Spot On...
 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:47:17 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:


There is no shortage of chronic liars running for the GOP nomination,
including the two at the top, and as for giving away the farm, what the
Repugs want to do is get their hands on more of the assets of the middle
class and working poor and hand it over to the rich.


News flash!
Communism has failed every place it was tried and Robin Hood is a
fictional character.
Taking from the rich and giving to the poor only makes everyone poor.

Spot On...
 

On 1/18/16 12:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 08:34:42 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/17/16 9:32 PM, wrote:


Do you really think anyone but the democrat will have a snowball's
chance in hell of carrying Maryland whether you or even 20,000 of you
stayed home?
Richard is in the same situation. I don't see any Reagans out there.



Your disdain for the American political system is almost comical.
As for my vote, as I stated, I want to contribute to the Democratic
landslide in the popular vote. As for "Reagans," your boy Ronnie never
impressed me.

As usual you either missed the point or you intentionally ignored it.
Reagan won Mass in 80 and 84. He won Maryland in 84 too.
Since then Md and Mass have been solid blue and a few more GOP votes
or a few less dem votes were not going to change that.

As for the political system, are you saying that you like the EC now
or are you just trolling again? The popular vote is actually
irrelevant. Once a candidate wins a state, the rest of the votes there
are pretty much wasted.


Gosh, you took civics in high school or read an article.

I know what the "popular vote" is and what it means. I also know a
landslide in the popular vote can have meaning politically, and it can
also help elect downticket candidates.

Spot On...
 

On 1/18/16 12:35 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:47:17 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:


There is no shortage of chronic liars running for the GOP nomination,
including the two at the top, and as for giving away the farm, what the
Repugs want to do is get their hands on more of the assets of the middle
class and working poor and hand it over to the rich.


News flash!
Communism has failed every place it was tried and Robin Hood is a
fictional character.
Taking from the rich and giving to the poor only makes everyone poor.


News flash...communism is not an issue, Mr. Civics.

Spot On...
 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:07:16 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 12:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 08:34:42 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/17/16 9:32 PM, wrote:


Do you really think anyone but the democrat will have a snowball's
chance in hell of carrying Maryland whether you or even 20,000 of you
stayed home?
Richard is in the same situation. I don't see any Reagans out there.



Your disdain for the American political system is almost comical.
As for my vote, as I stated, I want to contribute to the Democratic
landslide in the popular vote. As for "Reagans," your boy Ronnie never
impressed me.

As usual you either missed the point or you intentionally ignored it.
Reagan won Mass in 80 and 84. He won Maryland in 84 too.
Since then Md and Mass have been solid blue and a few more GOP votes
or a few less dem votes were not going to change that.

As for the political system, are you saying that you like the EC now
or are you just trolling again? The popular vote is actually
irrelevant. Once a candidate wins a state, the rest of the votes there
are pretty much wasted.


Gosh, you took civics in high school or read an article.

I know what the "popular vote" is and what it means. I also know a
landslide in the popular vote can have meaning politically, and it can
also help elect downticket candidates.

You are confusing popular vote with voter turnout.
I take a lot of care in who I vote for in the state and local
elections where the popular vote actually means something but the
circus that the presidency has become does not really merit that much
thought.
Most states are decided long before the first vote is cast and the
fact that Maryland, Massachusetts or California goes democrat 90% or
50%+1 is just gee whiz information.
I have only voted in one race in 68 years where my vote would even
show up and if I had voted for Bush in 2000 it would have been 538
votes instead of 537

Spot On...
 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:14:59 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 12:35 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:47:17 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:


There is no shortage of chronic liars running for the GOP nomination,
including the two at the top, and as for giving away the farm, what the
Repugs want to do is get their hands on more of the assets of the middle
class and working poor and hand it over to the rich.


News flash!
Communism has failed every place it was tried and Robin Hood is a
fictional character.
Taking from the rich and giving to the poor only makes everyone poor.


News flash...communism is not an issue, Mr. Civics.

Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.

Spot On...
 

wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:14:59 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 12:35 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:47:17 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:


There is no shortage of chronic liars running for the GOP nomination,
including the two at the top, and as for giving away the farm, what the
Repugs want to do is get their hands on more of the assets of the middle
class and working poor and hand it over to the rich.


