a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

Harry Krause wrote:

I wouldn't be overly concerned with McKee; he's somewhat of a usenet
crackpot, and a right-wing extremist who claims to be a Democrat. If I
recall, he's an unlicensed handyman.

As I recall, you're some kind of class act, Krause.

--
Skipper

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 06:34:49 -0500, " *JimH*" wrote:


Old Len is a flyweight fighting in the heavyweight division. He has lost
every round so far yet keeps coming back for more. ;-)

It is quite illustrative that you use the metafore of fighting.
The irony I put in my posts in which I saluted you totally escaped
your grasp?

Personally I would use the metafore of upbringing retarded children.
It helps me to occasionaly determine if the more problematic children
make any progress.

Are you intrested in your grades Jim?

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

Harry Krause wrote:

See, not all your memory is fried. I am indeed a classy guy.

There's nothing like the smell of Krause in the morning to start your
day.

--
Skipper

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

"Len" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 07:31:57 -0500, "Bert Robbins"
wrote:

The your sources are all biased opinion. Each news organization has a
bias.
Each person writing an op-ed peice for a newspaper has a bias. Each
individual oberserving an event has a bias.
I agree.
But I can also think for myself. And I can use various sources with
various Bias's. And I am careful about interest that are persued
within the specific bias presented. That what every citizen should do
in my view.

I live in the US and we have freedom of the press and we get our news from
all over the world. Do you live in a country that censors your news?

In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly
Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan
played? Don't you think any president with a smart advisor would have
done not exactly the same but would have added in the same amount?

No, Reagan was the drivinig force in tearing down the iron curtain.
Well thank you. Now I don't have to think anymore. I just have to
repeat, Reagan was the driving force, Reagan was the driving force.

You are welcome.

Let me put it in another way: What would have become of this alleged
"Reagan-directed-end-of-the-cold-war" if Gorbatsjow hadn't been there
but another Brenzjnev-type or Chroestjow-type?
A few more years and a few hundred thousand people behind the iron curtain
would be dead.
What would the amount of casualties be when Bush hadn't started war on
false pretences? Or am I using biased information?

The children of Iraq would still be starving due to Saddam taking all of the
Oil for Food money and building more palaces.

As another poster here said, Reagan was in the car, he wasn't the
driver but he was in the car. I admit to that. But any us president
would have been in that car.
The winners write the history and the loosers complain about it. In the
future it will be read that Reagan won the cold war throught the economic
might of the USA and the democratic principles that it promoted. Fair or
unfair this is what history will see.
What is it with this obsession with winners and losers....

There are always winners and losers in everything you do. The fact that you
abhor competition and desire to seek consensus is very telling.

Who wins when a cat and a mouse are put into a box? Hint, there is no
consensus.

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

Bert Robbins wrote:
Those are US companies doing a nice thing for our norther friends by
keeping
you employed.
No Bert. They are Canadian Companies that sell to the USA. Look it
up.
Heroux-Devtek.

Who?

Last time I was up in Waterloo all I could see were US companies names
everywhere I went. Well, except for Tim Horton's, I wish they would come
down to the US and replace Starbucks.

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:53:35 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


Sometimes, just sometimes, I wonder if we benefit from a strong
military. ;-) Bullets or butter? World's policeman doesn't come
without a cost.

It keeps your from harm.

Does it? And at what cost? It seems to me, since WWII, this country has
been at peace . . . Well, at least a couple of years. Perhaps, if our
military wasn't so strong, we wouldn't be using them as much.

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 07:41:12 -0500, "Bert Robbins"
wrote:
But I can also think for myself. And I can use various sources with
various Bias's. And I am careful about interest that are persued
within the specific bias presented. That what every citizen should do
in my view.

I live in the US and we have freedom of the press and we get our news from
all over the world. Do you live in a country that censors your news?
No, did I imply that? where?

Well thank you. Now I don't have to think anymore. I just have to
repeat, Reagan was the driving force, Reagan was the driving force.
You are welcome.
Don't you even understand irony when it's that thick?

