "The party IN power is
>> arrogant; the party OUT of power is merely insane."
>
> Well then, snuggle up to Jane, but please..PLEASE don't have any
> children.

Oh, we conservatives like kids. It's the progressives that are eating the
seed corn.

Study up on the "Roe Effect."

In 1982, there were 64,553* reported abortions in Florida. It's fair to say
that most of these abortions were not from conservative, pro-lifers. Come
2000, these aborted fetuses would have been voting for the first time. Some,
of course, would have moved away, been incarcerated, or been killed in
gang-related wars. Most would probably not vote, but those that did would
probably follow the inclinations of their parents.

All that said, due to abortions in 1982, there were probably 10,000 votes in
Florida the Democrats did not get.

Bush won Florida by 537 votes.

--------------------------
* http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/usa/ab-usa-FL.html

SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> I really shouldn't reply here on this subject and just let it go but I
> don't want anyone to think I could support such language. Frankly I
> find the comment about the Saudis, for whom I have no great love in
> general, quite distasteful and somewhat bigoted. I realize there are
> some Saudis who might say similar or worse things about Americans or
> maybe even just westerners in general, but you sir have just proven
> yourself to be the same.
>

It's not bigotry to recognize bigotry in others. The facts are that the
Saudis regard women as something significantly less than men. Right or
wrong, that is a fact. Likewise for many of the Saudi's co-religionists.

It is a huge mistake on the part of our country to have a female
representing us in that part of the world.

And I felt the same way about Condi Rice (and to a lesser extent about Colin
Powell).

As an aside, have you ever had a Middle-eastern fig? They're as big as an
apple - and quite tasty.

On Aug 5, 8:33=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Then another common tactic of those without a valid case, take some
> small insignificant tangential point and blow it up into some
> seemingly irrifutable fact of misstatment of you opponent.
>

You mean like your accusation that I called Hillary and all women
seamstress(ses)?

You know you are starting to look pretty silly, don't you?

On Aug 5, 12:29=A0pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Bush won Florida by 537 votes.
>

"Sure he did."
*pats HeyBub on the head*

Well... it was more than hinted at, it was fairly explicit. You used
the analogy of the coal miner and the seamstress. Bill Clinton and the
Koreans being the the coal miners and Hillary the seamstress. What
difference is there other than Bill is a man and Hillary a woman? So
your analogy says don't send a woman to do a man's job. So no,
admittediy not every woman is a seamstress and you didn't say so but
you clearly indicate there are jobs suited to a woman and jobs suited
to a man. Pretty clear. Pretty sexist. If the logic of my
interpretation is flawed, in your opinion, then please explain.

Piss on that.