News flash!
Communism has failed every place it was tried and Robin Hood is a
fictional character.
Taking from the rich and giving to the poor only makes everyone poor.


News flash...communism is not an issue, Mr. Civics.

Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.


Bull****. He isn't even as much of a socialist as some of my socialist
friends, Mr. PoliSci.

--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

Spot On...
 

On 1/18/16 4:19 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:07:16 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 12:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 08:34:42 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/17/16 9:32 PM, wrote:


Do you really think anyone but the democrat will have a snowball's
chance in hell of carrying Maryland whether you or even 20,000 of you
stayed home?
Richard is in the same situation. I don't see any Reagans out there.



Your disdain for the American political system is almost comical.
As for my vote, as I stated, I want to contribute to the Democratic
landslide in the popular vote. As for "Reagans," your boy Ronnie never
impressed me.

As usual you either missed the point or you intentionally ignored it.
Reagan won Mass in 80 and 84. He won Maryland in 84 too.
Since then Md and Mass have been solid blue and a few more GOP votes
or a few less dem votes were not going to change that.

As for the political system, are you saying that you like the EC now
or are you just trolling again? The popular vote is actually
irrelevant. Once a candidate wins a state, the rest of the votes there
are pretty much wasted.


Gosh, you took civics in high school or read an article.

I know what the "popular vote" is and what it means. I also know a
landslide in the popular vote can have meaning politically, and it can
also help elect downticket candidates.

You are confusing popular vote with voter turnout.


No, I am not, Dr. PoliSci

Spot On...
 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:51:32 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:14:59 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 12:35 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:47:17 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:


There is no shortage of chronic liars running for the GOP nomination,
including the two at the top, and as for giving away the farm, what the
Repugs want to do is get their hands on more of the assets of the middle
class and working poor and hand it over to the rich.


News flash!
Communism has failed every place it was tried and Robin Hood is a
fictional character.
Taking from the rich and giving to the poor only makes everyone poor.


News flash...communism is not an issue, Mr. Civics.

Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.


Bull****. He isn't even as much of a socialist as some of my socialist
friends, Mr. PoliSci.

Who? Karl Marx and Fidel Castro?

If you read the classical definition of Communism, Bernie fits it just
fine.
He wants to redistribute wealth, have the government establish wages,
he thinks the government should control the means of production and
has even suggested nationalizing businesses.

Spot On...
 

On 1/18/2016 4:26 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:14:59 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 12:35 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:47:17 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:


There is no shortage of chronic liars running for the GOP nomination,
including the two at the top, and as for giving away the farm, what the
Repugs want to do is get their hands on more of the assets of the middle
class and working poor and hand it over to the rich.


News flash!
Communism has failed every place it was tried and Robin Hood is a
fictional character.
Taking from the rich and giving to the poor only makes everyone poor.


News flash...communism is not an issue, Mr. Civics.


Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.


Disagree. He's a Democratic Socialist. It's a real thing and ideology.
My lawyer friend is also a Democratic Socialist and he and I often
discussed what it means and what the differences are as compared to
"socialism" and "communism."

Bernie is neither a socialist or a communist.

Spot On...
 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:20:34 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 4:19 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:07:16 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 12:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 08:34:42 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/17/16 9:32 PM, wrote:


Do you really think anyone but the democrat will have a snowball's
chance in hell of carrying Maryland whether you or even 20,000 of you
stayed home?
Richard is in the same situation. I don't see any Reagans out there.



Your disdain for the American political system is almost comical.
As for my vote, as I stated, I want to contribute to the Democratic
landslide in the popular vote. As for "Reagans," your boy Ronnie never
impressed me.

As usual you either missed the point or you intentionally ignored it.
Reagan won Mass in 80 and 84. He won Maryland in 84 too.
Since then Md and Mass have been solid blue and a few more GOP votes
or a few less dem votes were not going to change that.

As for the political system, are you saying that you like the EC now
or are you just trolling again? The popular vote is actually
irrelevant. Once a candidate wins a state, the rest of the votes there
are pretty much wasted.


Gosh, you took civics in high school or read an article.

