posted on February 17, 2008 08:26:21 AM new
'You ain't gonna like losing' Author unknown.
President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism. But the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq
Bush's mistake came in his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in WWII. It is not.
Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their leaders, so it was the people's duty to back those leaders.
Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not or whether the war was going badly or not.
And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WWII than we have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter. The people stuck with the President because it was their patriotic duty as Americans to put aside their differences in WWII and work together to win that war.
Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in. Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war bonds to help the effort.
Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition, trying their best to join the military. Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh rationing of everything from gasoline to soap and butter was imposed, yet there was very little complaining.
You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the President. Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made upbeat films and entertained our troops to help the troops' morale. And a bunch even enlisted.
And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off with a Pledge of Allegiance, and with prayers for our country and our troops!
Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies.
A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' by being forced to wear women's underwear, being subjected to interrogation by a woman, being scared by a dog or that they did not have air conditioning.
There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crackheads, dope pushers and armed gangs roaming our streets
No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism. He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that our fathers fought so dearly to preserve.
It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and Gomorrah and the land of Oz. We did unite for a short while after 9/11, but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country would require some sacrifices.
We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam. It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million Muslims that are sympathetic to the terrorists cause...Hitler and Tojo combined did not have nearly that many potential recruits.
So...we either win it - or lose it - and you ain't gonna like losing.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall.
Everyone has a different opinion on the war, and our current President. But, this article makes a lot of sense, and I hope you will read it and give it some thought. What a difference 60 years makes..!!!
posted on February 17, 2008 09:47:25 AM new
Why would I think you are not patriotic mingo. This response is just what I thought I would get from a communist leaning poster.
Mingo says "it's a load of "Reader's Digest"-style, conservative propaganda horse puckey"
Obvious you weren't around when people believed in the USA. If you knew your history you would know all about how people believed in America. You are just showing your ignorance. You sure like useing that Reader,s Digest mentallaty. Did you grow up using that for your school books? I know Minnesota is backwards but I thought they had more sense in using that for a text book.
If you lived during those times you would know. Ask you mother or father or maybe they aren't around for you to talk to or maybe they just don't talk to you. That would be my guess. Maybe they disowned you.
Kiara that was American back at the end of world war II but what would you know or care.
America is becoming a country of people who don't care, as shown by the posts of the left in here. I for one don't want that for my children or grandchildren. But what do you care anyway you have no children and you live in a country that depends on the U.S. for their Military. Seems right to me that you would think that way. It's easy to depend on someone else.
posted on February 17, 2008 10:13:32 AM new
Thanks, Helen. After awhile they all sound the same. "According to Pastor Glen"
Libra, people still believe in America and I see that daily. If they didn't give a crap more than half the country wouldn't be in such disagreement over the way Bush has chosen to rule the past few years.
But what do you care anyway you have no children
You have absolutely no idea whether I have children or not. It has never been disclosed here. It has nothing to do with this discussion at all, nor is it any of your business.
Seems right to me that you would think that way
Which way? I doubt you have a clue as to how I really think.
posted on February 17, 2008 10:14:59 AM new
Okay Helen Where in your post shows me I received it in an email. I didn't. so there. I have the ability just as YOU do to find articles. You are NOT the only one that can do that. But your followers, which I think that is a cult, depend on you.
What is written there is what I observed living in that era. If you don't know then don't look stupid and say it isn't true.
1.A true american would not believe in Abortion. Especially one on demand. Go out on a one night stand, get wasted have sex then demand the abortion pill. Seems right to me. NOT
2.Taking away school vouchers parents have the right to choose, not government
3.Protecting the rights of minorities in the work place. what rights are being taken away?
4.Paying attention to the youger voter demographic of ages 18-24, the most commonly ignored voter block in America.Sure bring in the gang members so they can vote. It is the choice of every American to vote or not vote. What are they going to do start bringing them in bus loads. Drag them by their hair. Last I looked nobody was held back from voting. The polls are open for 13 hours. Seems like they could find time out of their day to vote. They have even made it easier and it still doesn't happen. Stupid comment
5.Standing up for the separation of church and state.I bet mingo likes this one. Show me where the church as anything to do with the state? Didn't the press show us clips of Clinton going to church every Sunday carrying a bible. hypocrite .