On Aug 5, 3:55=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Aug 5, 6:48=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Oh I see, all women are seamstresses. What a sexist dolt.
>
> > =A0You ask "And HOW is calling somebody a white-robed fig-sucker
> > degrading?" Oh, I guess that was a term of endearment. Are you so
> > blind to your racist point of view that you can't see that? If you are
> > so sure it is so benign maybe you should go find a group of Saudi's
> > and say that to their face... as if you had the balls; any balls.
>
> > I honestly thought I would be the last person on the earth to defend
> > Hillary but she ain't no seamstress. I suppose she has as much
> > toughness as any of the other aholes that have held that post since
> > Kissenger. Dude, your view of women and anyone not exactly like the
> > all impressive you is pretty clear. Pretty pathetic. I hope you have
> > coward your wife into an appropriate position of submission.
>
> > On Aug 5, 2:46=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 5, 4:09=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > I think calling someone a "white robed fig sucker" is not in any wa=
y
> > > > recognizing the bigotry of others. It is just a racist slur, at bes=
t.
>
> > > Hardly.
>
> > > > I don't dispute that their backwards thinking in terms of basic hum=
an
> > > > rights, specifically as it relates to women is diplorable, but that
> > > > doesn't give anyone a freedom to degrade them.
>
> > > Well well,well. Didn't we just swallow a whole box full of Political
> > > Correctness Cereal.
> > > Look, if you want to talk shop with a coal miner, you send in a coal
> > > miner, not a seamstress.
> > > I have some knowledge how some of these off-the-wall zealots think.
> > > They get the same respect from me as I get from them...or what my wif=
e
> > > would get from them. I am getting sick and tired of our side reaching
> > > out our hand just to have it slapped over and over again.
> > > The City Of Toronto is full of people who insist we change to be
> > > tolerant of them but won't learn the language of the country they
> > > chose over theirs. Same with your immigrants from Mexico. It is
> > > courtesy to communicate at the level of your host. Sending in Hillary
> > > to Saudi Arabia precludes her from having any sort of standing
> > > regardless HOW much *I* believe women are equal to any of us. They
> > > don't. Period.
> > > Stop assuming that your sense of women's rights bears any weight in
> > > Saudi Arabia. It doesn't. To call them white-robed fig-suckers is no
> > > different than my being called a Woodboot or Windmill mechanic.
> > > There's richness in ethnicity.
> > > Unfortunately, there have been too many tofu-sucking-Birkenstock-Volv=
o
> > > driving-macramay assholes who have tried to cloud the diversity by
> > > being weak-assed, spineless legislating morons trying to force Utopia
> > > down our throats.
>
> > > So put down that pork sandwich because you are offending somebody
> > > somewhere!
>
> > > And HOW is calling somebody a white-robed fig-sucker degrading? Huh?
> > > Huh? You blue-jean wearing hamburger muncher, you!
>
> > > Don't get me started.
>
> > > > Also, I think you are very backwards to think we shouldn't put a wo=
men
> > > > in any position simply because she is a woman.
>
> > > That is BULLSHIT! A woman deserves all the rights in this
> > > society....*T*H*I*S* society. You see, it does not matter what I thin=
k
> > > about women's rights... it's the other side of the bargaining table
> > > that has a problem with women. Not me. Get it?
>
> > > > We know that their
> > > > feelings on this are wrong. Even better to put it in their face and
> > > > show the proper respect to any intelligent human by picking whoever=
is
> > > > best for a job regardless of gender.
>
> > > Good luck with that.
>
> > > > You need to join the 21st century and stop thinking like those 12
> > > > century idealogs.
>
> > > Really??
>
> Before I get into this pissing contest any further...point out to me
> where I said that all women are seamstresses... or that all men are
> coal miners. It is YOU, sir, who has a problem. (You know, reading
> stuff into things that aren't said, much less even hinted at?"- Hide quot=
ed text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Robatoy wrote:
> On Aug 4, 9:58 pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> On Aug 4, 7:12 pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Rush doesn't want all libs to fail. You should listen to his program
>> and you wouldn't have such wrong ideas. .
>
> The right has lost its way. They're just bitter, vindictive and in
> Rush's case, insane.
> I have listened to Rush...I think the Oxycontin has fried him beyond
> repair.

Bitter? Yes. And clinging to guns or religiion and expressing an antipathy
to those that are not like them.

But that's normal.

Check out "Jane's Law." Jane's Law states: "The party IN power is arrogant;
the party OUT of power is merely insane."

I think calling someone a "white robed fig sucker" is not in any way
recognizing the bigotry of others. It is just a racist slur, at best.
I don't dispute that their backwards thinking in terms of basic human
rights, specifically as it relates to women is diplorable, but that
doesn't give anyone a freedom to degrade them.

Also, I think you are very backwards to think we shouldn't put a women
in any position simply because she is a woman. We know that their
feelings on this are wrong. Even better to put it in their face and
show the proper respect to any intelligent human by picking whoever is
best for a job regardless of gender.

You need to join the 21st century and stop thinking like those 12
century idealogs.

Now what is it that male chauvinists suck on, hmmmm...

On Aug 5, 12:50=A0pm, "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote:
> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> > I really shouldn't reply here on this subject and just let it go but I
> > don't want anyone to think I could support such language. Frankly I
> > find the comment about the Saudis, for whom I have no great love in
> > general, quite distasteful and somewhat bigoted. I realize there are
> > some Saudis who might say similar or worse things about Americans or
> > maybe even just westerners in general, but you sir have just proven
> > yourself to be the same.
>
> It's not bigotry to recognize bigotry in others. The facts are that the
> Saudis regard women as something significantly less than men. Right or
> wrong, that is a fact. Likewise for many of the Saudi's co-religionists.
>
> It is a huge mistake on the part of our country to have a female
> representing us in that part of the world.
>
> And I felt the same way about Condi Rice (and to a lesser extent about Co=
lin
> Powell).
>
> As an aside, have you ever had a Middle-eastern fig? They're as big as an
> apple - and quite tasty.