I know what the "popular vote" is and what it means. I also know a
landslide in the popular vote can have meaning politically, and it can
also help elect downticket candidates.

You are confusing popular vote with voter turnout.


No, I am not, Dr. PoliSci

Brain fart. I notice you didn't bother to see what I meant or post the
rest of the message.

Spot On...
 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:11:54 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.


Disagree. He's a Democratic Socialist. It's a real thing and ideology.
My lawyer friend is also a Democratic Socialist and he and I often
discussed what it means and what the differences are as compared to
"socialism" and "communism."

Bernie is neither a socialist or a communist.


You sound like Harry quibbling about the difference between an athirst
and an agnostic.

Sanders's LUP platform called for the nationalization of all U.S.
banks, public ownership of all utilities, and the establishment of a
worker-controlled federal government. Add to that, he wants to
nationalize the entire health care industry and regulate salaries of
the companies that are left, redistributing what he thinks are "excess
profits" he sounds pretty "communist" to me.

Spot On...
 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:29:45 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:11:54 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.


Disagree. He's a Democratic Socialist. It's a real thing and ideology.
My lawyer friend is also a Democratic Socialist and he and I often
discussed what it means and what the differences are as compared to
"socialism" and "communism."

Bernie is neither a socialist or a communist.


You sound like Harry quibbling about the difference between an athirst
and an agnostic.

Sanders's LUP platform called for the nationalization of all U.S.
banks, public ownership of all utilities, and the establishment of a
worker-controlled federal government. Add to that, he wants to
nationalize the entire health care industry and regulate salaries of
the companies that are left, redistributing what he thinks are "excess
profits" he sounds pretty "communist" to me.

===

It's a heck of a good start. I already live in a city with
essentially a worker controlled government and frankly it leaves a bit
to be desired. The employees union is very strong, they vote, and
there are a lot of them. Any elected official, or high ranking
appointed office, goes up against the union at their own peril.

Canada, our neighbor to the north, has a totally regulated health care
system. Patients hate it because non-emergency care is tightly
rationed. People wait a long time to see specialists, even people
with fractures who need an orthopedic surgeon. It's the same with
people who need cataract surgery or joint replacement. Doctors hate
it because they can't treat their patients the way they should be, and
every thing they do is second guessed by the system. Doctors have
left the system in droves to retire or go to other countries. It is
illegal for patients inside Canada to go outside the system but those
who can afford it go to other countries at their own expense.

That said, Bernie is a likable guy who has a few good ideas, mainly
his plan to get big money and special interests out of politics. Of
the four major candidates at this time, I might be tempted to vote for
him. At least he respects the second ammendment, is not an
inexperienced blow hard ego maniac, is not in bed with the religious
right, and not a proven liar surrounded by past scandals. I think our
system of checks and balances would keep him from nationalizing any
major businesses, and hopefully keep from implementing a nationalized
health care system.

Spot On...
 

On 1/18/2016 7:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:11:54 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.


Disagree. He's a Democratic Socialist. It's a real thing and ideology.
My lawyer friend is also a Democratic Socialist and he and I often
discussed what it means and what the differences are as compared to
"socialism" and "communism."

Bernie is neither a socialist or a communist.


You sound like Harry quibbling about the difference between an athirst
and an agnostic.

Sanders's LUP platform called for the nationalization of all U.S.
banks, public ownership of all utilities, and the establishment of a
worker-controlled federal government. Add to that, he wants to
nationalize the entire health care industry and regulate salaries of
the companies that are left, redistributing what he thinks are "excess
profits" he sounds pretty "communist" to me.



His LUP platform? Holy crap Greg. That was in 1971 .. 45 years ago.
He left the LUP (Liberty Union Party) in 1976. His views and
proposals have become much more mainstream now compared to then.

You really need to upgrade your computers and software. :-)

Spot On...
 

On 1/18/16 7:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:11:54 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.


Disagree. He's a Democratic Socialist. It's a real thing and ideology.
My lawyer friend is also a Democratic Socialist and he and I often
discussed what it means and what the differences are as compared to
"socialism" and "communism."

Bernie is neither a socialist or a communist.


You sound like Harry quibbling about the difference between an athirst
and an agnostic.


