You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...
, it could logically be reasoned that more than half the
republicans (or at least conservatives) still like him.


100% since 20% of such polls are commonly comprised of votes that are
party based. That means that Bush gets quite a few positive votes from
people who don't like him as president.

WHAT?? Are you contending that polls, like Zogby or NY Times, are based on
voting?

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I heard the poll numbers were in the low 30s... 32, 33. Worst in 25 years.
Bad news for the US, since it's even worse overseas.

I saw an article about a year ago in the SF Chronicle, written by a liberal
no less, that presented a sound case as to why overseas opinion had
virtually no impact on anything. Our trade relations continue with those
countries that hate us, the same as they do when those countries don't hate
us so vehemently. Same with investment activity and banking. And those
same countries are buying our military materiel and fighter jets, just like
before. Opinion is inconsequential, according to the writer. I found the
piece refreshing, coming from a liberal columnist in the Chron.

So when Oz and Donal rip on the US, ignore 'em. g

Such opinion here at home, however, probably has a profound effect. I'm
going on record today predicting that the GOP is going to lose majorities in
both houses of Congress this fall. It would serve W right, the idiot.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I heard the poll numbers were in the low 30s... 32, 33. Worst in 25 years.
Bad news for the US, since it's even worse overseas.

I saw an article about a year ago in the SF Chronicle, written by a liberal
no less, that presented a sound case as to why overseas opinion had
virtually no impact on anything. Our trade relations continue with those
countries that hate us, the same as they do when those countries don't hate
us so vehemently. Same with investment activity and banking. And those
same countries are buying our military materiel and fighter jets, just like
before. Opinion is inconsequential, according to the writer. I found the
piece refreshing, coming from a liberal columnist in the Chron.


I agree with you. The bleeding heart brigade here have claimed at
various times that some action/inaction by our Govt would cause people
elsewhere to dislike us etc.

Never made a jot of difference to our trade.

So when Oz and Donal rip on the US, ignore 'em. g

Yeah. Oz is occasionally right but I can't recall the last time Donal
managed it.

PDW

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Certainly overseas opinions affect those of us who have to travel or deal
with people from other countries. I'm very tired of apologizing for Bush.
They are certainly affecting our business relationship with certain South
American countries, and certainly affecting our security via other Arab
countries.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I heard the poll numbers were in the low 30s... 32, 33. Worst in 25 years.
Bad news for the US, since it's even worse overseas.

I saw an article about a year ago in the SF Chronicle, written by a
liberal no less, that presented a sound case as to why overseas opinion
had virtually no impact on anything. Our trade relations continue with
those countries that hate us, the same as they do when those countries
don't hate us so vehemently. Same with investment activity and banking.
And those same countries are buying our military materiel and fighter
jets, just like before. Opinion is inconsequential, according to the
writer. I found the piece refreshing, coming from a liberal columnist in
the Chron.

So when Oz and Donal rip on the US, ignore 'em. g

Such opinion here at home, however, probably has a profound effect. I'm
going on record today predicting that the GOP is going to lose majorities
in both houses of Congress this fall. It would serve W right, the idiot.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Wow that the most pathetic thing I've heard in a long time Jon.

Did they apologize when Saddam was chopping of hands, gassing whole
villages and failing to follow UN resolutions?
Are the countries you speak of UN members?

BTW Jon I deal with Canooks, French, Germans, Chinese, Russians,
Mexican ect... and all of them are professional engineers and the
subject of Bush has only come up once, that was with a guy in Chicago
who still wears sky blue polyester suits.

Joe

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Who are you talking about? Who apologized about Saddam? The point of the war
with Iraq was to eliminate his WMD. There were no such things there. We were
misled and we're still being misled about the war. Bushco is doing the
misleading.

I'm sorry that you hand out with people who wear blue polyester suits.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...
Wow that the most pathetic thing I've heard in a long time Jon.

Did they apologize when Saddam was chopping of hands, gassing whole
villages and failing to follow UN resolutions?
Are the countries you speak of UN members?

BTW Jon I deal with Canooks, French, Germans, Chinese, Russians,
Mexican ect... and all of them are professional engineers and the
subject of Bush has only come up once, that was with a guy in Chicago
who still wears sky blue polyester suits.

Joe

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Did they apologize when Saddam was chopping of hands, gassing whole
villages and failing to follow UN resolutions?


That's NOT what YOU were given as the reason for war, now was it, Joe.
The reason for the war was imaginary WMDs that quite a few folks here
swore would be found...Scotty Potty among them. In all seriousness I
have some sympathy for Scotty and others like him. They backed a
president, believed what he said and got slammed. A few folks are crazy
enough to believe Bush' stories still. Bush knew there were assholes
like Scotty Potty. Folks like him are what Bush has counted on all
along.
Poor Scotty probably still thinks Bush told the truth.

