The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 1-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...

Saw worse - apparently some hedge fund kid married Howdy Doody in a
dress
yesterday.

You sound really jealous. I'm sorry, but even Palin wouldn't have you.

Hahahahahahahahahahhaa - that's it, I've always dreamed of The Clinton
Skank
and Slick Willy as my inlaws! You think the hedge fund kid was Howdy's
first choice, or did she blow it??

Was your choice dumb or dumber or moron or racist?

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

On 1-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

Hahahahahahahahahahhaa - that's it, I've always dreamed of The Clinton
Skank
and Slick Willy as my inlaws! You think the hedge fund kid was Howdy's
first choice, or did she blow it??

Was your choice dumb or dumber or moron or racist?

You should spend far less time watching Saturday morning TV

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 1-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

Hahahahahahahahahahhaa - that's it, I've always dreamed of The Clinton
Skank
and Slick Willy as my inlaws! You think the hedge fund kid was Howdy's
first choice, or did she blow it??

Was your choice dumb or dumber or moron or racist?

You should spend far less time watching Saturday morning TV

Whoooo... really got your panties in a twist didn't I. Sorry for you.

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

On 1-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

Hahahahahahahahahahhaa - that's it, I've always dreamed of The
Clinton
Skank
and Slick Willy as my inlaws! You think the hedge fund kid was
Howdy's
first choice, or did she blow it??

Was your choice dumb or dumber or moron or racist?

You should spend far less time watching Saturday morning TV

Whoooo... really got your panties in a twist didn't I. Sorry for you.

I very much liked dumb and dumber, a moron is the current and 2 previous
administrations, but with the gross ignorance of the inhabitants of the
former U.S., racist has become nothing more than TV show gibberish.

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 1-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

Hahahahahahahahahahhaa - that's it, I've always dreamed of The
Clinton
Skank
and Slick Willy as my inlaws! You think the hedge fund kid was
Howdy's
first choice, or did she blow it??

Was your choice dumb or dumber or moron or racist?

You should spend far less time watching Saturday morning TV

Whoooo... really got your panties in a twist didn't I. Sorry for you.

I very much liked dumb and dumber, a moron is the current and 2 previous
administrations, but with the gross ignorance of the inhabitants of the
former U.S., racist has become nothing more than TV show gibberish.

Sorry, but Obama is incredibly smart. I know that must hurt you somehow.
Bush was a true idiot. Clinton was a consummate politician and a Rhodes
Scholar. The only thing that's gibberish on the subject of racism on TV is
from the moron right-wingnuts.

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

On 2-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

I very much liked dumb and dumber, a moron is the current and 2 previous
administrations, but with the gross ignorance of the inhabitants of the
former U.S., racist has become nothing more than TV show gibberish.

Sorry, but Obama is incredibly smart. I know that must hurt you somehow.
Bush was a true idiot. Clinton was a consummate politician and a Rhodes
Scholar. The only thing that's gibberish on the subject of racism on TV is

from the moron right-wingnuts.

Obama has the capability to learn, reason, deduct, but is way out of league
in experience with anything but rah rah fraternity style promotion. I almost
feel sorry for him, but not his blind followers. UNDERSTAND that I was not a
sycophant for Mr. Magoo either, but the fact that the corrupt ruling parties
gave the average schlub those two choices is alone grounds for serious doubt
about the population's ability to think. Neither of these fools should have
even been on the mock ballot.

As long as you suffer the right vs left vs republican vs democrat crap, you
remain part of the problem. The corrupt political syndicates and their
lackeys WANT you to think that way to keep you from paying attention to what
is going on, and what is right and wrong.

They are doing it successfully, including getting entertainment TV (called
"news") to subscribe to their empty rhetoric.

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 2-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

I very much liked dumb and dumber, a moron is the current and 2
previous
administrations, but with the gross ignorance of the inhabitants of the
former U.S., racist has become nothing more than TV show gibberish.

Sorry, but Obama is incredibly smart. I know that must hurt you somehow.
Bush was a true idiot. Clinton was a consummate politician and a Rhodes
Scholar. The only thing that's gibberish on the subject of racism on TV
is

from the moron right-wingnuts.