It's only a quibble to those who don't understand the difference.

Spot On...
 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 20:08:18 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 7:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:11:54 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



Bernie is a communist and you can parse it anywhere you want but it is
true.


Disagree. He's a Democratic Socialist. It's a real thing and ideology.
My lawyer friend is also a Democratic Socialist and he and I often
discussed what it means and what the differences are as compared to
"socialism" and "communism."

Bernie is neither a socialist or a communist.


You sound like Harry quibbling about the difference between an athirst
and an agnostic.


It's only a quibble to those who don't understand the difference.

Yeah, you sound like one of those "audiophools" who lecture me about
oxygen in speaker wire.

Spot On...
 

On 1/18/16 7:19 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:20:34 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 4:19 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:07:16 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 12:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 08:34:42 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/17/16 9:32 PM, wrote:


Do you really think anyone but the democrat will have a snowball's
chance in hell of carrying Maryland whether you or even 20,000 of you
stayed home?
Richard is in the same situation. I don't see any Reagans out there.



Your disdain for the American political system is almost comical.
As for my vote, as I stated, I want to contribute to the Democratic
landslide in the popular vote. As for "Reagans," your boy Ronnie never
impressed me.

As usual you either missed the point or you intentionally ignored it.
Reagan won Mass in 80 and 84. He won Maryland in 84 too.
Since then Md and Mass have been solid blue and a few more GOP votes
or a few less dem votes were not going to change that.

As for the political system, are you saying that you like the EC now
or are you just trolling again? The popular vote is actually
irrelevant. Once a candidate wins a state, the rest of the votes there
are pretty much wasted.


Gosh, you took civics in high school or read an article.

I know what the "popular vote" is and what it means. I also know a
landslide in the popular vote can have meaning politically, and it can
also help elect downticket candidates.

You are confusing popular vote with voter turnout.


No, I am not, Dr. PoliSci

Brain fart. I notice you didn't bother to see what I meant or post the
rest of the message.


Perhaps you've noticed I rarely anymore get "involved" in your quests
here to see how many elephants can fit on the head of a pin.

It is possible you don't understand the import of a "landslide victory"
in the national popular vote, or that it isn't necessarily connected to
huge voter turnout, and that no matter how many people vote (turnout) a
"landslide" can help downticket candidates.

Oh, I know what you meant. But that's not what I was discussing, nor was
I discussing the electoral college, per se.

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:40:03 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Perhaps you've noticed I rarely anymore get "involved" in your quests
here to see how many elephants can fit on the head of a pin.

===

Funny stuff considering the source.

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:04:40 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:40:03 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Perhaps you've noticed I rarely anymore get "involved" in your quests
here to see how many elephants can fit on the head of a pin.

===

Funny stuff considering the source.

One who should not be discussing 'pinheads'.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Spot On...
 

On 1/19/16 9:18 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:04:40 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:40:03 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Perhaps you've noticed I rarely anymore get "involved" in your quests
here to see how many elephants can fit and dance on the head of a pin.

===

Funny stuff considering the source.

One who should not be discussing 'pinheads'.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



Actually, it was a cultural allusion I left for Greg, considering his
career at IBM, in the vein of "IBM bringing out a personal computer
would be like teaching an elephant to tap dance," but, of course,
"getting it" would require some amount of cultural literacy, which is
pretty much lacking among you and yours.

Shouldn't you be out in Oregon, delivering snacks to your Teabagging
heroes?

Spot On...
 

On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 9:16:51 AM UTC-6, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/19/16 9:18 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:04:40 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:40:03 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Perhaps you've noticed I rarely anymore get "involved" in your quests
here to see how many elephants can fit and dance on the head of a pin..

===

Funny stuff considering the source.

One who should not be discussing 'pinheads'.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



Actually, it was a cultural allusion I left for Greg, considering his
career at IBM, in the vein of "IBM bringing out a personal computer
would be like teaching an elephant to tap dance," but, of course,
"getting it" would require some amount of cultural literacy, which is
pretty much lacking among you and yours.

Shouldn't you be out in Oregon, delivering snacks to your Teabagging
heroes?

We see you are still up-skirting Hillary.