Oh I see, all women are seamstresses. What a sexist dolt.

You ask "And HOW is calling somebody a white-robed fig-sucker
degrading?" Oh, I guess that was a term of endearment. Are you so
blind to your racist point of view that you can't see that? If you are
so sure it is so benign maybe you should go find a group of Saudi's
and say that to their face... as if you had the balls; any balls.

I honestly thought I would be the last person on the earth to defend
Hillary but she ain't no seamstress. I suppose she has as much
toughness as any of the other aholes that have held that post since
Kissenger. Dude, your view of women and anyone not exactly like the
all impressive you is pretty clear. Pretty pathetic. I hope you have
coward your wife into an appropriate position of submission.

On Aug 5, 2:46=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Aug 5, 4:09=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I think calling someone a "white robed fig sucker" is not in any way
> > recognizing the bigotry of others. It is just a racist slur, at best.
>
> Hardly.
>
> > I don't dispute that their backwards thinking in terms of basic human
> > rights, specifically as it relates to women is diplorable, but that
> > doesn't give anyone a freedom to degrade them.
>
> Well well,well. Didn't we just swallow a whole box full of Political
> Correctness Cereal.
> Look, if you want to talk shop with a coal miner, you send in a coal
> miner, not a seamstress.
> I have some knowledge how some of these off-the-wall zealots think.
> They get the same respect from me as I get from them...or what my wife
> would get from them. I am getting sick and tired of our side reaching
> out our hand just to have it slapped over and over again.
> The City Of Toronto is full of people who insist we change to be
> tolerant of them but won't learn the language of the country they
> chose over theirs. Same with your immigrants from Mexico. It is
> courtesy to communicate at the level of your host. Sending in Hillary
> to Saudi Arabia precludes her from having any sort of standing
> regardless HOW much *I* believe women are equal to any of us. They
> don't. Period.
> Stop assuming that your sense of women's rights bears any weight in
> Saudi Arabia. It doesn't. To call them white-robed fig-suckers is no
> different than my being called a Woodboot or Windmill mechanic.
> There's richness in ethnicity.
> Unfortunately, there have been too many tofu-sucking-Birkenstock-Volvo
> driving-macramay assholes who have tried to cloud the diversity by
> being weak-assed, spineless legislating morons trying to force Utopia
> down our throats.
>
> So put down that pork sandwich because you are offending somebody
> somewhere!
>
> And HOW is calling somebody a white-robed fig-sucker degrading? Huh?
> Huh? You blue-jean wearing hamburger muncher, you!
>
> Don't get me started.
>
>
>
> > Also, I think you are very backwards to think we shouldn't put a women
> > in any position simply because she is a woman.
>
> That is BULLSHIT! A woman deserves all the rights in this
> society....*T*H*I*S* society. You see, it does not matter what I think
> about women's rights... it's the other side of the bargaining table
> that has a problem with women. Not me. Get it?
>
> > We know that their
> > feelings on this are wrong. Even better to put it in their face and
> > show the proper respect to any intelligent human by picking whoever is
> > best for a job regardless of gender.
>
> Good luck with that.
>
>
>
> > You need to join the 21st century and stop thinking like those 12
> > century idealogs.
>
> Really??