Obama has the capability to learn, reason, deduct, but is way out of
league
in experience with anything but rah rah fraternity style promotion. I
almost
feel sorry for him, but not his blind followers. UNDERSTAND that I was not
a
sycophant for Mr. Magoo either, but the fact that the corrupt ruling
parties
gave the average schlub those two choices is alone grounds for serious
doubt
about the population's ability to think. Neither of these fools should
have
even been on the mock ballot.

You're wrong. Obama is an amazing intellect. Experience isn't the end all
and be all of being President. Bush was out of his league intellectually,
and he had very little experience.

The two party system works, mostly. It would be interesting to have a viable
third party, but so far nothing seems likely. Yes, both parties have corrupt
elements, but they are not in and of themselves corrupt.

As long as you suffer the right vs left vs republican vs democrat crap,
you
remain part of the problem. The corrupt political syndicates and their
lackeys WANT you to think that way to keep you from paying attention to
what
is going on, and what is right and wrong.

I'm only interested in a candidate who can actually make a difference,
including getting elected. McCain, in the last election, was not viable for
a host of reasons. Obama certainly isn't perfect, but there are very few who
qualify as perfect.

The only way to pay attention is to try and find as unbiased a source as
possible, and listen and evaluate all information sources (not necessarily
equally - it's called judgment, so comparing Faux to NPR isn't a reasonable
comparison). Who decides what's important? In some respects it's the media
(an entity mentioned in the Constitution), and in other respects it's one's
own due diligence.

They are doing it successfully, including getting entertainment TV (called
"news") to subscribe to their empty rhetoric.

Faux isn't news, although they would like you to believe they are. MSNBC is
mostly entertainment and what I would call insightful commentary with some
news mixed in. The major networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) are trying to find a
balance between corporate interest, news, and entertainment - unsuccessfully
in my opinion). NPR is pretty balanced, but only part of the story. The
foreign press has advantages and disadvantages.

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

On 2-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

As long as you suffer the right vs left vs republican vs democrat crap,
you
remain part of the problem. The corrupt political syndicates and their
lackeys WANT you to think that way to keep you from paying attention to
what
is going on, and what is right and wrong.

I'm only interested in a candidate who can actually make a difference,
including getting elected. McCain, in the last election, was not viable
for
a host of reasons. Obama certainly isn't perfect, but there are very few
who
qualify as perfect.

The only way to pay attention is to try and find as unbiased a source as
possible, and listen and evaluate all information sources (not necessarily

equally - it's called judgment, so comparing Faux to NPR isn't a
reasonable
comparison). Who decides what's important? In some respects it's the media

(an entity mentioned in the Constitution), and in other respects it's
one's
own due diligence.

They are doing it successfully, including getting entertainment TV
(called
"news") to subscribe to their empty rhetoric.

Faux isn't news, although they would like you to believe they are. MSNBC
is
mostly entertainment and what I would call insightful commentary with some

news mixed in. The major networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) are trying to find a
balance between corporate interest, news, and entertainment -
unsuccessfully
in my opinion). NPR is pretty balanced, but only part of the story. The
foreign press has advantages and disadvantages.

You are expounding on maintaining the status quo. Same old structure, but
we'll do better next time. That's been said since the 18th century. Then,
however, there was a chance.

I don't need a TV show, a politician, or nonsensical speech maker tell me
what I need (I'll take care of that) what they can give you (nothing unless
it's first confiscated) and I know perfectly well what establishes a
productive economy. Obama and the slime in congress do not. NO elected liar
could tell me different, not the current facade, or most of the previous.
The core fault of the United States is that politicians have learned that if
they can convince a small minority (only possibly 10% of the population
adhere to either ruling parties blather) that they will be cared for, they
get elected. The facts of the matter is that is literally impossible. The
tactic isn't new. At some point enough is confiscated from those nasty
entrepreneurs where they must leave; the coffers still need to rise to meet
the promised payment, then the P/L is beyond repair.

