On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 22:15:07 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:04:11 -0700, wrote:

Colin Powell could beat him but he is not willing and the far right
doesn't think he is right enough.

Powell has too much baggage with the UN testimony. Too bad, since he's
a decent, thoughtful guy who couldn't win against Cheney.

You could use the same argument as fleabaggers used on McCain, Powell is
too old.

Powell is just one year younger, but he isn't senile and isn't an
angry old man.

Pretty sure Obama is going to be a one term dodo if they can come up
with anything 1/2 baked.

I would welcome a Republican presidential candidate who would be a
rational, viable choice, which would be helpful for a healthy, honest,
debate about the important issues facing us.

I don't see one around that has any chance of getting the nomination.
It think it's more likely that it'll be someone who is either extreme
and ignorant or extreme with a lot of baggage.

Hey, go for it if he wants. I would vote for Powell, he is a republican
military, sure to kick some ass.

Powell is an intelligent former statesman and general. He's about as
anti-war as you can get.

I doubt he would be interested at this point, given his age and the
baggage.

As far as I am concerned "baggage" is really experience. That is
particularly true in this case.

I would really prefer someone who wasn't from the Bush/Clinton/Bush
legacy. I am just not sure who it would be,

Really? Like Newt's experience dumping his wife while she was getting
chemo? Was that his first wife or his third?

Similar to Edwards huh? Politicians are generally scum.

Yes, similar to Edwards in moral failing. No, not similar to Edwards
as a ardent supporter of family values, whatever that means.


Or, like all the experience pandering to the crazy bat**** people?

Or, the stop funding the gov't crowd that has no governance
experience?

I said I am not sure who it would be. The pool of candidates is really
pretty shallow and I don't blame them. The job of president really
sucks. It will only get worse as the economic problems we have been
ignoring for the last 50 years start exploding in our face.

The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

On 25/03/2011 1:17 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 22:15:07 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:04:11 -0700, wrote:

Colin Powell could beat him but he is not willing and the far right
doesn't think he is right enough.

Powell has too much baggage with the UN testimony. Too bad, since he's
a decent, thoughtful guy who couldn't win against Cheney.

You could use the same argument as fleabaggers used on McCain, Powell is
too old.

Powell is just one year younger, but he isn't senile and isn't an
angry old man.

Pretty sure Obama is going to be a one term dodo if they can come up
with anything 1/2 baked.

I would welcome a Republican presidential candidate who would be a
rational, viable choice, which would be helpful for a healthy, honest,
debate about the important issues facing us.

I don't see one around that has any chance of getting the nomination.
It think it's more likely that it'll be someone who is either extreme
and ignorant or extreme with a lot of baggage.

Hey, go for it if he wants. I would vote for Powell, he is a republican
military, sure to kick some ass.

Powell is an intelligent former statesman and general. He's about as
anti-war as you can get.

I doubt he would be interested at this point, given his age and the
baggage.

As far as I am concerned "baggage" is really experience. That is
particularly true in this case.

I would really prefer someone who wasn't from the Bush/Clinton/Bush
legacy. I am just not sure who it would be,

Really? Like Newt's experience dumping his wife while she was getting
chemo? Was that his first wife or his third?

Similar to Edwards huh? Politicians are generally scum.

Yes, similar to Edwards in moral failing. No, not similar to Edwards
as a ardent supporter of family values, whatever that means.


Or, like all the experience pandering to the crazy bat**** people?

Or, the stop funding the gov't crowd that has no governance
experience?

I said I am not sure who it would be. The pool of candidates is really
pretty shallow and I don't blame them. The job of president really
sucks. It will only get worse as the economic problems we have been
ignoring for the last 50 years start exploding in our face.

The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

That is why smart people like me made sure my pension was in my name, in
my account under my direct control. Paid off in spades as fleabaggers
like you can't get to it.

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:14:54 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 25/03/2011 1:17 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 22:15:07 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:04:11 -0700, wrote:

Colin Powell could beat him but he is not willing and the far right
doesn't think he is right enough.

Powell has too much baggage with the UN testimony. Too bad, since he's
a decent, thoughtful guy who couldn't win against Cheney.

You could use the same argument as fleabaggers used on McCain, Powell is
too old.

Powell is just one year younger, but he isn't senile and isn't an
angry old man.

Pretty sure Obama is going to be a one term dodo if they can come up
with anything 1/2 baked.

I would welcome a Republican presidential candidate who would be a
rational, viable choice, which would be helpful for a healthy, honest,
debate about the important issues facing us.

I don't see one around that has any chance of getting the nomination.
It think it's more likely that it'll be someone who is either extreme
and ignorant or extreme with a lot of baggage.

Hey, go for it if he wants. I would vote for Powell, he is a republican
military, sure to kick some ass.

Powell is an intelligent former statesman and general. He's about as
anti-war as you can get.

I doubt he would be interested at this point, given his age and the
baggage.

As far as I am concerned "baggage" is really experience. That is
particularly true in this case.

I would really prefer someone who wasn't from the Bush/Clinton/Bush
legacy. I am just not sure who it would be,

Really? Like Newt's experience dumping his wife while she was getting
chemo? Was that his first wife or his third?

