Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Roger Long wrote:
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote

Bush can read?

OK, OK, it was a cheap shot.
Not a cheap shot at all. Of course he can read. He has however,
admitted on several occasions that he doesn't. If you know what is
right, are firm in your convictions, and are guided by faith and prayer,
there is nothing on paper you need to learn in order to make the right
decisions. Facts are simply confusing and temptations to depart from the
path of righteousness that the lord has laid out for you.

Believe me, this is not satire. I'm absolutely serious.
Gosh when a set-up is this easy, with moralizing about "facts" not getting
in the way of predetermined biases; and with so many people needing to
believe so many false facts to ridicule Bush, I just couldn't let this go.

For those who want to retain their ignorant bias about Bush's reading, I
recommend avoiding this link:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...7bushbooks.htm

Stephen


Posting the same link yet again?

Sorry, connection problem.

Check this, but don't let your head explode!

http://www.jibjab.com/view/209630

I subscribe to the Maher podcast and have seen and heard him many times.
Was there something in the link having anything to do with what we are
talking about here? If not, why did you recommend it?

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

On Jul 21, 6:11*pm, Herodotus wrote:
...
Yes Tom, its a great magazine. It is not a technical as "Scientific
American" which I have subscribed to since university days. It makes
difficult subjects simple to understand without losing any of the
essential parts.
...

I subscribed to "Scientific American" for years and it is a good rag,
too. But I let the subscription lapse when I went cruising because
you can find it on news stands everywhere. I rarely find a "New
Scientist" on display. An important distinction for those of us who
are nomadic.

-- Tom.

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Roger Long wrote:
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote

Bush can read?

OK, OK, it was a cheap shot.
Not a cheap shot at all. Of course he can read. He has however,
admitted on several occasions that he doesn't. If you know what is
right, are firm in your convictions, and are guided by faith and
prayer, there is nothing on paper you need to learn in order to make
the right decisions. Facts are simply confusing and temptations to
depart from the path of righteousness that the lord has laid out for
you.

Believe me, this is not satire. I'm absolutely serious.
Gosh when a set-up is this easy, with moralizing about "facts" not
getting in the way of predetermined biases; and with so many people
needing to believe so many false facts to ridicule Bush, I just couldn't
let this go.

For those who want to retain their ignorant bias about Bush's reading, I
recommend avoiding this link:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...7bushbooks.htm

Stephen


Posting the same link yet again?

Sorry, connection problem.

Check this, but don't let your head explode!

http://www.jibjab.com/view/209630

I subscribe to the Maher podcast and have seen and heard him many times.
Was there something in the link having anything to do with what we are
talking about here? If not, why did you recommend it?




I wasn't trying to get your head to explode! Nothing to recommend, except to
vote for McCain if you like the way things have gone in the last 7 years.

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

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Roger Long wrote:
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote

Bush can read?

OK, OK, it was a cheap shot.
Not a cheap shot at all. Of course he can read. He has however,
admitted on several occasions that he doesn't. If you know what is
right, are firm in your convictions, and are guided by faith and
prayer, there is nothing on paper you need to learn in order to make
the right decisions. Facts are simply confusing and temptations to
depart from the path of righteousness that the lord has laid out for
you.

Believe me, this is not satire. I'm absolutely serious.
Gosh when a set-up is this easy, with moralizing about "facts" not
getting in the way of predetermined biases; and with so many people
needing to believe so many false facts to ridicule Bush, I just couldn't
let this go.

For those who want to retain their ignorant bias about Bush's reading, I
recommend avoiding this link:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...7bushbooks.htm

Stephen

Posting the same link yet again?
Sorry, connection problem.

Check this, but don't let your head explode!

http://www.jibjab.com/view/209630
I subscribe to the Maher podcast and have seen and heard him many times.
Was there something in the link having anything to do with what we are
talking about here? If not, why did you recommend it?




I wasn't trying to get your head to explode! Nothing to recommend, except to
vote for McCain if you like the way things have gone in the last 7 years.

Everything in my personal world, everything I contact even the
government has been very good. Wouldn't want anything to change there.

Things been pretty bad for you though, eh? Why do you think the
president can change things for you?

Stephen

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Roger Long wrote:
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote

Bush can read?