The "system" of two syndicates convincing the masses to side with them is
the problem. No non ruling class individual seems to be able to make a
decision without endorsement by someone (politician) who is getting paid out
of your pocket. If the confiscation keeps you in business to support the non
productive, the trend must advance.

Two corrupt political syndicates can only survive with the endorsement of
marginally equal wailing groups. The result is destructive, as evidenced by
the eminent crash of the entire country. Change underwear (parties) in
November - that's moronic and a waste of energy, but some of the public will
expound on that. NOTHING in the U.S. ever changes except its rate of
decimation. Do you bother voting D or R? If so, you are part of the
problem.

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 2-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

As long as you suffer the right vs left vs republican vs democrat crap,
you
remain part of the problem. The corrupt political syndicates and their
lackeys WANT you to think that way to keep you from paying attention to
what
is going on, and what is right and wrong.

I'm only interested in a candidate who can actually make a difference,
including getting elected. McCain, in the last election, was not viable
for
a host of reasons. Obama certainly isn't perfect, but there are very few
who
qualify as perfect.

The only way to pay attention is to try and find as unbiased a source as
possible, and listen and evaluate all information sources (not
necessarily

equally - it's called judgment, so comparing Faux to NPR isn't a
reasonable
comparison). Who decides what's important? In some respects it's the
media

(an entity mentioned in the Constitution), and in other respects it's
one's
own due diligence.

They are doing it successfully, including getting entertainment TV
(called
"news") to subscribe to their empty rhetoric.

Faux isn't news, although they would like you to believe they are. MSNBC
is
mostly entertainment and what I would call insightful commentary with
some

news mixed in. The major networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) are trying to find a
balance between corporate interest, news, and entertainment -
unsuccessfully
in my opinion). NPR is pretty balanced, but only part of the story. The
foreign press has advantages and disadvantages.

You are expounding on maintaining the status quo. Same old structure, but
we'll do better next time. That's been said since the 18th century. Then,
however, there was a chance.

Nope. I'm saying that I need to see a viable alternative before agreeing to
trash a system that's pretty much worked.

I don't need a TV show, a politician, or nonsensical speech maker tell me
what I need (I'll take care of that) what they can give you (nothing
unless
it's first confiscated) and I know perfectly well what establishes a
productive economy. Obama and the slime in congress do not. NO elected
liar
could tell me different, not the current facade, or most of the previous.
The core fault of the United States is that politicians have learned that
if
they can convince a small minority (only possibly 10% of the population
adhere to either ruling parties blather) that they will be cared for, they
get elected. The facts of the matter is that is literally impossible. The
tactic isn't new. At some point enough is confiscated from those nasty
entrepreneurs where they must leave; the coffers still need to rise to
meet
the promised payment, then the P/L is beyond repair.

The "system" of two syndicates convincing the masses to side with them is
the problem. No non ruling class individual seems to be able to make a
decision without endorsement by someone (politician) who is getting paid
out
of your pocket. If the confiscation keeps you in business to support the
non
productive, the trend must advance.

Two corrupt political syndicates can only survive with the endorsement of
marginally equal wailing groups. The result is destructive, as evidenced
by
the eminent crash of the entire country. Change underwear (parties) in
November - that's moronic and a waste of energy, but some of the public
will
expound on that. NOTHING in the U.S. ever changes except its rate of
decimation. Do you bother voting D or R? If so, you are part of the
problem.

This sounds like an angry rant. I vote for the best person. These days, that
tends to be Ds. I'm still waiting for a rational alternative. So far, you
have not indicated you have such an alternative.

The most disgusting thing you will ever see...
 

On 2-Aug-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

Do you bother voting D or R? If so, you are part of the
problem.

This sounds like an angry rant. I vote for the best person. These days,
that
tends to be Ds. I'm still waiting for a rational alternative. So far, you
have not indicated you have such an alternative.

With those "thoughts" you've simply become livestock being harvested. It's
your choice if you cannot get beyond the corrupt tyranny. That mindset is
behind the root causes of the failure of the U.S.