R
 

nom=de=plume wrote:
"John H" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:12:54 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:29:53 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H Rant" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:20:09 -0400, Jim wrote:

nom=de=plume wrote:
"John H Rant" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 10:32:14 -0400, Jim wrote:

John H wrote:
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:41:55 -0700, jps
wrote:

On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:54:03 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Lu Powell" wrote in message
...
A Chicago poster hit a home run with the following. "The
Chicago
democrat
machine ain't what it used to be. They were supposed to bribe
the
Olympic
Committee!"

Priceless!
I thought the IOC was supposed to be the "one world gov't"
sports
wing. You
guys cheered when the US didn't get the 2016 games, which meant
no
jobs
(fyi, jobs that would have started almost immediately). Then,
when
the
Nobel
committee confirms your belief that Obama is a one-worlder, you
scream
and
yell, claiming it's a fraud. Please pick one. I'm getting
dizzy.
Don't expect a response.

They can't hold a position if it means they'd be on our
President's
side.
If she gets no response, it'll be because her comment is devoid
of
meaning. Sometimes ditziness makes one talk funny.

As for you, I'm on the President's side. He saved over 3.45
million
jobs while he was pushing for the Olympics. I think that's quite
worthwhile.
Careful who you are calling a ditz John. As Tom pointed out she
might
not be who she claims to be. Do you know any woman that wouldn't
freak
at the sight of a rattlesnake. Most men too.
Oh, my bad.

I saw this, "I'm getting dizzy." Then I made a typo, perhaps a
Freudian Typo. I should have said, "Sometimes dizziness makes one
talk
funny."

Thanks ever so much for point out my boo-boo.

I hope hesheit (pronounce that really fast) doesn't come after me.

Looks like some people aren't much men.... "most" men get freaked
out
by
a
snake? Give me a break.

I have a healthy respect for rattlesnakes, but I'm not afraid of
them.
They
are God's creatures, and they deserve our respect. I don't kill them
unless
it's absolutely necessary. I have a shovel and it works if it comes
to
that.
Jeeeze... even my cat can deal with rattlesnakes. Are you less than
a
cat?
No, don't answer.

The only good rattlesnake is a dead one. The only reason I tolerate
black snakes is because they eat rattle snakes and coral snakes.
If you were more of a manly man, like nomdeplum, rattlesnakes wouldn't
bother you at all.

I didn't say they don't bother me at all. I'm just used to them. But,
maybe
someone does have to "man up." If my cat can deal with them....
We're happy for you and your cat.
I figured you would be..

Why the name change?

Why 'R' and not 'M'?
Huh? I haven't changed anything..
Must have been a glitch.

Now that I've unfiltered you I can see that you haven't.


Every once in a while Outlook seems to go crazy. Even my iPhone can't seem
to keep things straight. I have bluetooth in the car and I'd tell it to call
home, and it would call a completely different place. Last time I tried to
call my friend Susan, and it tried to call the cat vet. I had to turn the
phone off to get it to reset.


Yesterday I was involved in ANOTHER parking lot accident caused by the
other party backing out of a parking space while dialing a number on
their phone.

That's four times in two years. Best not to get me in a cell phone debate.

The best I can offer is that these guys are giving themselves brain
cancer while driving up insurance rates. They would put the damn phone
down if they could understand why they should.

R
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:04:08 -0700, Jim wrote:



Yesterday I was involved in ANOTHER parking lot accident caused by the
other party backing out of a parking space while dialing a number on
their phone.

That's four times in two years. Best not to get me in a cell phone
debate.

The best I can offer is that these guys are giving themselves brain
cancer while driving up insurance rates. They would put the damn phone
down if they could understand why they should.

Just drove about 2500 miles and had only one "close-call."
Woman talking on a cell wandered over and almost got me.
Glad my wife screamed me onto the shoulder.

