or is it too early to celebrate? (by "witch" i mean spammer from hong
kong.)

r b-j

robert bristow-johnson <r...@audioimagination.com> writes:

> or is it too early to celebrate? (by "witch" i mean spammer from hong
> kong.)

What a load off - for a minute I thought you were talking about Hilary.
-- 
%  Randy Yates                  % "How's life on earth? 
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC            %  ... What is it worth?" 
%%% 919-577-9882                % 'Mission (A World Record)', 
%%%% <y...@ieee.org>           % *A New World Record*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

On Apr 25, 12:41 pm, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> wrote:
> robert bristow-johnson <r...@audioimagination.com> writes:
> > or is it too early to celebrate? (by "witch" i mean spammer from hong
> > kong.)
>
> What a load off - for a minute I thought you were talking about Hilary.

no.  that witch is still alive and spewing mud.

it's funny, Randy, that coming possibly from different directions, we
might have the same feelings about Hillary.

now North Carolina is becoming the next focus.  are you voting in the
primary?  (you need not answer, but i would be interested in knowing
*which* primary ballot you're taking.)

oh well.  the Democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an
opportunity.  this is going to be their election to lose and they
might with this self-destructive primary battle going on so late.
that, besides the fact that too many American middle-aged white males
seem to only want to vote for the same and that is decidedly what will
not be offered by the Democrats.

r b-j

Huh - yet more spam!

"robert bristow-johnson" <r...@audioimagination.com> wrote in message 
news:4...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 25, 12:41 pm, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> robert bristow-johnson <r...@audioimagination.com> writes:
>> > or is it too early to celebrate? (by "witch" i mean spammer from hong
>> > kong.)
>>
>> What a load off - for a minute I thought you were talking about Hilary.
>
> no.  that witch is still alive and spewing mud.
>
> it's funny, Randy, that coming possibly from different directions, we
> might have the same feelings about Hillary.
>
> now North Carolina is becoming the next focus.  are you voting in the
> primary?  (you need not answer, but i would be interested in knowing
> *which* primary ballot you're taking.)
>
> oh well.  the Democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an
> opportunity.  this is going to be their election to lose and they
> might with this self-destructive primary battle going on so late.
> that, besides the fact that too many American middle-aged white males
> seem to only want to vote for the same and that is decidedly what will
> not be offered by the Democrats.
>
> r b-j 

On Apr 25, 10:41=EF=BF=BDam, robert bristow-johnson
<r...@audioimagination.com> wrote:
> On Apr 25, 12:41 pm, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> wrote:
>
> > robert bristow-johnson <r...@audioimagination.com> writes:
> > > or is it too early to celebrate? (by "witch" i mean spammer from hong
> > > kong.)
>
> > What a load off - for a minute I thought you were talking about Hilary.
>
> no. =EF=BF=BDthat witch is still alive and spewing mud.
>
> it's funny, Randy, that coming possibly from different directions, we
> might have the same feelings about Hillary.
>
> now North Carolina is becoming the next focus. =EF=BF=BDare you voting in =
the
> primary? =EF=BF=BD(you need not answer, but i would be interested in knowi=
ng
> *which* primary ballot you're taking.)
>
> oh well. =EF=BF=BDthe Democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an
> opportunity. =EF=BF=BDthis is going to be their election to lose and they
> might with this self-destructive primary battle going on so late.
> that, besides the fact that too many American middle-aged white males
> seem to only want to vote for the same and that is decidedly what will
> not be offered by the Democrats.
>
> r b-j

     So instead of spam, we get bullshit
spouting from another Neo-Con!  Great!

     Obama-Hillary Forever!

     White-Males are going DOWN.

On Apr 25, 3:31 pm, Paul <Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>      So instead of spam, we get bullshit
> spouting from another Neo-Con!  Great!

wow!  did i leave that impression?  you should see some of my previous
political spoutings here (you'll need Google Groups to do it).

>      Obama-Hillary Forever!

i *can't* imagine that such will be the ticket.  if Barack gets the
nomination, i think he'll need a southern white male (probably Edwards
again, dunno) to balance the ticket and get more of dixieland in the
electoral thingie.  if Hillary gets it (and i can't imagine how,
unless some big unknown scandal with Obama shakes out), i can't
imagine that whatever knocked Obama down from the essentially
insurmountable delegate lead will allow him to be No. 2 on the
ticket.  but Hillary has baggage and there are so many people who just
hate her and lotsa Dems like me that aren't all that excited by her
(but i'll vote for her in the general in November, if she's the one on
the ballot) that i can't imagine Obama selecting her for VP.  also
picking Edwards who is out of office does not make another senate seat
vulnerable (that happened back in 2004 and Liz Dole got it).