On Aug 5, 6:48=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oh I see, all women are seamstresses. What a sexist dolt.
>
> =A0You ask "And HOW is calling somebody a white-robed fig-sucker
> degrading?" Oh, I guess that was a term of endearment. Are you so
> blind to your racist point of view that you can't see that? If you are
> so sure it is so benign maybe you should go find a group of Saudi's
> and say that to their face... as if you had the balls; any balls.
>
> I honestly thought I would be the last person on the earth to defend
> Hillary but she ain't no seamstress. I suppose she has as much
> toughness as any of the other aholes that have held that post since
> Kissenger. Dude, your view of women and anyone not exactly like the
> all impressive you is pretty clear. Pretty pathetic. I hope you have
> coward your wife into an appropriate position of submission.
>
> On Aug 5, 2:46=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 5, 4:09=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I think calling someone a "white robed fig sucker" is not in any way
> > > recognizing the bigotry of others. It is just a racist slur, at best.
>
> > Hardly.
>
> > > I don't dispute that their backwards thinking in terms of basic human
> > > rights, specifically as it relates to women is diplorable, but that
> > > doesn't give anyone a freedom to degrade them.
>
> > Well well,well. Didn't we just swallow a whole box full of Political
> > Correctness Cereal.
> > Look, if you want to talk shop with a coal miner, you send in a coal
> > miner, not a seamstress.
> > I have some knowledge how some of these off-the-wall zealots think.
> > They get the same respect from me as I get from them...or what my wife
> > would get from them. I am getting sick and tired of our side reaching
> > out our hand just to have it slapped over and over again.
> > The City Of Toronto is full of people who insist we change to be
> > tolerant of them but won't learn the language of the country they
> > chose over theirs. Same with your immigrants from Mexico. It is
> > courtesy to communicate at the level of your host. Sending in Hillary
> > to Saudi Arabia precludes her from having any sort of standing
> > regardless HOW much *I* believe women are equal to any of us. They
> > don't. Period.
> > Stop assuming that your sense of women's rights bears any weight in
> > Saudi Arabia. It doesn't. To call them white-robed fig-suckers is no
> > different than my being called a Woodboot or Windmill mechanic.
> > There's richness in ethnicity.
> > Unfortunately, there have been too many tofu-sucking-Birkenstock-Volvo
> > driving-macramay assholes who have tried to cloud the diversity by
> > being weak-assed, spineless legislating morons trying to force Utopia
> > down our throats.
>
> > So put down that pork sandwich because you are offending somebody
> > somewhere!
>
> > And HOW is calling somebody a white-robed fig-sucker degrading? Huh?
> > Huh? You blue-jean wearing hamburger muncher, you!
>
> > Don't get me started.
>
> > > Also, I think you are very backwards to think we shouldn't put a wome=
n
> > > in any position simply because she is a woman.
>
> > That is BULLSHIT! A woman deserves all the rights in this
> > society....*T*H*I*S* society. You see, it does not matter what I think
> > about women's rights... it's the other side of the bargaining table
> > that has a problem with women. Not me. Get it?
>
> > > We know that their
> > > feelings on this are wrong. Even better to put it in their face and
> > > show the proper respect to any intelligent human by picking whoever i=
s
> > > best for a job regardless of gender.
>
> > Good luck with that.
>
> > > You need to join the 21st century and stop thinking like those 12
> > > century idealogs.
>
> > Really??

Before I get into this pissing contest any further...point out to me
where I said that all women are seamstresses... or that all men are
coal miners. It is YOU, sir, who has a problem. (You know, reading
stuff into things that aren't said, much less even hinted at?"

Scott Lurndal wrote:
> "HeyBub" <[email protected]> writes:
>> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>>> I really shouldn't reply here on this subject and just let it go
>>> but I don't want anyone to think I could support such language.
>>> Frankly I find the comment about the Saudis, for whom I have no
>>> great love in general, quite distasteful and somewhat bigoted. I
>>> realize there are some Saudis who might say similar or worse things
>>> about Americans or maybe even just westerners in general, but you
>>> sir have just proven yourself to be the same.
>>>
>>
>> It's not bigotry to recognize bigotry in others. The facts are that
>> the Saudis regard women as something significantly less than men.
>> Right or wrong, that is a fact.
>
> How about this then:
>
> The facts are that the Republicans regard Democrats as something
> significantly less than Republicans.
>
> is that also bigotry? If not, why?
>

Sure. As I said, right or wrong, it is a fact. Now "bigotry" does not mean
denial of facts; it means treating some others with hatred and intolerance.
This is sometimes a Good Thing(TM), as in the dirty Japs of WW2.

Be that as it may, it is still counterproductive to send an emissary to
negotiate when you know the other party will treat your representative with
barely concealed contempt and disdain, take nothing they say seriously, and
view your surrogate as an insult to them, their religion, and their way of
life.

It may even be that the reason the Iranians won't negotiate is that they
simply cannot negotiate with a woman! Doing so would be against their
religion and 1500 years of tradition. That leaves them only one choice:
continue to build a nuclear weapon.

So the Iranians work towards the bomb, Israel attacks, Iran counter-attacks,
maybe millions die, and it's all the fault of Bush and Obama for having
Secretaries of State who squat to pee.

Like the Trojans and the Greeks, another war over (a couple of) women. At
least this war would have a reason better than some.