RB
35s5
NY

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Certainly overseas opinions affect those of us who have to travel or deal
with people from other countries. I'm very tired of apologizing for Bush.

That's your first mistake. When you apologize you enable their hatred of us
and you. Contrary to what you might believe, they won't hold you in any
higher regard just because you don't like Bush. You're still one of those
ugly Americans.

They are certainly affecting our business relationship with certain South
American countries, and certainly affecting our security via other Arab
countries.

If I get your drift, those countries are enemies, not just countries that
dislike Americans.

A recent trip to Canada was an eye-opener for me. I expected, especially in
Quebec and Montreal, to be treated poorly by the Canadians. To the contrary
they were all exceptionally nice and friendly, without exception. I made
two new friends, with whom I communicate weekly. It seems that commonality
between individuals trumps political enmity every time.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Maxprop" wrote .....
A recent trip to Canada was an eye-opener for me. I expected, especially in
Quebec and Montreal, to be treated poorly by the Canadians. To the contrary
they were all exceptionally nice and friendly, without exception. I made
two new friends, with whom I communicate weekly. It seems that commonality
between individuals trumps political enmity every time.

True.

My stepson was asked to share his table in crowded resturant in Bern last
month. His German guest began the conversation with "We don't like Bush over
here." "Neither do we." "Trouble with Americans is you're all monolingual." With
that Dano showed the man their menus - his in Italian and English, the man's in
German and (guess what) English and asked "Why should we bother learning another
language?" By the time lunch was over they were friends..

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Not at all. They're mostly relieved that they're not dealing with a fanatic.

Venezuela is not our enemy.

If a large percentage of the population of a country doesn't like US
politics, we are less safe in that country.

Canadians try very hard to like us.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
k.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Certainly overseas opinions affect those of us who have to travel or deal
with people from other countries. I'm very tired of apologizing for Bush.

That's your first mistake. When you apologize you enable their hatred of
us and you. Contrary to what you might believe, they won't hold you in
any higher regard just because you don't like Bush. You're still one of
those ugly Americans.

They are certainly affecting our business relationship with certain South
American countries, and certainly affecting our security via other Arab
countries.

If I get your drift, those countries are enemies, not just countries that
dislike Americans.

A recent trip to Canada was an eye-opener for me. I expected, especially
in Quebec and Montreal, to be treated poorly by the Canadians. To the
contrary they were all exceptionally nice and friendly, without exception.
I made two new friends, with whom I communicate weekly. It seems that
commonality between individuals trumps political enmity every time.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

They are certainly affecting our business relationship with certain South
American countries, and certainly affecting our security via other Arab
countries.


Maxprop wrote:
If I get your drift, those countries are enemies, not just countries that
dislike Americans.


???

You need to lay off the bottled paranoid delusions, Max P.
We are not at war, declared or undeclared, with any South
American or Central American country. Or do you consider any
place "enemy" that doesn't speak the same language?



A recent trip to Canada was an eye-opener for me. I expected, especially in
Quebec and Montreal, to be treated poorly by the Canadians. To the contrary
they were all exceptionally nice and friendly, without exception. I made
two new friends, with whom I communicate weekly. It seems that commonality
between individuals trumps political enmity every time.


They're probably clinical psychologists, using you for a
case study.

In general I've found Canadians to be much like Southerners:
polite, friendly, hospitable, willing to help a stranger in
need. They dress a lot differently, especially to go
outside, and they're also less likely to shoot somebody just
because he needs killin'.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Not at all. They're mostly relieved that they're not dealing with a
fanatic.

Venezuela is not our enemy.

I hope not. We are getting a substantial percentage of our crude from them.
But Chavez does indeed believe Bush is his enemy, so I guess that makes him
"our" enemy.

If a large percentage of the population of a country doesn't like US
politics, we are less safe in that country.

That's painting a small item with a rather broad brush. Most French,
Germans, and Italians dislike us politically, but Americans travel to those
countries daily and the safety factor has really not declined significantly
in the past decade. Traveling to Tehran would be foolish, however, I think.
Fanatics tend to be the problem, not opposing political ideologies.


Canadians try very hard to like us.

All except for Mooron. He tries very hard to eat our raw kidneys or shoot
us in the head.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

In article et,
Maxprop wrote:

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Not at all. They're mostly relieved that they're not dealing with a
fanatic.

Venezuela is not our enemy.