>
>      White-Males are going DOWN.

being a middle-aged white male, i hope to make it for another couple
of decades.  but i am certainly happy with white mails not controlling
everything all of the time.

r b-j

On Apr 25, 9:19=EF=BF=BDpm, robert bristow-johnson <r...@audioimagination.co=
m>
wrote:
> On Apr 25, 3:31 pm, Paul <Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDSo instead of spam, we get bullshit
> > spouting from another Neo-Con! =EF=BF=BDGreat!
>
> wow! =EF=BF=BDdid i leave that impression? =EF=BF=BDyou should see some of=
 my previous
> political spoutings here (you'll need Google Groups to do it).
>
> > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObama-Hillary Forever!
>
> i *can't* imagine that such will be the ticket. =EF=BF=BDif Barack gets th=
e
> nomination, i think he'll need a southern white male (probably Edwards
> again, dunno) to balance the ticket and get more of dixieland in the
> electoral thingie. =EF=BF=BDif Hillary gets it (and i can't imagine how,
> unless some big unknown scandal with Obama shakes out), i can't
> imagine that whatever knocked Obama down from the essentially
> insurmountable delegate lead will allow him to be No. 2 on the
> ticket. =EF=BF=BDbut Hillary has baggage and there are so many people who =
just
> hate her and lotsa Dems like me that aren't all that excited by her
> (but i'll vote for her in the general in November, if she's the one on
> the ballot) that i can't imagine Obama selecting her for VP. =EF=BF=BDalso=

> picking Edwards who is out of office does not make another senate seat
> vulnerable (that happened back in 2004 and Liz Dole got it).
>

     But you see, many people have expressed
the idea that they would not vote for the other
Democrat, if their chosen one didn't make it
on top.

     But this could tilt in either direction:
supporting your argument, that if they run
together, they will get zero votes.  But also
perhaps they will get all the votes.  Or
at least enough of them

     We shall see.

     But Edwards would be a good choice,
i agree, for all the Clinton haters out there.



>
>
> > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDWhite-Males are going DOWN.
>
> being a middle-aged white male, i hope to make it for another couple
> of decades. =EF=BF=BDbut i am certainly happy with white mails not control=
ling
> everything all of the time.
>
> r b-j


       Well, you are an exception to
our kind.

       Michael Moore was correct in
labeling us Stupid.  Stupid for the
centuries of Imperialism, world domination,
and general destruction of the planet.

       Just having a female or black
person in the top office will not
rid the world of sexism or racism.
      But it WILL show the world that
the United States is at least beginning
to live up to it's promise of All
People are created Equal.

       And it will no doubt increase
EXPONENTIALLY the patriotism and
belief that the United States has
the potential to be the greatest
Nation in the world.

On Apr 26, 7:56=C2=A0am, Paul <Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 25, 9:19=EF=BF=BDpm, robert bristow-johnson <r...@audioimagination.=
com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 25, 3:31 pm, Paul <Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDSo instead of spam, we get bullshit
> > > spouting from another Neo-Con! =EF=BF=BDGreat!
>
> > wow! =EF=BF=BDdid i leave that impression? =EF=BF=BDyou should see some =
of my previous
> > political spoutings here (you'll need Google Groups to do it).
>
> > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObama-Hillary Forever!
>
> > i *can't* imagine that such will be the ticket. =EF=BF=BDif Barack gets =
the
> > nomination, i think he'll need a southern white male (probably Edwards
> > again, dunno) to balance the ticket and get more of dixieland in the
> > electoral thingie. =EF=BF=BDif Hillary gets it (and i can't imagine how,=