--Vic


I see people on the phone all the time. Around here, it's mostly guys in big
pickups, although there's the occaisonal sedan with a woman talking. I
watched a van run a red (no side traffic fortunately) while she was yacking
away. I don't think she noticed. I don't even like to talk via the built-in
bluetooth. That's distracting too. I usually pull over or if not possible,
slow down and move over, e.g., on the freeway.

--
Nom=de=Plume

R
 

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:04:08 -0700, Jim wrote:



Yesterday I was involved in ANOTHER parking lot accident caused by the
other party backing out of a parking space while dialing a number on
their phone.

That's four times in two years. Best not to get me in a cell phone debate.

The best I can offer is that these guys are giving themselves brain
cancer while driving up insurance rates. They would put the damn phone
down if they could understand why they should.

Just drove about 2500 miles and had only one "close-call."
Woman talking on a cell wandered over and almost got me.
Glad my wife screamed me onto the shoulder.

--Vic

R
 

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:50:58 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:04:08 -0700, Jim wrote:



Yesterday I was involved in ANOTHER parking lot accident caused by the
other party backing out of a parking space while dialing a number on
their phone.

That's four times in two years. Best not to get me in a cell phone
debate.

The best I can offer is that these guys are giving themselves brain
cancer while driving up insurance rates. They would put the damn phone
down if they could understand why they should.

Just drove about 2500 miles and had only one "close-call."
Woman talking on a cell wandered over and almost got me.
Glad my wife screamed me onto the shoulder.

--Vic


I see people on the phone all the time. Around here, it's mostly guys in big
pickups, although there's the occaisonal sedan with a woman talking. I
watched a van run a red (no side traffic fortunately) while she was yacking
away. I don't think she noticed. I don't even like to talk via the built-in
bluetooth. That's distracting too. I usually pull over or if not possible,
slow down and move over, e.g., on the freeway.

I hate to say it, but it seems to me that females with cell phones
pose the big problem. Yes, there may be males using them, but they
don't seem to get as distracted as do the females. When a car slows
from 70 to 50 in the fast lane, it's usually a female on a cell phone.
Totally oblivious to cars behind her.

Which committee?
 

On Oct 10, 9:32*am, Jim wrote:
John H wrote:
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:41:55 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:54:03 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Lu Powell" wrote in message
...
A Chicago poster hit a home run with the following. "The Chicago democrat
machine ain't what it used to be. They were supposed to bribe the Olympic
Committee!"

Priceless!

I thought the IOC was supposed to be the "one world gov't" sports wing. You
guys cheered when the US didn't get the 2016 games, which meant no jobs
(fyi, jobs that would have started almost immediately). Then, when the Nobel
committee confirms your belief that Obama is a one-worlder, you scream and
yell, claiming it's a fraud. Please pick one. I'm getting dizzy.
Don't expect a response. *

They can't hold a position if it means they'd be on our President's
side.

If she gets no response, it'll be because her comment is devoid of
meaning. Sometimes ditziness makes one talk funny.

As for you, I'm on the President's side. He saved over 3.45 million
jobs while he was pushing for the Olympics. I think that's quite
worthwhile.

Careful who you are calling a ditz John. As Tom pointed out she might
not be who she claims to be. Do you know any woman that wouldn't freak
at the sight of a rattlesnake. Most men too.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My wife doesn't discriminate.

She hates all snakes. I don't really like 'em either. except for
garden snakes. They keep the mice under control.

R
 

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:50:58 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:04:08 -0700, Jim wrote:



Yesterday I was involved in ANOTHER parking lot accident caused by the
other party backing out of a parking space while dialing a number on
their phone.

That's four times in two years. Best not to get me in a cell phone
debate.

The best I can offer is that these guys are giving themselves brain
cancer while driving up insurance rates. They would put the damn phone
down if they could understand why they should.

Just drove about 2500 miles and had only one "close-call."
Woman talking on a cell wandered over and almost got me.
Glad my wife screamed me onto the shoulder.