On Aug 4, 6:11=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ahh, the ol' 2-for-1 deal. Just like when Bill was pres we got Hillary
> for free, now Bill comes as part of the package.
>
> Honestly, I had been surprised by Hillary during the campaign and
> thought maybe she had some chops. I also thought maybe she would shine
> in this current position. Unlike the do-nothing type job one has in
> the Senate which doesn't really show off ones weakness, in this
> current position she ain't gettin it done and it shows; and now she
> has to call in Billy to close the deal. Weak. I have the greatest
> respect for Bill (as a politician) but Hillary just lost a few notches
> in my ranking.
>
> On Aug 4, 2:58=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 4, 4:44=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I think he is just on his game so he has shed some pounds so he can
> > > play whilst Hillary is busy galvanting around the globe.
>
> > > Also, I can just here his internal dialog on this "journalist" issue.
> > > "Hey, why leave two hot looking asian chicks all locked up in jail. I
> > > bet I can go get them out and maybe get a little sumtin in exchange."
>
> > > Polictical comment: I guess the Obama administration didn't have
> > > anybody up to the job.
>
> > > On Aug 4, 1:27=A0pm, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > I just saw a couple of news article regarding Bill Clinton's role i=
n
> > > > getting the US journalists released from N. Korea (apparently he wa=
s
> > > > successful).
>
> > > > Is it just me or has he aged considerably during the past several
> > > > months? =A0I thought he looked rather thin and gaunt.
>
> > > > RonB
>
> > They did: Bill Clinton.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

A great deal of her effectiveness is going to waste because she is
female. Those white-robed fig-suckers in Saudi aren't going to pay
attention to anything she says and that holds true in many parts of
the world. " Don't need no lip from no biatch!"

I don't like Bill and never have, but he is good at certain things. I
wonder what he was authorized to promise that Kim Jong Il.

On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 13:27:17 -0700 (PDT), RonB <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I just saw a couple of news article regarding Bill Clinton's role in
>getting the US journalists released from N. Korea (apparently he was
>successful).
>
>Is it just me or has he aged considerably during the past several
>months? I thought he looked rather thin and gaunt.
>
>RonB



Yes, he is not aging well. Bill Clinton is my favorite, excellent
speaker too.

Robatoy wrote:
> On Aug 5, 6:08 pm, Morris Dovey <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> A great deal of her effectiveness is going to waste because she is
>>> female. Those white-robed fig-suckers in Saudi aren't going to pay
>>> attention to anything she says and that holds true in many parts of
>>> the world. " Don't need no lip from no biatch!"
>>
>> Hmm. I don't think your stereotyping is particularly productive (nor
>> accurate)
>
> Then somebody explain to me that when my BIL worked in Saudi, my
> sister did not get a visa to visit him in case she (and many others)
> shed some of her western cooties on the Saudi women. Yet Hillary is
> supposed to be able to sit down and talk turkey about US interests
> with that same crowd? That would make them what? Hypocrites?
> I guess it is okay for those Middle Eastern nations to slurp up
> western dollars in exchange for oil even though some of that oil goes
> to Jimmy Swaggart powering his car on his way to a hooker or some
> factory using oil-based plastics to make dildos.
> Makes sense to me. Let's defend the culture of Africa's cannibals
> while we are at it. Female circumcision is cool because THEY think it
> is cool.
>
> There is a certain type of t-shirt which is referred to as a 'wife-
> beater'. That disgusts me.
> Very close friends of Ang and I work in the fields of domestic
> violence and fight the denigration of women.
> So, for me to label somebody a white-robed fig sucker is somehow
> offensive but to set a woman on fire for being in a car with somebody
> who isn't her husband isn't?
>
> That whole culture that treats their camels or yaks with more respect
> than their women disgusts me.
> But not enough to justify the senseless killing that goes on with the
> Palestinians.
> Complicated, eh?

Several comments:

Hypocrisy gets a bad rap - it's not necessarily bad. 90% of gynecologists
are men.

I applaud your dedication to the righting of wrongs, but fear some of your
targets are misplaced. For example, according to the CDC, more MEN are the
victims of severe domestic violence (death or serious bodily injury) than
are women, but we are woefully underserved! In fact, there's only ONE men's
domestic violence shelter in the nation (I think Pittsburgh).

More men are raped each day than women (think prisons).