I hope not. We are getting a substantial percentage of our crude from them.
But Chavez does indeed believe Bush is his enemy, so I guess that makes him
"our" enemy.

If a large percentage of the population of a country doesn't like US
politics, we are less safe in that country.

That's painting a small item with a rather broad brush. Most French,
Germans, and Italians dislike us politically, but Americans travel to those
countries daily and the safety factor has really not declined significantly
in the past decade. Traveling to Tehran would be foolish, however, I think.
Fanatics tend to be the problem, not opposing political ideologies.


Canadians try very hard to like us.

All except for Mooron. He tries very hard to eat our raw kidneys or shoot
us in the head.

Safest place. He knows most of you keep your brains in your butt...

PDW

You've Got to Get Mad
 

I think Chavez is right. Bush is the enemy.

Travelling to Tehran would not be dangerous for the average American. There
are only a few fanatics in Iran and they are only interested in hating Bush.
Maybe that's the exception that proves the rule.

However, we are definitely less safe in other countries if the population
feels that the extremists have a valid point. They would tend to give them
more license.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Not at all. They're mostly relieved that they're not dealing with a
fanatic.

Venezuela is not our enemy.

I hope not. We are getting a substantial percentage of our crude from
them. But Chavez does indeed believe Bush is his enemy, so I guess that
makes him "our" enemy.

If a large percentage of the population of a country doesn't like US
politics, we are less safe in that country.

That's painting a small item with a rather broad brush. Most French,
Germans, and Italians dislike us politically, but Americans travel to
those countries daily and the safety factor has really not declined
significantly in the past decade. Traveling to Tehran would be foolish,
however, I think. Fanatics tend to be the problem, not opposing political
ideologies.


Canadians try very hard to like us.

All except for Mooron. He tries very hard to eat our raw kidneys or shoot
us in the head.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Peter Wiley" wrote in

Canadians try very hard to like us.

All except for Mooron. He tries very hard to eat our
raw kidneys or shoot
us in the head.

Safest place. He knows most of you keep your brains in
your butt...


So, Mooron is a *brain* kisser?

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I think Chavez is right. Bush is the enemy.

Travelling to Tehran would not be dangerous for the average American.
There are only a few fanatics in Iran and they are only interested in
hating Bush. Maybe that's the exception that proves the rule.

You'd be a fool to believe that when traveling to Tehran. Bush = American
citizens = Bush. They don't differentiate between our leaders and us. 9/11
should have taught you that.


However, we are definitely less safe in other countries if the population
feels that the extremists have a valid point. They would tend to give them
more license.

I know what you mean. Traveling to San Francisco, with all those extremists
out there plus the judges that give them "more license," is definitely
unsafe. g

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Maxprop" wrote in message
Canadians try very hard to like us.

All except for Mooron. He tries very hard to eat our raw kidneys or shoot
us in the head.

Nah..... I'd suffer a cellulite overload... best just to club you like a
white-coat and peel that thin skin clean off'!! Leave ya'll groanin' &
moanin' for hours... while yer mudders looked on in anguish!

CM-

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Max, you don't know what you're talking about. I have two friends who've
been there recently. No problems at all and they were both welcomed by the
locals.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I think Chavez is right. Bush is the enemy.

Travelling to Tehran would not be dangerous for the average American.
There are only a few fanatics in Iran and they are only interested in
hating Bush. Maybe that's the exception that proves the rule.

You'd be a fool to believe that when traveling to Tehran. Bush = American
citizens = Bush. They don't differentiate between our leaders and us.
9/11 should have taught you that.


However, we are definitely less safe in other countries if the population
feels that the extremists have a valid point. They would tend to give
them more license.

I know what you mean. Traveling to San Francisco, with all those
extremists out there plus the judges that give them "more license," is
definitely unsafe. g

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Travelling to Tehran would not be dangerous for the average American.
There are only a few fanatics in Iran and they are only interested in
hating Bush. Maybe that's the exception that proves the rule.


Maxprop wrote:
You'd be a fool to believe that when traveling to Tehran. Bush = American
citizens = Bush. They don't differentiate between our leaders and us. 9/11
should have taught you that.


Gee whiz Max P, you seem to have a problem with consistency.
Not long ago, you said that many foreigners can
distinguish between dislike for the U.S. gov't and
individual citizens. Now you're saying that 9/11 should
teach us to hate & fear all foreigners, or just the ones
that Bush/Cheney say we should?




However, we are definitely less safe in other countries if the population
feels that the extremists have a valid point. They would tend to give them
more license.