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:40:03 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 7:19 PM, wrote:

Brain fart. I notice you didn't bother to see what I meant or post the
rest of the message.


Perhaps you've noticed I rarely anymore get "involved" in your quests
here to see how many elephants can fit on the head of a pin.

It is possible you don't understand the import of a "landslide victory"
in the national popular vote, or that it isn't necessarily connected to
huge voter turnout, and that no matter how many people vote (turnout) a
"landslide" can help downticket candidates.

Oh, I know what you meant. But that's not what I was discussing, nor was
I discussing the electoral college, per se.

When the down ticket is a political hack like Steny Hoyer or DUI
lawyer like Mike Miller, there is not much of a challenge anyway.
If it makes you happy to be part of the landslide, go for it but don't
delude yourself that you are actually instrumental in the process.

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:16:47 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Actually, it was a cultural allusion I left for Greg, considering his
career at IBM, in the vein of "IBM bringing out a personal computer
would be like teaching an elephant to tap dance," but, of course,
"getting it" would require some amount of cultural literacy, which is
pretty much lacking among you and yours.


AKA another off topic brain fart.
The quote itself wasn't even from IBM, it was a 3d party consultant.
The other "Elephant" reference was Gerstner, the asshole who laid off
100,000 people in his effort to "make the elephant dance".
It was "dance" in the sense of those old cowboy movies where you dance
to the beat of gunfire at your feet.

Spot On...
 

On 1/19/16 11:59 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:40:03 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/18/16 7:19 PM, wrote:

Brain fart. I notice you didn't bother to see what I meant or post the
rest of the message.


Perhaps you've noticed I rarely anymore get "involved" in your quests
here to see how many elephants can fit on the head of a pin.

It is possible you don't understand the import of a "landslide victory"
in the national popular vote, or that it isn't necessarily connected to
huge voter turnout, and that no matter how many people vote (turnout) a
"landslide" can help downticket candidates.

Oh, I know what you meant. But that's not what I was discussing, nor was
I discussing the electoral college, per se.

When the down ticket is a political hack like Steny Hoyer or DUI
lawyer like Mike Miller, there is not much of a challenge anyway.
If it makes you happy to be part of the landslide, go for it but don't
delude yourself that you are actually instrumental in the process.




You're a trip. In his last four elections, Hoyer's Republican opponents
could do no better than 35% of the vote cast, and his Libertarian
opponents got 1 to 2% of the vote case. I wouldn't call Hoyer a
"political hack," but, then, I don't have your bizarre views on politics.

If Hillary ends up running against the Donald, and she gets 55% or
better of the vote cast nationally, it'll be considered a landslide, and
it may be enough for the Dems to recapture the U.S. Senate and gain some
seats back in the House. Thus, a Hillary victory of that magnitude will
likely carry some downticket Dems into national Congressional office.

Spot On...
 

On 1/19/16 12:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:16:47 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Actually, it was a cultural allusion I left for Greg, considering his
career at IBM, in the vein of "IBM bringing out a personal computer
would be like teaching an elephant to tap dance," but, of course,
"getting it" would require some amount of cultural literacy, which is
pretty much lacking among you and yours.


AKA another off topic brain fart.
The quote itself wasn't even from IBM, it was a 3d party consultant.
The other "Elephant" reference was Gerstner, the asshole who laid off
100,000 people in his effort to "make the elephant dance".
It was "dance" in the sense of those old cowboy movies where you dance
to the beat of gunfire at your feet.



I didn't say the quote was *from* IBM, but it was *about* IBM. Glad you
were able to google it up.

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:20:57 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/19/16 12:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:16:47 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Actually, it was a cultural allusion I left for Greg, considering his
career at IBM, in the vein of "IBM bringing out a personal computer
would be like teaching an elephant to tap dance," but, of course,
"getting it" would require some amount of cultural literacy, which is
pretty much lacking among you and yours.


AKA another off topic brain fart.
The quote itself wasn't even from IBM, it was a 3d party consultant.
The other "Elephant" reference was Gerstner, the asshole who laid off
100,000 people in his effort to "make the elephant dance".
It was "dance" in the sense of those old cowboy movies where you dance
to the beat of gunfire at your feet.



I didn't say the quote was *from* IBM, but it was *about* IBM. Glad you
were able to google it up.