6.Last but not least -
Standing up for gay rights including civil union, which they are entitled to under the Constitution.This is NOT what they want they want Marriage. They are not satisfied with a civil union. Get Real
_________________
[ edited by Libra63 on Feb 17, 2008 10:19 AM ]
posted on February 17, 2008 10:18:05 AM new
Kiara says "half the country wouldn't be in such disagreement over the way Bush has chosen to rule the past few years."
posted on February 17, 2008 10:38:23 AM new
Libra, I have been giving it some thought. My Dad, a republican to the core, supported Nixon until almost the very end, when finally disillusioned and thoroughly disgusted, he said that the presidency would never be the same for him - he had always considered the office enobled the people who attained it. Watergate opened a great many eyes as to what happens in the oval office. Don't expect people to support a war we are in because the president lied to the Congress and American people about weapons of mass destruction. Don't expect people to admire a man who cheated his way to win his first term of office. No, although one may use unscrupulous methods to become president, my respect still has to be earned. I question your rosy view of Americans universally supporting presidents in the past. Are you counting the Americans who had their property confiscated and were interred in camps during WWII? Or are you referring to one sector (male and white) that called all the shots? As far as the patriotism of celebrities, what about the Nazi-sympathizing Lindberghs?
Edited to add: Reader's Digest would never print such tripe.
[ edited by pixiamom on Feb 17, 2008 10:46 AM ]
posted on February 17, 2008 10:45:52 AM newWell the other half is not in disagreement.
Libra, I actually said MORE than half - considering Bush's approval rating is hovering at about 30% I guess it's about 70% that are not in agreement then. Based on that, I believe people do care more than you think and are paying attention to what is happening.
Pixiamom has made some good points so I look forward to your response to her.
posted on February 17, 2008 12:24:39 PM new
You still really think coffee would help?
From my post she determined I'm a communist, Minnesota is backwards, and my parents disowned me
To those who don't think Americans are making sacrifices for this war...baloney...our TAXES and those of the next several generations are paying for this war...planting a garden ain't gonna help this time.
posted on February 17, 2008 01:34:33 PM new5.Standing up for the separation of church and state.I bet mingo likes this one. Show me where the church as anything to do with the state?
It doesn't Libra, or at least it shouldn't. That's why those teachers you mentioned remembering who started the day with the pledge of allegiance and a prayer were wrong. Leading a class in prayer in a public (state/government sponsored) school is against the law. My classrooms all start the day with the pledge of allegiance. They always have.
You are going to see in record numbers in a few months just how much people care for this country. Your comment about bringing out gang members to vote is preposterous. BOTH parties do everything they can to get eligible voters to the polls at election time. They always have.
posted on February 17, 2008 05:48:19 PM new
Libra - Coming from the great state of Wisconsin, I am surprised that you are virtually ignoring the anti-war words and beliefs of one of the political icons of the state, REPUBLICAN Senator Roebert LaFollette.
Mr Follette campaigned vigorously against WWI, so much so that "Roosevelt called him a "skunk who should be hanged" when he opposed the arming of American merchant ships; one of his colleagues in the Senate said he was "a better German than the head of the German parliament" when he opposed the Wilson Administration's request for a declaration of war in 1917.
Here are some of his quotes:
Quotes
* "The will of the people shall be the law of the land."
* "In times of peace, the war party insists on making preparation for war. As soon as prepared for, it insists on making war."
* "The underlying reason indeed why both parties have failed to take the people's side in the present crisis is that neither party can openly attack the real evils which are undermining representative government without convicting themselves of treachery to the voters during their recent tenure in office."
* "Every nation has its war party. It is not the party of democracy. It is the party of autocracy. It seeks to dominate absolutely. It is commercial, imperialistic, ruthless. It tolerates no opposition. It is just as arrogant, just as despotic, in London, or in Washington, as in Berlin. The American Jingo is twin to the German Junker…. If there is no sufficient reason for war, the war party will make war on one pretext, then invent another."
* "The purpose of this ridiculous campaign is to throw the country into a state of sheer terror, to change public opinion, to stifle criticism, and suppress discussion. People are being unlawfully arrested, thrown into jail, held incommunicado for days, only to be eventually discharged without ever having been taken into court, because they have committed no crime. But more than this, if every preparation for war can be made the excuse for destroying free speech and a free press and the right of the people to assemble together for peaceful discussion, then we may well despair of ever again finding ourselves for a long period in a state of peace. The destruction of rights now occurring will be pointed to then as precedents for a still further invasion of the rights of the citizen."
posted on February 17, 2008 05:59:36 PM new
More on LaFollette:
"Opposition to American involvement in World War I
Perhaps one of the most notable positions of Senator La Follette was his opposition of American entry into World War I and, failing that, his critique of the wartime policies of President Woodrow Wilson. Historian Thomas Ryley summarizes the common feeling at the time saying, "More than any of the other objectors to war, he remained a symbol of opposition to the conflict and to Wilsonian policies for prosecuting it......
