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 19:10:50 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 25/03/2011 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:05:26 -0600,
wrote:

On 25/03/2011 11:04 AM, Harryk wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/03/2011 10:21 AM, Harryk wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/03/2011 6:51 AM, OmDeFlume wrote:
On 3/25/2011 12:06 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/03/2011 8:15 PM, 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,

I know I will be reminded I can't vote but here goes...

ANYBODY but Obama. We got the bottom of the pond with that one.

But but, pondscum floats.

Sure was a dirty pond whee Obama came from.


Really? I've been to Hawaii twice, and I found it to be a remarkable
place. How many times have you been there?

Not once. I prefer Costa Rica, Panama, Mexico. Have lived in 4 other
countries too. Been to Europe. Probably been to at least 40 states on a
visit or pass through. And you? Whole life in backwater USA?


No, I've been around and to more countries and continents than you've
mentioned. I do like Hawaii a lot, though. Beautiful, multi-cultural,
terrific beaches, pretty mountains, fabulous local restaurants, et cetera.

Wife has been to Hawaii. See seems to prefer the spanish touch. From
what I hear of Hawaii, I would agree. But might get there in the next
year or two. Say in 2 years if they still offer the 20 island cruise --
goes to more than Hawaii. 34 days on a cruise ship sounds interesting.
But this year is out as we are looking for a retirement community in
Panama or Costa Rica. Hope to have something in the next year.

If you need a few bucks to leave sooner, just let us know.

Why? So a fleabagger friends of yours can rip me off? Hahahaha...
Besides you wouldn't know if I was gone as I can VPN in while on the
road. Not like you using daddy's hand me down computer in a trailer park.

You're the one who lives in a trailer park, so talk to your own daddy
about an upgrade.

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:13:20 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 25/03/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:19:01 -0600,
wrote:

On 25/03/2011 10:29 AM, 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.

Yep, having faith in government is a big letdown. I never had such
faith. My CPP/SS is pocket change, if I get it good deal and extra
cruise each year.

It will get ugly, especially here in Canada. Canada is not a cheap
place to live. Yet so many think they can live on $1000/mo. on CPP
(Canada's version of SS).

Are they in for a rude awaking.

But in all fairness, when you look at what they paid into it, the people
who paid for 25 years plus are getting hosed big.

You want ALL pensions in your name, in your account, in your control and
that is final. Anything else is bullsh!t.

Looks like Canada gets to vote, government just went down on a
non-confidence motion. Over paid lard fools want an election. Our next
government will break the bad news....WE ARE BROKE and BANKRUPT.

So, basically you're a leech on society.

Nope, just living off my savings and investments. But you would not
know about that, being trailer park trash on welfare and all.

Give us a break. You live hand to mouth. You have no savings. You're
welfare all the way. Nothing wrong with it, but I can imagine you're a
bit ashamed!

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 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 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.