As to the "wife beater," I suppose, on some level, some women enjoy it. I
stopped a guy once who had taken his girlfriend's face and used it to bust
out the window of his car. After I handcuffed him and put him in the back of
my patrol car, I had a long conversation with her - or as long as I could on
the side of the road. Finally, in desperation, I gave her an ultimatum:
"Lady, are you going to file charges? Because if not, I've got to cut him
loose."

She said no!

I had one more chance: I stopped him on the way back to his car, looked him
right in the eye, and, with my best Clint Eastwood imitation, I said:
"Listen up, asshole, you touch that woman again and you'll have ME to deal
with! You got that straight?"

His exact words: "Fuck you. When I get her home, I'm gonna beat her so bad
she won't be able to lay down! Get in the car woman!"

And they drove away and lived happily ever after.

I was so frustrated over the whole sorry affair that, when I got off duty, I
went home and beat my wife.

In article <[email protected]>,
HeyBub <[email protected]> wrote:
<...snipped...>
>There's also an alternative. When faced with a similar situation, a
>Republican president proclaimed: "America wants Pedicaris alive, or Raisuli
>dead!"
>
>And this same president said, a little later, "Gentlemen, nothing in this
>world is certain - absolutely nothing. The fate of the nation will be
>decided by the American people in November, and the fate of Morocco will be
>decided tomorrow by me."
>
>------------------

A nice story but it was actually John Hay, the Sec of State, who made
the 1st remark, and the accurate quote is "This government wants Perdicaris
alive or Raisuli dead." And then Roosevelt backed down, quietly got
France and England to pressure the ruler of Morocco to accept Raisuli's
demands, after which Perdicaris was released. Roosevelt and Hay kept that
part secret at the time, the facts not being made public til about 30 years
later.
--
There are no stupid questions, but there are lots of stupid answers.

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

"SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:bd341649-e0be-46fa-a996-63ec0d290638@x25g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Also, I think you are very backwards to think we shouldn't put a women
in any position simply because she is a woman. We know that their
feelings on this are wrong. Even better to put it in their face and
show the proper respect to any intelligent human by picking whoever is
best for a job regardless of gender.

========
Not to belabor this, but that is the underlying question. Is she really the
best qualified person to forward our President's foreign policy? Or do you
find room for just the slightest doubt that she was indeed selected on some
other basis, such as internal politics and perhaps even her gender?

Robatoy wrote:

> A great deal of her effectiveness is going to waste because she is
> female. Those white-robed fig-suckers in Saudi aren't going to pay
> attention to anything she says and that holds true in many parts of
> the world. " Don't need no lip from no biatch!"

Hmm. I don't think your stereotyping is particularly productive (nor
accurate), and if things continue to proceed as they have been, I think
we (the US) will have a credible and capable voice in Riyadh. The guy on
this web page is my xBIL and I have considerable respect for his
abilities (warning - split URL):

http://riyadh.usembassy.gov/policy/press-releases/president-obama
-announces-intent-to-nominate-brigadier-general-james.-b.-smith-as
-ambassador-to-kingdom-of-saudi-arabia

> I don't like Bill and never have, but he is good at certain things. I
> wonder what he was authorized to promise that Kim Jong Il.

Probably not very much.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
> In anycase, dislike it as we might, KJI _is_ the government of North
> Korea and one should always attempt to talk with governments, even
> Iran. Dictating to a foreign government has never worked, Cuba has
> shown the futility of embargo as a tool for regime change and Bush
> Jr. has shown the futility of forced regime change.
>

We HAVE tried to talk to NK, from the agreements signed in 1994 by the
Clinton administration to the failed Six Party talks of last year. By my
count, we have had negotiations with NK seven times since 1990. It's obvious
they won't talk.

No, the only thing left is to destroy their ratty government. A good time
would have been when Clinton was in the capitol - all the state's high
ranking factotums were in attendance. A low-yield nuke would have been
appropriate.

"Lee Michaels" wrote:

> My concern is that this looks an awful like responding to state
> sponsored terrorism. And we have always had the policy of not
> negotiating with terrorists. Wanna bet that there are some
> terrorists getting some ideas about this?

Doubt it.

Sending "Slick Willie", one of the best to ever play the game on the
world stage, to put a face on this operation, sends a message that
Obama's people are operating at a whole different level than the rest
of the players.

"Speak softly and carry a BIG stick" just took on a whole new meaning,
IMHO.