In many people’s eyes during 1917 and 1918, he was the most hated man in America, for insisting that America had no business in the war and had been led into it by lies and trickery." La Follete and others who opposed entry into World War I (and who later opposed endorsing the Treaty of Versailles) were referred to as Irreconcilables.
On September 20, 1917, he addressed the Non-Partisan League convention in Saint Paul, Minnesota, to discuss war taxation. Responding to an audience question, he said that while America had "suffered grievance…at the hands of Germany" they were not sufficient to provoke war. "I say this, that the comparatively small privilege, of the right of an American citizen to ride on a munitions loaded ship flying a foreign flag, is too small to involve this government in the loss of millions and millions of lives!!" He insisted that the President knew there was ammunition on the RMS Lusitania but hadn’t prevented Americans from boarding it. After much audience cheering, he then defended free speech during wartime and received a standing ovation after his conclusion. "
-------------------------------------
posted on February 17, 2008 06:17:41 PM new
So anti-war sentiment is not new. Nearly 1/3 of the population opposed the Revolution. Many (some of my ancestors in fact) moved to Canada so that they could remain loyal to the British Crown.
It is not "communistic" (throw back to another Wisconsonian Joesph McCarthy) to oppose a war that the majority of the population feels is WRONG. It is our American right of free speech to say whatever we want about the war and about a President who set out to lie to his constituency so that he could pursue this war. People of conscience can no longer allow this slaughter of our sons and daughters to continue - and for what? OIL?
Times have changed since WWII. There are wars and there are other wars. America was attacked at Pearl Harbor during WWII and from that day forward the country stood united behind FDR.
GWB USED the WTC attack and the country's fear of terrorism to further his own agenda of waging war in Iraq. He distorted the facts and reports of WMD so that he could fight this war. If he put all the resources in Pakistan and Afghanistan that he put in Iraq, Al Qhaeda would be history. GWB is no FDR.
-------------------------------------
posted on February 17, 2008 06:59:43 PM new
I hate to tell you I have no interest in LaFollette AND I am not from the great state of Wisconsin. I am a transplant from the State of Minnesota.
I am in the here and now not 100 years ago. The country was much different back then. They had no terriorist threats. They had no gangs, no drugs. Women stayed home the men worked. There were no cars. You could walk around and not get muged. There was no internet to spread lies and rumors.
When there was a war the country spoke up instead of rioting. They had no Jane Fonda's to listen to, thank goodness, They also didn't have all the money spent on elections. Billions and still growing. I have been through 5 wars in my life time and this isn't the end of them. They will continue until the end of the world.
The State of Minnesota was Republican until 1950.
You know all that for a fact. The one fact I do know if Clinton had not been playing around but doing his job 911 wouldn't have happened or at least we would have had a warning.
posted on February 17, 2008 07:09:59 PM new
Excellent posts neglus. Every war this country has fought since it's beginning has been opposed by somebody. Dissent is the American Way.
Libra has alluded to her poor education in the past here; if you had known the education that I had... I'm guessing poor history lessons were part of the deal.
posted on February 17, 2008 07:20:45 PM new
Sure her post was excellent she cut and pasted it from somewhere but neglected to put it in her post. Any one can do that.
Well now if things go the way it is planned you will have another Clinton in the White House. Wow are we ever lucky. More corruption. More fooling around in the Oval Office. 4 more years of Bill Clinton. You think Hillary will have much say. I honestly doubt it. I can't wait for someone to say something she doesn't like and the tears flow. Some strong women she is.
It won't affect me as I really don't care. I still will go about on my day to day life enjoying my family and grandchildren.
I will do my duty and vote for the person who I think will make a good President. Win or lose I won't lose any sleep over it like all the democrats did after Pres. Bush was elected.
posted on February 17, 2008 07:32:21 PM new
"The one fact I do know if Clinton had not been playing around but doing his job 911 wouldn't have happened or at least we would have had a warning.".....
Libra, I don't know what Mr Clinton was doing on 911. It doesn't matter what Mr Clinton was doing on 911 because he was not the guy in charge and had not been in charge for. The guy in charge was reading to school children in Florida and after being informed of this tragedy, CONTINUED READING TO THE SCHOOL CHILDREN!