I know what you mean. Traveling to San Francisco, with all those extremists
out there plus the judges that give them "more license," is definitely
unsafe. g


Yep, only a matter of time until those San Fran extremists
start carrying out terrorist attacks. Better round 'em up...
get a special detention center ready, Gitmo's full...

DSK

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt.Mooron" wrote in message
news:bo_cg.30227$cl1.15454@edtnps90...

"Maxprop" wrote in message
Canadians try very hard to like us.

All except for Mooron. He tries very hard to eat our raw kidneys or
shoot us in the head.

Nah..... I'd suffer a cellulite overload... best just to club you like a
white-coat and peel that thin skin clean off'!! Leave ya'll groanin' &
moanin' for hours... while yer mudders looked on in anguish!

. . . and then eat our raw kidneys?

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..

Yep, only a matter of time until those San Fran extremists start carrying
out terrorist attacks. Better round 'em up... get a special detention
center ready, Gitmo's full...

I'll bet the internment centers where we kept the Japanese during WWII could
be re-opened.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Maxprop wrote:
"Capt.Mooron" wrote in message
news:bo_cg.30227$cl1.15454@edtnps90...
"Maxprop" wrote in message
Canadians try very hard to like us.
All except for Mooron. He tries very hard to eat our raw kidneys or
shoot us in the head.
Nah..... I'd suffer a cellulite overload... best just to club you like a
white-coat and peel that thin skin clean off'!! Leave ya'll groanin' &
moanin' for hours... while yer mudders looked on in anguish!

. . . and then eat our raw kidneys?

Max


You don't want to know....

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Maxprop" wrote
"Capt. JG" wrote
Travelling to Tehran would not be dangerous for the average American.

You'd be a fool to believe that when traveling to Tehran. Bush = American
citizens = Bush. They don't differentiate between our leaders and us. 9/11
should have taught you that.


Fact is we are all "infidels" to radical Islam and they believe that they are
doing God's own work by killing as many of us as possible. They believe that
the very concept of democracy - the idea that man rather than God can make the
rules - is a mortal sin. Worse yet, democracy leads to affluence and education,
eliminating the religious fervor that comes with grinding physical and mental
poverty. To them, our "threat" of bringing freedom and plenty to their world is
akin to bringing a dance band to a baptist convention. Hard as it is to
believe, they are even more dangerous than radical christians and every person
who threatens to bring them wealth and freedom must be killed first. As Max
says, they do not distinguish between infidels and their leaders.

Saddam was keeping a thumb on these radicals - that's why it was safe for
Americans to go to Tehran under him. Blundering Bush removed Saddam from power
and his thumb from the radicals but he did not replace it with a US thumb.
That's why it's dangerous for everybody in Tehran, even moderate Muslims.

You've Got to Get Mad
 

I agree about the radical Islamists part, but the citizenry of Iran in
general does not fall into that category. Most Muslims are peaceful people
with no interest in killing anyone.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Maxprop" wrote
"Capt. JG" wrote
Travelling to Tehran would not be dangerous for the average American.

You'd be a fool to believe that when traveling to Tehran. Bush =
American
citizens = Bush. They don't differentiate between our leaders and us.
9/11
should have taught you that.


Fact is we are all "infidels" to radical Islam and they believe that they
are
doing God's own work by killing as many of us as possible. They believe
that
the very concept of democracy - the idea that man rather than God can make
the
rules - is a mortal sin. Worse yet, democracy leads to affluence and
education,
eliminating the religious fervor that comes with grinding physical and
mental
poverty. To them, our "threat" of bringing freedom and plenty to their
world is
akin to bringing a dance band to a baptist convention. Hard as it is to
believe, they are even more dangerous than radical christians and every
person
who threatens to bring them wealth and freedom must be killed first. As
Max
says, they do not distinguish between infidels and their leaders.

Saddam was keeping a thumb on these radicals - that's why it was safe for
Americans to go to Tehran under him. Blundering Bush removed Saddam from
power
and his thumb from the radicals but he did not replace it with a US thumb.
That's why it's dangerous for everybody in Tehran, even moderate Muslims.

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I agree about the radical Islamists part, but the citizenry of Iran in
general does not fall into that category. Most Muslims are peaceful people
with no interest in killing anyone.

When polled, however, they seem to have no issues with terrorists who
exterminate infidels.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

You're probably right. Thus, what I was saying... our foreign policy
infuriates people in other countries, and they have less of a problem
supporting terrorists, which makes us less safe abroad.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I agree about the radical Islamists part, but the citizenry of Iran in
general does not fall into that category. Most Muslims are peaceful people
with no interest in killing anyone.