What would the amount of casualties be when Bush hadn't started war on
false pretences? Or am I using biased information?

The children of Iraq would still be starving due to Saddam taking all of the
Oil for Food money and building more palaces.
Do you mean the children that we're starving befor or after the years
America supported Saddam ?

What is it with this obsession with winners and losers....
There are always winners and losers in everything you do. The fact that you
abhor competition and desire to seek consensus is very telling.
What makes you think (wrongly) I abhor competition?
Or is that synonymous with fighting to you, hm... very telling
indeed...
Seeking consensus is not a bad thing. You should take a modern course
in negociation or google for "prisoners dilemma". It resembles
co-existing a bit better tham your boxing-ring. It may enlighten you
that when both parties communicate intelligently the total outcome can
improve a lot.

I'll try it again in even simpler terms....
In thinking in simple winning/losing you always settle for a
suboptimal result. Tell me, who is winning, the intelligent negotiator
who finds a mutual interest and achieves a combined succes (that would
be me in this little comparison) or the boxer who knocks everything
down he doesn't directly understand (and that would be you)?

Or is this too much a braincracker for you...?

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:53:35 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


Sometimes, just sometimes, I wonder if we benefit from a strong
military. ;-) Bullets or butter? World's policeman doesn't come
without a cost.

It keeps your from harm.

Does it? And at what cost? It seems to me, since WWII, this country has
been at peace . . . Well, at least a couple of years. Perhaps, if our
military wasn't so strong, we wouldn't be using them as much.

By the simple fact that our military is strong, very strong, we are
generally safe within our own borders. Peace is the end result of some
entity winning a war. The world has never been at peace, only the losers
have been at peace with the winners of the conflict. There have always been
tribes, towns, cities and nations at war.

Human nature prevents us from living in peace.

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

Bert Robbins wrote:

Last time I was up in Waterloo all I could see were US companies names
everywhere I went. Well, except for Tim Horton's, I wish they would come
down to the US and replace Starbucks.



%^&$^%& Yankee dollahs! Now an American wants to own The Hudson's Bay
Company, which is the oldest company in Canada...at 335 years.
http://tinyurl.com/aqq9a

a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
 

"Len" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 07:41:12 -0500, "Bert Robbins"
wrote:
But I can also think for myself. And I can use various sources with
various Bias's. And I am careful about interest that are persued
within the specific bias presented. That what every citizen should do
in my view.

I live in the US and we have freedom of the press and we get our news from
all over the world. Do you live in a country that censors your news?
No, did I imply that? where?

Well thank you. Now I don't have to think anymore. I just have to
repeat, Reagan was the driving force, Reagan was the driving force.
You are welcome.
Don't you even understand irony when it's that thick?

What would the amount of casualties be when Bush hadn't started war on
false pretences? Or am I using biased information?

The children of Iraq would still be starving due to Saddam taking all of
the
Oil for Food money and building more palaces.
Do you mean the children that we're starving befor or after the years
America supported Saddam ?

What is it with this obsession with winners and losers....
There are always winners and losers in everything you do. The fact that
you
abhor competition and desire to seek consensus is very telling.
What makes you think (wrongly) I abhor competition?
Or is that synonymous with fighting to you, hm... very telling
indeed...
Seeking consensus is not a bad thing. You should take a modern course
in negociation or google for "prisoners dilemma". It resembles
co-existing a bit better tham your boxing-ring. It may enlighten you
that when both parties communicate intelligently the total outcome can
improve a lot.

I'll try it again in even simpler terms....
In thinking in simple winning/losing you always settle for a
suboptimal result. Tell me, who is winning, the intelligent negotiator
who finds a mutual interest and achieves a combined succes (that would
be me in this little comparison) or the boxer who knocks everything
down he doesn't directly understand (and that would be you)?

Or is this too much a braincracker for you...?

An American, you are not!