You don't think I might have heard that before?

I was in Kingston when they were working on this, before it got
shipped to Boca

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:16:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 1/19/16 9:18 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:04:40 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:40:03 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Perhaps you've noticed I rarely anymore get "involved" in your quests
here to see how many elephants can fit and dance on the head of a pin.

===

Funny stuff considering the source.

One who should not be discussing 'pinheads'.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



Actually, it was a cultural allusion I left for Greg, considering his
career at IBM, in the vein of "IBM bringing out a personal computer
would be like teaching an elephant to tap dance," but, of course,
"getting it" would require some amount of cultural literacy, which is
pretty much lacking among you and yours.

Shouldn't you be out in Oregon, delivering snacks to your Teabagging
heroes?


Speaking of allusions, have you had any more Ansel Adams moments with those birds
down by the creek?
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Spot On...
 

On 1/19/16 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:20:57 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/19/16 12:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:16:47 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Actually, it was a cultural allusion I left for Greg, considering his
career at IBM, in the vein of "IBM bringing out a personal computer
would be like teaching an elephant to tap dance," but, of course,
"getting it" would require some amount of cultural literacy, which is
pretty much lacking among you and yours.


AKA another off topic brain fart.
The quote itself wasn't even from IBM, it was a 3d party consultant.
The other "Elephant" reference was Gerstner, the asshole who laid off
100,000 people in his effort to "make the elephant dance".
It was "dance" in the sense of those old cowboy movies where you dance
to the beat of gunfire at your feet.



I didn't say the quote was *from* IBM, but it was *about* IBM. Glad you
were able to google it up.

You don't think I might have heard that before?

I was in Kingston when they were working on this, before it got
shipped to Boca


Remember? I said I left you a cultural allusion.

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:48:23 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

You seem to think that pols cannot ever change their positions. Just the
other day, you called Bernie a "commie" because of some of his positions
40+ years ago, positions he has for the most part vacated.

If that's how you use your knowledge base, you are out of date.


I am just remembering that you folks were willing to dredge up things
GW did in the 70s like it was relevant.
.... and I have not really seen Bernie move that far right since his
hippie days.

Spot On...
 

On 1/19/16 8:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:48:23 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

You seem to think that pols cannot ever change their positions. Just the
other day, you called Bernie a "commie" because of some of his positions
40+ years ago, positions he has for the most part vacated.

If that's how you use your knowledge base, you are out of date.


I am just remembering that you folks were willing to dredge up things
GW did in the 70s like it was relevant.
... and I have not really seen Bernie move that far right since his
hippie days.


GW Bush was a drunk and drug addict in the 1970s through at least 1990,
and he skipped out on his Air National Guard duties, apparently.

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:07:04 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/19/16 8:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:48:23 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

You seem to think that pols cannot ever change their positions. Just the
other day, you called Bernie a "commie" because of some of his positions
40+ years ago, positions he has for the most part vacated.

If that's how you use your knowledge base, you are out of date.


I am just remembering that you folks were willing to dredge up things
GW did in the 70s like it was relevant.
... and I have not really seen Bernie move that far right since his
hippie days.


GW Bush was a drunk and drug addict in the 1970s through at least 1990,
And Bernie was a communist until at least 1990, assuming you can 12
step that out of your system Whats you point?

and he skipped out on his Air National Guard duties, apparently.
It wasn't apparent to the National Guard

Spot On...
 

On 1/19/2016 8:07 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/19/16 8:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:48:23 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

You seem to think that pols cannot ever change their positions. Just the
other day, you called Bernie a "commie" because of some of his positions
40+ years ago, positions he has for the most part vacated.

If that's how you use your knowledge base, you are out of date.


I am just remembering that you folks were willing to dredge up things
GW did in the 70s like it was relevant.
... and I have not really seen Bernie move that far right since his
hippie days.


GW Bush was a drunk and drug addict in the 1970s through at least 1990,
and he skipped out on his Air National Guard duties, apparently.