--Vic


I see people on the phone all the time. Around here, it's mostly guys in
big
pickups, although there's the occaisonal sedan with a woman talking. I
watched a van run a red (no side traffic fortunately) while she was
yacking
away. I don't think she noticed. I don't even like to talk via the
built-in
bluetooth. That's distracting too. I usually pull over or if not possible,
slow down and move over, e.g., on the freeway.

I hate to say it, but it seems to me that females with cell phones
pose the big problem. Yes, there may be males using them, but they
don't seem to get as distracted as do the females. When a car slows
from 70 to 50 in the fast lane, it's usually a female on a cell phone.
Totally oblivious to cars behind her.


I think that's totally sexist and not supported by any facts I'm aware of.
There's no comparison between testonerone big wheels driving, while yacking
about God knows what, while driving single-handed and smoking a cig.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Which committee?
 

"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Oct 10, 9:32 am, Jim wrote:
John H wrote:
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:41:55 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:54:03 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Lu Powell" wrote in message
...
A Chicago poster hit a home run with the following. "The Chicago
democrat
machine ain't what it used to be. They were supposed to bribe the
Olympic
Committee!"

Priceless!

I thought the IOC was supposed to be the "one world gov't" sports
wing. You
guys cheered when the US didn't get the 2016 games, which meant no
jobs
(fyi, jobs that would have started almost immediately). Then, when the
Nobel
committee confirms your belief that Obama is a one-worlder, you scream
and
yell, claiming it's a fraud. Please pick one. I'm getting dizzy.
Don't expect a response.

They can't hold a position if it means they'd be on our President's
side.

If she gets no response, it'll be because her comment is devoid of
meaning. Sometimes ditziness makes one talk funny.

As for you, I'm on the President's side. He saved over 3.45 million
jobs while he was pushing for the Olympics. I think that's quite
worthwhile.

Careful who you are calling a ditz John. As Tom pointed out she might
not be who she claims to be. Do you know any woman that wouldn't freak
at the sight of a rattlesnake. Most men too.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My wife doesn't discriminate.

She hates all snakes. I don't really like 'em either. except for
garden snakes. They keep the mice under control.


I've heard there are two kinds of people.. those that hate/fear snakes and
those that hate/fear spiders. If I had to pick which one to be near, I guess
I'd pick snakes (those without arms/legs, otherwise, I'd pick spiders).
--
Nom=de=Plume

R
 

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:50:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:50:58 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:04:08 -0700, Jim wrote:



Yesterday I was involved in ANOTHER parking lot accident caused by the
other party backing out of a parking space while dialing a number on
their phone.

That's four times in two years. Best not to get me in a cell phone
debate.

The best I can offer is that these guys are giving themselves brain
cancer while driving up insurance rates. They would put the damn phone
down if they could understand why they should.

Just drove about 2500 miles and had only one "close-call."
Woman talking on a cell wandered over and almost got me.
Glad my wife screamed me onto the shoulder.

--Vic


I see people on the phone all the time. Around here, it's mostly guys in
big
pickups, although there's the occaisonal sedan with a woman talking. I
watched a van run a red (no side traffic fortunately) while she was
yacking
away. I don't think she noticed. I don't even like to talk via the
built-in
bluetooth. That's distracting too. I usually pull over or if not possible,
slow down and move over, e.g., on the freeway.

I hate to say it, but it seems to me that females with cell phones
pose the big problem. Yes, there may be males using them, but they
don't seem to get as distracted as do the females. When a car slows
from 70 to 50 in the fast lane, it's usually a female on a cell phone.
Totally oblivious to cars behind her.


I think that's totally sexist and not supported by any facts I'm aware of.
There's no comparison between testonerone big wheels driving, while yacking
about God knows what, while driving single-handed and smoking a cig.

That's like saying I'm racist because I'm not wild about the health
bill being held up by the friggin' Democrats.

Facts are facts. 'Testonerone' big wheels driving while yacking don't
slow down to nothing and wander back and forth like the females do.