When polled, however, they seem to have no issues with terrorists who
exterminate infidels.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
You're probably right. Thus, what I was saying... our foreign policy
infuriates people in other countries, and they have less of a problem
supporting terrorists, which makes us less safe abroad.

I suspect it goes deeper than that. True, the West is despised by many
Mideasterners, but moreover I think Islam holds no sympathy for infidels,
whether they live in the West or elsewhere. Most Muslims are peaceful and
passive, content to worship in their own manner. But they aren't outraged
by the Islamic extremists who bring terror and murder to their particular
brand of Islam. It's the old adage: you're either part of the solution, or
part of the problem.

That said, I seriously doubt if Muslims living in the Middle East will ever
hold much stock with Westerners. Our best tactic would be to leave them
alone and stay out of their affairs. But I fear we have, as the Japanese
emperor once said, awakened a sleeping tiger. It won't go away any time
soon, no matter what we do.

Max

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I agree about the radical Islamists part, but the citizenry of Iran in
general does not fall into that category. Most Muslims are peaceful people
with no interest in killing anyone.

Possibly, but it only takes one undeterred radical to ruin a vacation, and the
citizenry of Iran have been unable to deter their radicals since Blundering Bush
"brought freedom" to them. Question in my mind is why they elected leaders and
a constitution just like Iran's if they are so peaceful. I suspect their idea
of "peace" is everybody in the world submitting to sharia. Otherwise it's jihad.

You've Got to Get Mad
 

I agree about the radical Islamists part, but the citizenry of Iran in
general does not fall into that category. Most Muslims are peaceful people
with no interest in killing anyone.


Vito wrote:
Possibly, but it only takes one undeterred radical to ruin a vacation, and the
citizenry of Iran have been unable to deter their radicals since Blundering Bush
"brought freedom" to them.

You mean Iraq, I guess? I've made that exact same typo...

.... Question in my mind is why they elected leaders and
a constitution just like Iran's if they are so peaceful. I suspect their idea
of "peace" is everybody in the world submitting to sharia. Otherwise it's jihad.


Maybe, maybe not. First they want all their neighbors to go
to the same church and pray the same way, so it'll take them
a while to get around to us.

Meanwhile, I suggest that both you and Maxprop google up
some of the mainstream Muslim pronouncements on terrorism &
suicide bombing. Don't believe what me, look for yourself if
you're at all interested (or at least interested enough to
avoid making imbecilic statements like Max P).

DSK

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"DSK" wrote
Vito wrote:
Possibly, but it only takes one undeterred radical to ruin a vacation, and
the
citizenry of Iran have been unable to deter their radicals since Blundering
Bush
"brought freedom" to them.

You mean Iraq, I guess? I've made that exact same typo...

Yes, thanks

Meanwhile, I suggest that both you and Maxprop google up
some of the mainstream Muslim pronouncements on terrorism &
suicide bombing.....

Sure but actions speak louder .... etc .. and, fact is, the mainstream verbally
denounces yet protects and supports the radical minority. It's the same with
all religions. Not one in 1000 Christians would bomb an abortion clinic, let
alone leave a second delayed bomb to kill the emergency people who respond, but
they do fund these activities thru their "mainstream" churches. All of the
Methodists I know are hunters and shooters, but every Sunday they drop $$$ into
a collection plate and the church's leaders use it to fund Sara Brady. All a
Muslim terrorist need do is hole up in a mosque to be safe from us - these
"mainstream" Muslims protect him.

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Meanwhile, I suggest that both you and Maxprop google up
some of the mainstream Muslim pronouncements on terrorism &
suicide bombing.....


Vito wrote:
Sure but actions speak louder .... etc .. and, fact is, the mainstream verbally
denounces yet protects and supports the radical minority.

How do you figure?

... It's the same with
all religions. Not one in 1000 Christians would bomb an abortion clinic, let
alone leave a second delayed bomb to kill the emergency people who respond, but
they do fund these activities thru their "mainstream" churches.

I keep forgetting, you're a whacko yourself.

There certainly are some churches who collect money to hand
to abortion clinic bombers, but they ain't "mainstream."



.... All a
Muslim terrorist need do is hole up in a mosque to be safe from us - these
"mainstream" Muslims protect him.


Umm, no. Unless you think that cooperating with law
enforcement to help arrest suspected terrorists is
"protecting" them.

DSK

You've Got to Get Mad
 

"DSK" wrote
I keep forgetting, you're a whacko yourself.

.......and you an ostrich ....

You've Got to Get Mad
 

Vito wrote:
......and you an ostrich ....


Aww, yer just sayin' that!

I'm a lot of things, many of which are not good... but
that's not one of them.

DSK