> > unless some big unknown scandal with Obama shakes out), i can't
> > imagine that whatever knocked Obama down from the essentially
> > insurmountable delegate lead will allow him to be No. 2 on the
> > ticket. =EF=BF=BDbut Hillary has baggage and there are so many people wh=
o just
> > hate her and lotsa Dems like me that aren't all that excited by her
> > (but i'll vote for her in the general in November, if she's the one on
> > the ballot) that i can't imagine Obama selecting her for VP. =EF=BF=BDal=
so
> > picking Edwards who is out of office does not make another senate seat
> > vulnerable (that happened back in 2004 and Liz Dole got it).
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0But you see, many people have expressed
> the idea that they would not vote for the other
> Democrat, if their chosen one didn't make it
> on top.
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0But this could tilt in either direction:
> supporting your argument, that if they run
> together, they will get zero votes. =C2=A0But also
> perhaps they will get all the votes. =C2=A0Or
> at least enough of them
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0We shall see.
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0But Edwards would be a good choice,
> i agree, for all the Clinton haters out there.
>
>

And the other thing is, from a progressive POV, Edwards wouldn't be so
bad.  Even though he's likely a sorta vain pretty-boy, he does have
some record as an advocate for authentic victims.  but, 4 years ago, i
thought Dean was better.  when i was doing a little volunteer work for
the campaign, i caught a glimpse of Edwards in Portsmith NH when i was
wearing a Dean T-shirt.  it's kinda fun crashing the other side's
event.

>
> > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDWhite-Males are going DOWN.
>



> > being a middle-aged white male, i hope to make it for another couple
> > of decades. =EF=BF=BDbut i am certainly happy with white mails not contr=
olling
> > everything all of the time.
>

> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Well, you are an exception to
> our kind.
>

no.  there are many others.  not all men are power freaks, and i can
confess that there were ideas that my wife had that was different than
mine and hers where better and ended up saving our collective ass.
for me, it's just facing the facts honestly and recognizing that in
fact, women, though different as a class than men, are no less
qualified to be making decisions that get executed than men.

but, i'm not bothered by statistical differences, after all when
little boy fetuses are in mommy's tummy gestating, their little brains
are being bathed in testosterone, which makes the class a little
different than the complement class.

> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Michael Moore was correct in
> labeling us Stupid. =C2=A0Stupid for the
> centuries of Imperialism, world domination,
> and general destruction of the planet.
>

i used the word in a recent post:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/msg/2e87e4e2b12019da

> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Just having a female or black
> person in the top office will not
> rid the world of sexism or racism.

or necessarily a good leader, e.g. Thatcher, Mugabee (i'll concede
that, in this particular pair, the ladder seems far worse than the
former).

> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 But it WILL show the world that
> the United States is at least beginning
> to live up to it's promise of All
> People are created Equal.

not all people are created equal.  it's also a simple fact from our
experience that some people are born with more talent and/or beauty
and/or fitness and/or intelligence and/or capabilities to accompish
things.  i think that is so even though i am appealing only to what i
think would be our common experience.

now, that does not mean that the law should treat people differently,
except when it make sense (and that is possibly where arguments
begin).  we *do* treat many different kinds of handicapped and
disadvantaged people differently than competent adults with means of
living. the former gets community support that the latter doesn't get
and sometimes the latter is granted rights and privileges that the
former doesn't get (like blind people do not get a license to drive).

the "all people equal" premise does all mean, to me at least, that
different groups of people in a variety of classes (race, sex,
national origin, religious creed incl. atheism and similar, etc.) are,
as a group, equal in both inherent worth and gifts that they offer to
the human experience.  in my opinion, that is actually the minimum
criteria to not be racist, sexist, or otherwise bigoted.

> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0And it will no doubt increase
> EXPONENTIALLY the patriotism and
> belief that the United States has
> the potential to be the greatest
> Nation in the world.

now THAT, in my opinion, is one of those "-isms" that along with
racism, sexism, sectarianism, economic classism, whatever.   i try to
steer away from nationalism.  i think it's just as bad.  now, just
like i cheered for my high-school team at football and basketball
events, i might cheer for American competitors at the Olympics, i
dunno.  and, culturally, i completely indentify with the north
american culture and even have a appreciation for some founding
principles like the 1st and 4th amendments.  but this "see, my country
is the greatest nation in the world" bit is not my cuppa tea.

