Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 8 Nov 2006 19:11 lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > >> > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > >> > > >> >> Don Rumsfeld, cut from the same inflexible, unthinking and > >> >> unlistening, "my way or the highway" mold, has now stepped aside. > >> > > >> > Do you think it was his decision entirely or was he nudged or even > >> > pushed ? > >> > >> Oh, I'm quite certain he was pushed. > > > > I'd like to think so ! > > > > > >> You can see it on Rumsfeld's face. I > >> think Bush saw the writing on the wall, that he would probably have to > >> let > >> Rumsfeld go at some point, and decided to cut bait now while he has a > >> remote > >> chance of having an even minimally friendly Congress for the new guy's > >> confirmation hearings. From what little I've read, however, the new guy > >> is > >> probably a pretty good choice, given his actual desire and ability to > >> work > >> with other people, and not think he can run the whole show himself. > > > > You mean there may yet be some hope for 'consensus politics' ??? > > > > I'd heard Bush isn't so keen on that. > > You should follow some of the unfolding events at cnn.com--these are the > events you will likely not hear anything about in the fullness of time. > Within hours of news of his victory in 2004, Bush was doing a > spike-the-ball-in-the-endzone victory dance, and waving it in everybody's > face. By stark contrast, within hours of news of the Democratic victories, > Nancy Pelosi, who is expected to become probably the most powerful Democrat > in Washington, has said almost nothing publicly, but rather has quietly > approached Bush and extended her wish to work together with him and to > compromise. > > Tell me....which of those two approaches do you think will end up being more > effective in actually getting things done in Washington? Would that it had > happened 2 years ago (or, while we're dreaming, 6 years ago).... That's a no-brainer. I'm not sure the Democrats should have removed the idea of impeachment quite frankly. Graham
From: unsettled on 8 Nov 2006 19:39 T Wake wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:45525D66.715FCBA3(a)hotmail.com... > >> >>unsettled wrote: >> >> >>>T Wake wrote: >>> >>>>Most of the west has evolved into a service based industry. As people >>>>become >>>>more educated they seem more reluctant to "graft" for a living.... >>> >>>You would do well if you ever got a grip on the >>>meaning of "education." What you're talking about, >>>and have very obviously experienced, is extensive >>>training. That equates to being a member of the >>>half-washed masses. >> >>Uh ? > > > More of unsettled gibberish. He really needs some Prozac. Oh look, now he's playing doctor! What's next, playing an intelligent human being? You'll never pull that off you know. You're just another of the half-washed masses.
From: unsettled on 8 Nov 2006 19:49 Ben Newsam wrote: > On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 10:31:35 -0600, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> > wrote: > > >>C) Taking a high tech biz like Google, what sort >> of people do they employ, ie, what's the >> distribution > > > Mostly commie pinkos I expect. I even thought of applying for a job > with them myself. Why? Typical stupid Brit comment, purposely out of context too. No doubt the product of a dumbed down "education" process.
From: unsettled on 8 Nov 2006 19:52 lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:45525D66.715FCBA3(a)hotmail.com... > >> >>unsettled wrote: >> >> >>>T Wake wrote: >>> >>>>Most of the west has evolved into a service based industry. As people >>>>become >>>>more educated they seem more reluctant to "graft" for a living.... >>> >>>You would do well if you ever got a grip on the >>>meaning of "education." What you're talking about, >>>and have very obviously experienced, is extensive >>>training. That equates to being a member of the >>>half-washed masses. >> >>Uh ? > > > Pay him no never-mind. When he can't win arguments using facts and logic, > he goes around acting all self-superior, as if he knows or understands some > inside joke that nobody else does. Not an inside joke, unfortunately.
From: unsettled on 8 Nov 2006 19:56
lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:45525B3A.A3C915E6(a)hotmail.com... > >> >>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >> >> >>>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> >>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Don Rumsfeld, cut from the same inflexible, unthinking and >>>>>unlistening, >>>>>"my way or the highway" mold, has now stepped aside. >>>> >>>>Do you think it was his decision entirely or was he nudged or even >>>>pushed ? >>> >>>Oh, I'm quite certain he was pushed. >> >>I'd like to think so ! >> >> >> >>> You can see it on Rumsfeld's face. I >>>think Bush saw the writing on the wall, that he would probably have to >>>let >>>Rumsfeld go at some point, and decided to cut bait now while he has a >>>remote >>>chance of having an even minimally friendly Congress for the new guy's >>>confirmation hearings. From what little I've read, however, the new guy >>>is >>>probably a pretty good choice, given his actual desire and ability to >>>work >>>with other people, and not think he can run the whole show himself. >> >>You mean there may yet be some hope for 'consensus politics' ??? >> >>I'd heard Bush isn't so keen on that. > > > True, but he may be sensing his demise if he doesn't attempt *some* sort of > reconciliation with Congress and the >50% of the American people that he has > increasingly alienated over the past 6 years. Remember, the Congress can > now begin investigating some of his shenanigans, and those of his cohorts. > He needs to be thinking ahead to 2008 and beyond. Who needs to be thinking of 2008 and beyond? Bush? Bwahahahaha. He will have his presidential library and an income for the rest of his life. In the meantime the executive branch, that is to say the president, sets foreign policy. > Bush was quoted today as saying: "I'm obviously disappointed with the > outcome of the election and, as the head of the Republican Party, I share a > large part of the responsibility," This is obviously the understatement of > the year. I think he bears *100%* of the responsibility, and it all focuses > on one unbelievably stupid moment of hubris--his in-your-face victory dance > about a "mandate from the people" after narrowly squeaking out a win in > 2004. I remember very distinctly thinking at that time, that that one > moment of self-indulgence would end up coming back to haunt him...and I do > not think the political repercussions from that one incredibly ill advised > speech have yet come to pass. I think he will pay *dearly* for his hubris. That Bush is a jerk is well established. That he's been the best man for the job isn't. However, the Republican Party platform is more apt to provide for economic growth. |