OK, OK, it was a cheap shot.
Not a cheap shot at all. Of course he can read. He has however,
admitted on several occasions that he doesn't. If you know what is
right, are firm in your convictions, and are guided by faith and
prayer, there is nothing on paper you need to learn in order to make
the right decisions. Facts are simply confusing and temptations to
depart from the path of righteousness that the lord has laid out for
you.

Believe me, this is not satire. I'm absolutely serious.
Gosh when a set-up is this easy, with moralizing about "facts" not
getting in the way of predetermined biases; and with so many people
needing to believe so many false facts to ridicule Bush, I just
couldn't let this go.

For those who want to retain their ignorant bias about Bush's reading,
I recommend avoiding this link:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...7bushbooks.htm

Stephen

Posting the same link yet again?
Sorry, connection problem.

Check this, but don't let your head explode!

http://www.jibjab.com/view/209630
I subscribe to the Maher podcast and have seen and heard him many times.
Was there something in the link having anything to do with what we are
talking about here? If not, why did you recommend it?




I wasn't trying to get your head to explode! Nothing to recommend, except
to vote for McCain if you like the way things have gone in the last 7
years.

Everything in my personal world, everything I contact even the government
has been very good. Wouldn't want anything to change there.

Things been pretty bad for you though, eh? Why do you think the president
can change things for you?

Stephen


Wrong again Stephen. Things have been very, very good for me and mine.
That's not the point. Do you think Bush and Company had nothing to do with
the last seven years?


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

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

Things been pretty bad for you though, eh? Why do you think the president
can change things for you?

Stephen


Wrong again Stephen. Things have been very, very good for me and mine.
That's not the point. Do you think Bush and Company had nothing to do with
the last seven years?

Stephen
It seems that in history, a society or country is judged by its
actions and impact upon and relationships with those around it. If you
are personally very happy with the US role and actions in the world
and with the performance and end state of the US economy as it is
today, regardless of its impact upon you and your pocket, then for you
the Bush government must be a good one.

Then there is morality and the judgment of history. Maybe it may take
a different view. What did the Bush government do to improve the lot
of its citizens? War on drugs? - drug use is increasing. War on
terror? citizens now seem more paranoid and afraid yet they are no
safer. More jobs? No, unemployment is constantly on the rise.
Housing?, Welfare safety net improved? Education? Less taxes?
initiatives for greener, less polluting technology? Morality? What is
moral about invading another sovereign state on a trumped up litany of
lies without the given consent of the other member states of the UN to
make your mates rich?

I can't personally think of anything they did do excepting kill off a
few more of its disadvantaged youth and discredit the USA in the eyes
of the rest of the world. Its citizenry abroad are now far less safer
than they were under Bill Clinton.

Peter

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:08:12 +1000, Herodotus
wrote:



I can't personally think of anything they did do excepting kill off a
few more of its disadvantaged youth and discredit the USA in the eyes
of the rest of the world. Its citizenry abroad are now far less safer
than they were under Bill Clinton.

Peter

Personally I think you should elect Bill's Monica to the presidency.
She can't do any worse and she would be a lot more interesting to
watch on television.

Peter

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Roger Long wrote:
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote

Bush can read?

OK, OK, it was a cheap shot.
Not a cheap shot at all. Of course he can read. He has however,
admitted on several occasions that he doesn't. If you know what is
right, are firm in your convictions, and are guided by faith and
prayer, there is nothing on paper you need to learn in order to make
the right decisions. Facts are simply confusing and temptations to
depart from the path of righteousness that the lord has laid out for
you.

Believe me, this is not satire. I'm absolutely serious.
Gosh when a set-up is this easy, with moralizing about "facts" not
getting in the way of predetermined biases; and with so many people
needing to believe so many false facts to ridicule Bush, I just
couldn't let this go.

For those who want to retain their ignorant bias about Bush's reading,
I recommend avoiding this link:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...7bushbooks.htm

Stephen
Posting the same link yet again?
Sorry, connection problem.

Check this, but don't let your head explode!

http://www.jibjab.com/view/209630
I subscribe to the Maher podcast and have seen and heard him many times.
Was there something in the link having anything to do with what we are
talking about here? If not, why did you recommend it?