He "The following three points summarize the results from the
Poisson estimations. First, more phone usage while driving is
associated with higher accident risk for women in our sample. RT also
found that cell phone usage by women appears to be riskier than usage
by men."

from:
http://aei-brookings.org/admin/autho...POST1-4-07.pdf

or: http://tinyurl.com/2ygznv


Enough on that subject.

Which committee?
 

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:52:02 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Oct 10, 9:32 am, Jim wrote:
John H wrote:
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:41:55 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:54:03 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Lu Powell" wrote in message
...
A Chicago poster hit a home run with the following. "The Chicago
democrat
machine ain't what it used to be. They were supposed to bribe the
Olympic
Committee!"

Priceless!

I thought the IOC was supposed to be the "one world gov't" sports
wing. You
guys cheered when the US didn't get the 2016 games, which meant no
jobs
(fyi, jobs that would have started almost immediately). Then, when the
Nobel
committee confirms your belief that Obama is a one-worlder, you scream
and
yell, claiming it's a fraud. Please pick one. I'm getting dizzy.
Don't expect a response.

They can't hold a position if it means they'd be on our President's
side.

If she gets no response, it'll be because her comment is devoid of
meaning. Sometimes ditziness makes one talk funny.

As for you, I'm on the President's side. He saved over 3.45 million
jobs while he was pushing for the Olympics. I think that's quite
worthwhile.

Careful who you are calling a ditz John. As Tom pointed out she might
not be who she claims to be. Do you know any woman that wouldn't freak
at the sight of a rattlesnake. Most men too.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My wife doesn't discriminate.

She hates all snakes. I don't really like 'em either. except for
garden snakes. They keep the mice under control.


I've heard there are two kinds of people.. those that hate/fear snakes and
those that hate/fear spiders. If I had to pick which one to be near, I guess
I'd pick snakes (those without arms/legs, otherwise, I'd pick spiders).

There are 10 kinds of people. Those who do binary, and those who
don't.

R
 

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:50:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:50:58 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:04:08 -0700, Jim wrote:



Yesterday I was involved in ANOTHER parking lot accident caused by the
other party backing out of a parking space while dialing a number on
their phone.

That's four times in two years. Best not to get me in a cell phone
debate.

The best I can offer is that these guys are giving themselves brain
cancer while driving up insurance rates. They would put the damn
phone
down if they could understand why they should.

Just drove about 2500 miles and had only one "close-call."
Woman talking on a cell wandered over and almost got me.
Glad my wife screamed me onto the shoulder.

--Vic


I see people on the phone all the time. Around here, it's mostly guys in
big
pickups, although there's the occaisonal sedan with a woman talking. I
watched a van run a red (no side traffic fortunately) while she was
yacking
away. I don't think she noticed. I don't even like to talk via the
built-in
bluetooth. That's distracting too. I usually pull over or if not
possible,
slow down and move over, e.g., on the freeway.

I hate to say it, but it seems to me that females with cell phones
pose the big problem. Yes, there may be males using them, but they
don't seem to get as distracted as do the females. When a car slows
from 70 to 50 in the fast lane, it's usually a female on a cell phone.
Totally oblivious to cars behind her.


I think that's totally sexist and not supported by any facts I'm aware of.
There's no comparison between testonerone big wheels driving, while
yacking
about God knows what, while driving single-handed and smoking a cig.

That's like saying I'm racist because I'm not wild about the health
bill being held up by the friggin' Democrats.

It's sexist because it's not just about "getting distracted." It's your
opinion not supported by facts.


Facts are facts. 'Testonerone' big wheels driving while yacking don't
slow down to nothing and wander back and forth like the females do.

Pure supposition.

He "The following three points summarize the results from the
Poisson estimations. First, more phone usage while driving is
associated with higher accident risk for women in our sample. RT also
found that cell phone usage by women appears to be riskier than usage
by men."

from:
http://aei-brookings.org/admin/autho...POST1-4-07.pdf

or: http://tinyurl.com/2ygznv


That's one study. Here's another perspective:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/com...y_car_men.html


--
Nom=de=Plume