You apparently didn't serve your country in any manner shape or form.
I love it when you assholes get on your high horse. It's so easy to
knock you down. ;-)

Spot On...
 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 22:02:18 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 1/19/2016 8:07 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/19/16 8:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:48:23 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

You seem to think that pols cannot ever change their positions. Just the
other day, you called Bernie a "commie" because of some of his positions
40+ years ago, positions he has for the most part vacated.

If that's how you use your knowledge base, you are out of date.


I am just remembering that you folks were willing to dredge up things
GW did in the 70s like it was relevant.
... and I have not really seen Bernie move that far right since his
hippie days.


GW Bush was a drunk and drug addict in the 1970s through at least 1990,
and he skipped out on his Air National Guard duties, apparently.

You apparently didn't serve your country in any manner shape or form.
I love it when you assholes get on your high horse. It's so easy to
knock you down. ;-)

No ****. Knowing absolutely nothing of the Air National Guard, or any other military
service, Krause becomes the job critic.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Spot On...
 

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:39:44 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 22:02:18 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 1/19/2016 8:07 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/19/16 8:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:48:23 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

You seem to think that pols cannot ever change their positions. Just the
other day, you called Bernie a "commie" because of some of his positions
40+ years ago, positions he has for the most part vacated.

If that's how you use your knowledge base, you are out of date.


I am just remembering that you folks were willing to dredge up things
GW did in the 70s like it was relevant.
... and I have not really seen Bernie move that far right since his
hippie days.


GW Bush was a drunk and drug addict in the 1970s through at least 1990,
and he skipped out on his Air National Guard duties, apparently.

You apparently didn't serve your country in any manner shape or form.
I love it when you assholes get on your high horse. It's so easy to
knock you down. ;-)

No ****. Knowing absolutely nothing of the Air National Guard, or any other military
service, Krause becomes the job critic.

Harry is not informed enough to understand that reserve units were
being largely defunded in the early 70s and the money was being
diverted to SE Asia.
GW was losing his "ride" and had little reason to show up at a meeting
if he couldn't fly.
We had the same thing happen to us in Alexandria at the CG Reserve. We
had a 40 footer we could not get much fuel for and the guys were
bringing in parts from work. They moved me out of the ORTAUG That was
the main reason I did not "re up". Who wants to spend a weekend
sitting in a room with nothing to do.

Spot On...
 

On Wednesday, January 20, 2016 at 1:38:01 PM UTC-6, wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:39:44 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 22:02:18 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 1/19/2016 8:07 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/19/16 8:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:48:23 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

You seem to think that pols cannot ever change their positions. Just the
other day, you called Bernie a "commie" because of some of his positions
40+ years ago, positions he has for the most part vacated.

If that's how you use your knowledge base, you are out of date.


I am just remembering that you folks were willing to dredge up things
GW did in the 70s like it was relevant.
... and I have not really seen Bernie move that far right since his
hippie days.


GW Bush was a drunk and drug addict in the 1970s through at least 1990,
and he skipped out on his Air National Guard duties, apparently.

You apparently didn't serve your country in any manner shape or form.
I love it when you assholes get on your high horse. It's so easy to
knock you down. ;-)

No ****. Knowing absolutely nothing of the Air National Guard, or any other military
service, Krause becomes the job critic.

Harry is not informed enough to understand that reserve units were
being largely defunded in the early 70s and the money was being
diverted to SE Asia.
GW was losing his "ride" and had little reason to show up at a meeting
if he couldn't fly.
We had the same thing happen to us in Alexandria at the CG Reserve. We
had a 40 footer we could not get much fuel for and the guys were
bringing in parts from work. They moved me out of the ORTAUG That was
the main reason I did not "re up". Who wants to spend a weekend
sitting in a room with nothing to do.

Krause isn't very swift. He can only parrot what he reads in the Daily KOS, Moveon.org, or some liberal-biased shill.

Spot On...
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 22:43:09 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote:

If you only know what you hear on TV, you're in a fog as thick as pea soup.


Sounds racist.

Harry doesn't understand that the "swing voter" will be making his
decision based on what they do see on TV. They tend to be the least
informed and they might not have really made a decision until a week
or two before the election, maybe even that day. Like most elections,
this really might be decided in a few states.
It is funny that in the polling, Bernie does better than Hillary
against Trump. I guess those loud mouth New York people are too much
alike to tell apart.