I wasn't trying to get your head to explode! Nothing to recommend, except
to vote for McCain if you like the way things have gone in the last 7
years.
Everything in my personal world, everything I contact even the government
has been very good. Wouldn't want anything to change there.

Things been pretty bad for you though, eh? Why do you think the president
can change things for you?

Stephen


Wrong again Stephen. Things have been very, very good for me and mine.
That's not the point. Do you think Bush and Company had nothing to do with
the last seven years?

If things have been so good for you and you think a Republican president
has been largely responsible, why do you want that to change?

Stephen

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

Herodotus wrote:
Things been pretty bad for you though, eh? Why do you think the president
can change things for you?

Stephen

Wrong again Stephen. Things have been very, very good for me and mine.
That's not the point. Do you think Bush and Company had nothing to do with
the last seven years?

Stephen
It seems that in history, a society or country is judged by its
actions and impact upon and relationships with those around it. If you
are personally very happy with the US role and actions in the world
and with the performance and end state of the US economy as it is
today, regardless of its impact upon you and your pocket, then for you
the Bush government must be a good one.

Well, what I said is that things have been good for me. I'm not looking
at forced regime change in Iraq or a president getting a blow job for
answers on how my life is.

Then there is morality and the judgment of history. Maybe it may take
a different view. What did the Bush government do to improve the lot
of its citizens? War on drugs? - drug use is increasing. War on
terror? citizens now seem more paranoid and afraid yet they are no
safer. More jobs? No, unemployment is constantly on the rise.
Housing?, Welfare safety net improved? Education? Less taxes?
initiatives for greener, less polluting technology? Morality? What is
moral about invading another sovereign state on a trumped up litany of
lies without the given consent of the other member states of the UN to
make your mates rich?

You do know that Congress makes the laws, right? And why are you blaming
the President for all of those things? Do US presidents really have that
much power? The blaming makes no sense and the lynch mob mentality
holding Bush responsible for all of it is nothing more than mass hysteria.

I can't personally think of anything they did do excepting kill off a
few more of its disadvantaged youth and discredit the USA in the eyes
of the rest of the world. Its citizenry abroad are now far less safer
than they were under Bill Clinton.

I wouldn't worry too much about the "discrediting." The US has been
saving the world's asses for about a hundred years now and that doesn't
appear to be about to change anytime soon. When they see how much better
off Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East are ten years from now, along
with whatever else we happen to have to do to stand up for freedom,
they'll be singing a different tune. Or, the good people will anyway.
There will still be tyrants trying to drum up hate against the leader of
the free world though. Careful you don't let them fool you.

Stephen

Advice on refridgeration unit please
 

I wouldn't worry too much about the "discrediting." The US has been
saving the world's asses for about a hundred years now and that doesn't
appear to be about to change anytime soon. When they see how much better
off Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East are ten years from now, along
with whatever else we happen to have to do to stand up for freedom,
they'll be singing a different tune. Or, the good people will anyway.
There will still be tyrants trying to drum up hate against the leader of
the free world though. Careful you don't let them fool you.

Stephen

Like in Vietnam, and Cambodia. I thought you got reamed in Somalia and
never went back.

Also, by our history books World War I started in 1914, not when the
US decided to join.

WWII started in September 1939, not over two years later when you
finally decided to get involved after Pearl Harbour. Prior to that,
several million Chinese had been killed since 1937 by invading
Japanese forces without the US being concerned at all. The way I hear
history told from many Americans, they were the sole combatants
against the Japanese and Germans.

Was Korea a victory for UN troops? Doubt it. It finally ended in a
stalemate.

I do not discount US involvement in the first and second World Wars,
and like most people, do sincerely appreciate the US getting involved
when it did, but please, don't pretend that you "saved the world's
arses" .

As for Iraq, Afghanistan and the entire Middle East being better off,
you might find that history will evolve to negate Western involvement
just as the Crusades in actuality made no more impact than a mosquito
bite on an elephant's rear end. You (and the many allied troops - it
is not solely a US war) can never win in Afghanistan for many of the
same reasons you could have never won in Vietnam, but then we don't
talk about our defeats do we?

As for tyrants...

This has gotten way off topic.

Peter