Similar to Edwards huh? Politicians are generally scum.

Yes, similar to Edwards in moral failing. No, not similar to Edwards
as a ardent supporter of family values, whatever that means.


Or, like all the experience pandering to the crazy bat**** people?

Or, the stop funding the gov't crowd that has no governance
experience?

I said I am not sure who it would be. The pool of candidates is really
pretty shallow and I don't blame them. The job of president really
sucks. It will only get worse as the economic problems we have been
ignoring for the last 50 years start exploding in our face.

The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

That is why smart people like me made sure my pension was in my name, in
my account under my direct control. Paid off in spades as fleabaggers
like you can't get to it.

"Smart people like you" is oxymoronic.

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:


The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.

So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 22:25:24 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:40:23 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:


The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.

So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!

I fully expect to. It is already happening tho. They are taxing the
hell out of my "tax free" social security and when I get to Medicare I
expect the part B and "gap" insurance to be higher than it is now.
I have already been told part D is not as good as buying the
Medco/WalMart plan.
Since I don't really use any drugs, I don't care about that.

$25 a year pretty much covers my fish oil and a multivitamin every
day.

Good for you, and of course all those other people who perhaps have
health issues... they're on their own!

On Mar 25, 10:57*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 22:25:24 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:40:23 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:

The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.

So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!

I fully expect to. It is already happening tho. They are taxing the
hell out of my "tax free" social security and when I get to Medicare I
expect the part B and "gap" insurance to be higher than it is now.
I have already been told part D is not as good as buying the
Medco/WalMart plan.
Since I don't really use any drugs, I don't care about that.

$25 a year pretty much covers my fish oil and a multivitamin every
day.

Good for you, and of course all those other people who perhaps have
health issues... they're on their own!

And how do you distribute your ill-gotten gains, D'Plume?

On 3/25/2011 10:25 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:40:23 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:


The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.

So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!

I fully expect to. It is already happening tho. They are taxing the
hell out of my "tax free" social security and when I get to Medicare I
expect the part B and "gap" insurance to be higher than it is now.
I have already been told part D is not as good as buying the
Medco/WalMart plan.
Since I don't really use any drugs, I don't care about that.

$25 a year pretty much covers my fish oil and a multivitamin every
day.

Why do you allow this little girl to suck you into these dumb off topic
discussions?

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:51:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:47:43 -0400, OmDeFlume wrote:

On 3/25/2011 10:25 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:40:23 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:


The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.

So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!

I fully expect to. It is already happening tho. They are taxing the
hell out of my "tax free" social security and when I get to Medicare I
expect the part B and "gap" insurance to be higher than it is now.
I have already been told part D is not as good as buying the
Medco/WalMart plan.
Since I don't really use any drugs, I don't care about that.

$25 a year pretty much covers my fish oil and a multivitamin every
day.

Why do you allow this little girl to suck you into these dumb off topic
discussions?


I enjoy bantering with Plume. The naivete of youth is always
refreshing.

Gee I didn't realize senility was considered an advantage! LOL

On 3/27/2011 1:23 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:51:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:47:43 -0400, wrote:

On 3/25/2011 10:25 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:40:23 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:


The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.

Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.

So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.

So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!

I fully expect to. It is already happening tho. They are taxing the
hell out of my "tax free" social security and when I get to Medicare I
expect the part B and "gap" insurance to be higher than it is now.
I have already been told part D is not as good as buying the
Medco/WalMart plan.
Since I don't really use any drugs, I don't care about that.

$25 a year pretty much covers my fish oil and a multivitamin every
day.

Why do you allow this little girl to suck you into these dumb off topic
discussions?


I enjoy bantering with Plume. The naivete of youth is always
refreshing.

Gee I didn't realize senility was considered an advantage! LOL

Well there's a dumb remark, dear. It's funny that you find that amusing.
One day you will be dealing with senility in one way or another and I'm
certain you wont be finding that funny. Have a nice life dear.

wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:23:04 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:51:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:47:43 -0400, wrote:

On 3/25/2011 10:25 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:40:23 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:
The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.
Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.
So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.
So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!
I fully expect to. It is already happening tho. They are taxing the
hell out of my "tax free" social security and when I get to Medicare I
expect the part B and "gap" insurance to be higher than it is now.
I have already been told part D is not as good as buying the
Medco/WalMart plan.
Since I don't really use any drugs, I don't care about that.

$25 a year pretty much covers my fish oil and a multivitamin every
day.
Why do you allow this little girl to suck you into these dumb off topic
discussions?

I enjoy bantering with Plume. The naivete of youth is always
refreshing.
Gee I didn't realize senility was considered an advantage! LOL

I am not the one who has trouble remembering what we were talking
about ;-)

It is a strange comment from a person who believes in the unions and
their policy of paying the oldest and longest serving employees the
most, regardless of performance.


It must really aggravate you retired corporate slugs that there are
still a few employees around who are not at-will serfs, to be disposed
of on a whim so the boys in the suits can take home bigger "bonuses."

BTW, are you also imposed to military personnel getting paid more the
longer they serve?