r b-j

On Apr 26, 11:51=C2=A0am, robert bristow-johnson
<r...@audioimagination.com> wrote:
> On Apr 26, 7:56=C2=A0am, Paul <Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 25, 9:19=EF=BF=BDpm, robert bristow-johnson <r...@audioimaginatio=
n.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 25, 3:31 pm, Paul <Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDSo instead of spam, we get bullshit
> > > > spouting from another Neo-Con! =EF=BF=BDGreat!
>
> > > wow! =EF=BF=BDdid i leave that impression? =EF=BF=BDyou should see som=
e of my previous
> > > political spoutings here (you'll need Google Groups to do it).
>
> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObama-Hillary Forever!
>
> > > i *can't* imagine that such will be the ticket. =EF=BF=BDif Barack get=
s the
> > > nomination, i think he'll need a southern white male (probably Edwards=

> > > again, dunno) to balance the ticket and get more of dixieland in the
> > > electoral thingie. =EF=BF=BDif Hillary gets it (and i can't imagine ho=
w,
> > > unless some big unknown scandal with Obama shakes out), i can't
> > > imagine that whatever knocked Obama down from the essentially
> > > insurmountable delegate lead will allow him to be No. 2 on the
> > > ticket. =EF=BF=BDbut Hillary has baggage and there are so many people =
who just
> > > hate her and lotsa Dems like me that aren't all that excited by her
> > > (but i'll vote for her in the general in November, if she's the one on=

> > > the ballot) that i can't imagine Obama selecting her for VP. =EF=BF=BD=
also
> > > picking Edwards who is out of office does not make another senate seat=

> > > vulnerable (that happened back in 2004 and Liz Dole got it).
>
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0But you see, many people have expressed
> > the idea that they would not vote for the other
> > Democrat, if their chosen one didn't make it
> > on top.
>
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0But this could tilt in either direction:
> > supporting your argument, that if they run
> > together, they will get zero votes. =C2=A0But also
> > perhaps they will get all the votes. =C2=A0Or
> > at least enough of them
>
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0We shall see.
>
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0But Edwards would be a good choice,
> > i agree, for all the Clinton haters out there.
>
> And the other thing is, from a progressive POV, Edwards wouldn't be so
> bad. =C2=A0Even though he's likely a sorta vain pretty-boy, he does have
> some record as an advocate for authentic victims. =C2=A0but, 4 years ago, =
i
> thought Dean was better. =C2=A0when i was doing a little volunteer work fo=
r
> the campaign, i caught a glimpse of Edwards in Portsmith NH when i was
> wearing a Dean T-shirt. =C2=A0it's kinda fun crashing the other side's
> event.
>
>
>
> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDWhite-Males are going DOWN.
>
> > > being a middle-aged white male, i hope to make it for another couple
> > > of decades. =EF=BF=BDbut i am certainly happy with white mails not con=
trolling
> > > everything all of the time.
>
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Well, you are an exception to
> > our kind.
>
> no. =C2=A0there are many others. =C2=A0not all men are power freaks, and i=
 can
> confess that there were ideas that my wife had that was different than
> mine and hers where better and ended up saving our collective ass.
> for me, it's just facing the facts honestly and recognizing that in
> fact, women, though different as a class than men, are no less
> qualified to be making decisions that get executed than men.
>
> but, i'm not bothered by statistical differences, after all when
> little boy fetuses are in mommy's tummy gestating, their little brains
> are being bathed in testosterone, which makes the class a little
> different than the complement class.
>

     Well, good for you, that you listen to your
other half when it's in both your interests.

     There are plenty of white males who are
supporting Hillary, no doubt.

     But you can't deny there are still men
in the Good Ole Boys' club, who balk at the
very idea of a woman at the helm of a country,
esp. as commander in chief.



> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Michael Moore was correct in
> > labeling us Stupid. =C2=A0Stupid for the
> > centuries of Imperialism, world domination,
> > and general destruction of the planet.
>
> i used the word in a recent post:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/msg/2e87e4e2b12019da
>

     Whoa!  For a guy who is bashing "liberals", dems,
and Hillary, you sure write a lot like them!

     Sounds like you wanna socialize the health
care here in the US a bit, like in Canada or Europe.

     Me too, really.


> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Just having a female or black
> > person in the top office will not
> > rid the world of sexism or racism.
>
> or necessarily a good leader, e.g. Thatcher, Mugabee (i'll concede
> that, in this particular pair, the ladder seems far worse than the
> former).
>
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 But it WILL show the world that
> > the United States is at least beginning
> > to live up to it's promise of All
> > People are created Equal.
>
> not all people are created equal. =C2=A0it's also a simple fact from our
> experience that some people are born with more talent and/or beauty
> and/or fitness and/or intelligence and/or capabilities to accompish
> things. =C2=A0i think that is so even though i am appealing only to what i=

> think would be our common experience.
>
> now, that does not mean that the law should treat people differently,
> except when it make sense (and that is possibly where arguments
> begin). =C2=A0we *do* treat many different kinds of handicapped and
> disadvantaged people differently than competent adults with means of
> living. the former gets community support that the latter doesn't get
> and sometimes the latter is granted rights and privileges that the
> former doesn't get (like blind people do not get a license to drive).
>
> the "all people equal" premise does all mean, to me at least, that
> different groups of people in a variety of classes (race, sex,
> national origin, religious creed incl. atheism and similar, etc.) are,
> as a group, equal in both inherent worth and gifts that they offer to
> the human experience. =C2=A0in my opinion, that is actually the minimum
> criteria to not be racist, sexist, or otherwise bigoted.
>

     I didn't mean to imply that all people have
equal abilities, but my point is that here in the
states, you can come from the lowest, poorest background,
and still rise to the very top, if you have the talent.

     In some countries, you cannot do this.

     Obama or Hillary as president will prove
that it's possible here.  Which almost makes it
reasonable to vote for them just for this reason!




> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0And it will no doubt increase
> > EXPONENTIALLY the patriotism and
> > belief that the United States has
> > the potential to be the greatest
> > Nation in the world.
>
> now THAT, in my opinion, is one of those "-isms" that along with
> racism, sexism, sectarianism, economic classism, whatever. =C2=A0 i try to=

> steer away from nationalism. =C2=A0i think it's just as bad. =C2=A0now, ju=
st
> like i cheered for my high-school team at football and basketball
> events, i might cheer for American competitors at the Olympics, i
> dunno. =C2=A0and, culturally, i completely indentify with the north
> american culture and even have a appreciation for some founding
> principles like the 1st and 4th amendments. =C2=A0but this "see, my countr=
y
> is the greatest nation in the world" bit is not my cuppa tea.
>
> r b-j- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


      Well, who would you have cheered for
during WWII?  The U.S. or the Nazis?  Don't
tell me you are heavily anti-semitic!

      What's wrong with being proud of your
country when it's doing the right things?

      Granted, I wasn't proud to be an
American for the past 8 years, due to
you-know-who, but this next election,
WE CANNOT LOSE.  Even McCain will be a
breath of fresh air, compared to
Barbarian Cowboy Bush.

      Anyhow, i don't blame you for
being patriot-phobic: it's to a large
degree what led to Hilter's rise to
power anyways.

On Apr 26, 7:41=A0pm, Paul <Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0Whoa! =A0For a guy who is bashing "liberals", dems,
> and Hillary, you sure write a lot like them!

what bashing?  all's i said was:

>> the Democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an
>> opportunity. this is going to be their election to lose and they
>> might with this self-destructive primary battle going on so late.

which is a commonly known fact among Democrats, too.  hell, why is it
that for the last 4 decades the Dems had only two presidents and one
was a one-termer?  after all the war, corruption, and damage that
Republican administrations do that rape the economy and environment
and the transference of wealth to the pockets of the rich from the
rest of us, if Americans weren't so distractable by the republican
slight-of-hand ("family values", etc.) you would think they would
never re-elect a Republican president.  but the Dems repeatedly screw
up (as we did 4 years ago) and "never miss an opportunity to miss an
opportunity."   the way they're doing that now is with this self-
destructive primary battle.  and in my opinion, this problem exists
solely because of the ambition of one woman and her husband.  they do
not have the good of the party (or of the country) at heart, but their
dynastic ambition.  if Hillary somehoew *did* win the nomination and
election, we would have the white house controlled by two families for
perhaps 28 years. then what happens?  the next generation of Clintons
vs. Bushies? Chelsea vs. the Bush twins?  we're tired of the same old
shit.

> =A0 =A0 =A0Sounds like you wanna socialize the health
> care here in the US a bit, like in Canada or Europe.

as many problems that they have with their health care system(s), i
have never met a Canadian or western European (or Japanese) that would
trade their single-payer system for a privately financed system as
ours.


> =A0 =A0 =A0 What's wrong with being proud of your
> country when it's doing the right things?

well "my" country (i would prefer to identify it as the country i live
in and am a citizen of) is not my kids.

r b-j