Lew

Larry W wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> HeyBub <[email protected]> wrote:
> <...snipped...>
>> There's also an alternative. When faced with a similar situation, a
>> Republican president proclaimed: "America wants Pedicaris alive, or
>> Raisuli dead!"
>>
>> And this same president said, a little later, "Gentlemen, nothing in
>> this world is certain - absolutely nothing. The fate of the nation
>> will be decided by the American people in November, and the fate of
>> Morocco will be decided tomorrow by me."
>>
>> ------------------
>
> A nice story but it was actually John Hay, the Sec of State, who made
> the 1st remark, and the accurate quote is "This government wants
> Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead." And then Roosevelt backed down,
> quietly got
> France and England to pressure the ruler of Morocco to accept
> Raisuli's demands, after which Perdicaris was released. Roosevelt and
> Hay kept that part secret at the time, the facts not being made
> public til about 30 years later.

So YOU say. I get my information from the authoritative movie quotes
database:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073906/quotes

Robatoy wrote:
>>
>> So the Iranians work towards the bomb, Israel attacks, Iran
>> counter-attacks, maybe millions die, and it's all the fault of Bush
>> and Obama for having Secretaries of State who squat to pee.
>>
>> Like the Trojans and the Greeks, another war over (a couple of)
>> women. At least this war would have a reason better than some.
>
> Somebody slap me. I am in complete agreement with what you just said.

Sometimes a progressive's gut reaction CAN be overcome by reality. In this
case, we believe women are equal in all respects but liberals hold that to
discriminate against a woman is simply evil. No truck will be given to any
suggestion that there might be a case where it's appropriate.

Well, there obviously ARE cases and to not recognize them works to our
detriment.

Another example that's pending: There are 615 Catholic hospitals in the U.S.
(accounting for 1/8th of all community hospitals) that will have to decide
whether to shut down if the pending health care legislation prevails. They
will face this decision because of the mandates on abortion.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with a woman's right to choose, potentially
loosing 12.5% of the nation's hospital capacity is an outstanding
consideration.

SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> I think he is just on his game so he has shed some pounds so he can
> play whilst Hillary is busy galvanting around the globe.
>
> Also, I can just here his internal dialog on this "journalist" issue.
> "Hey, why leave two hot looking asian chicks all locked up in jail. I
> bet I can go get them out and maybe get a little sumtin in exchange."
>
> Polictical comment: I guess the Obama administration didn't have
> anybody up to the job.
>

There's always Jimmy Carter.

And the journalists aren't free yet (and may never be).

Aside:
Dianne Feinstein has introduced a bill that would prohibit anyone convicted
in a foreign court of a felony or the crime of domestic violence from owning
a gun in the United States. This prohibition would apply, not only to the
likes of Desmond Tutu, Lech Walensa, and others, but also to these two
ladies.

What a PC asshole you are. Where do you teach? Harvard? Yale?
Berkley? Or are you in the Obama administration?
If you are offended by "fig suckers" how about sand niggers or rag
heads, camel humpers, slayers of infidels (jews, christians,
buddhists, et al). Saudis do not say bad things about Americans. They
simply crash planes into our iconic buildings. Go fuck yourself,
shithead.

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:52:59 -0700 (PDT), "SonomaProducts.com"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I really shouldn't reply here on this subject and just let it go but I
>don't want anyone to think I could support such language. Frankly I
>find the comment about the Saudis, for whom I have no great love in
>general, quite distasteful and somewhat bigoted. I realize there are
>some Saudis who might say similar or worse things about Americans or
>maybe even just westerners in general, but you sir have just proven
>yourself to be the same.
>
>On Aug 4, 3:54 pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Aug 4, 6:11 pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>

"Robatoy" wrote:

>I know you wanted him to fail, like your buddy Rush wanted all libs
>to
fail......but better luck next time, eh?

Damn shame they keep getting a whuppin.

Times will change, it's just going to take a while.

Lew

"HeyBub" wrote:

> Another example that's pending: There are 615 Catholic hospitals in
> the U.S. (accounting for 1/8th of all community hospitals) that will
> have to decide whether to shut down if the pending health care
> legislation prevails. They will face this decision because of the
> mandates on abortion.
>
> Whether one agrees or disagrees with a woman's right to choose,
> potentially loosing 12.5% of the nation's hospital capacity is an
> outstanding consideration.

The catholic church of Rome already has a problem with the catholic
church of the USA.

Time to fish or cut bait.

Lew