In fact, Clinton was pro-active against Al Quaeda in the last several years of his administration. Ponder this:
The two great myths that have settled across the nation, beyond the Hussein-9/11 connection, are that Clinton did not do enough during his tenure to stop the spread of radical terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, and that the attacks themselves could not have been anticipated or stopped. Blumenthal's insider perspective on these matters bursts the myths entirely, and reveals a level of complicity regarding the attacks within the journalistic realm and the conservative political ranks that is infuriating and disturbing.
Starting in 1995, Clinton took actions against terrorism that were unprecedented in American history. He poured billions and billions of dollars into counterterrorism activities across the entire spectrum of the intelligence community. He poured billions more into the protection of critical infrastructure. He ordered massive federal stockpiling of antidotes and vaccines to prepare for a possible bioterror attack. He order a reorganization of the intelligence community itself, ramming through reforms and new procedures to address the demonstrable threat. Within the National Security Council, "threat meetings" were held three times a week to assess looming conspiracies. His National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, prepared a voluminous dossier on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, actively tracking them across the planet. Clinton raised the issue of terrorism in virtually every important speech he gave in the last three years of his tenure. In 1996, Clinton delivered a major address to the United Nations on the matter of international terrorism, calling it "The enemy of our generation."
Behind the scenes, he leaned vigorously on the leaders of nations within the terrorist sphere. In particular, he pushed Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to assist him in dealing with the threat from neighboring Afghanistan and its favorite guest, Osama bin Laden. Before Sharif could be compelled to act, he was thrown out of office by his own army. His replacement, Pervez Musharraf, pointedly refused to do anything to assist Clinton in dealing with these threats. Despite these and other diplomatic setbacks, terrorist cell after terrorist cell were destroyed across the world, and bomb plots against American embassies were thwarted. Because of security concerns, these victories were never revealed to the American people until very recently.
In America, few people heard anything about this. Clinton's dire public warnings about the threat posed by terrorism, and the massive non-secret actions taken to thwart it, went completely unreported by the media, which was far more concerned with stained dresses and baseless Drudge Report rumors. When the administration did act militarily against bin Laden and his terrorist network, the actions were dismissed by partisans within the media and Congress as scandalous "wag the dog" tactics. The TV networks actually broadcast clips of the movie "Wag The Dog" to accentuate the idea that everything the administration was doing was contrived fakery.
The bombing of the Sundanese factory at al-Shifa, in particular, drew wide condemnation from these quarters, despite the fact that the CIA found and certified VX nerve agent precursor in the ground outside the factory, despite the fact that the factory was owned by Osama bin Laden's Military Industrial Corporation, and despite the fact that the manager of the factory lived in bin Laden's villa in Khartoum. The book "Age of Sacred Terror" quantifies the al-Shifa issue thusly: "The dismissal of the al-Shifa attack as a scandalous blunder had serious consequences, including the failure of the public to comprehend the nature of the al Qaeda threat."
In Congress, Clinton was thwarted by the reactionary conservative majority in virtually every attempt he made to pass legislation that would attack al Qaeda and terrorism. His 1996 omnibus terror bill, which included many of the anti-terror measures we now take for granted after September 11, was withered almost to the point of uselessness by attacks from the right; Jesse Helms and Trent Lott were openly dismissive of the threats Clinton spoke of.
Clinton wanted to attack the financial underpinnings of the al-Qaeda network by banning American companies and individuals from dealing with foreign banks and financial institutions that al Qaeda was using for its money-laundering operations. Texas Senator Phil Gramm, chairman of the Banking Committee, killed Clinton's bill on this matter and called it "totalitarian." In fact, he was compelled to kill the bill because his most devoted patrons, the Enron Corporation and its criminal executives in Houston, were using those same terrorist financial networks to launder their own dirty money and rip off the Enron stockholders.
Just before departing office, Clinton managed to make a deal with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to have some twenty nations close tax havens used by al Qaeda. His term ended before the deal was sealed, and the incoming Bush administration acted immediately to destroy the agreement. According to Time magazine, in an article entitled "Banking on Secrecy" published in October of 2001, Bush economic advisors Larry Lindsey and R. Glenn Hubbard were urged by think tanks like the Center for Freedom and Prosperity to opt out of the coalition Clinton had formed. The conservative Heritage Foundation lobbied Bush's Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neill, to do the same. In the end, the lobbyists got what they wanted, and the Bush administration pulled America out of the plan. The Time article stated, "Without the world's financial superpower, the biggest effort in years to rid the world's financial system of dirty money was short-circuited."
This laundry list of partisan catastrophes goes on and on. Far from being inept on the matter of terrorism, Clinton was profoundly activist in his attempts to address terrorism. Much of his work was foiled by right-wing Congressional conservatives who, simply, refused to accept the fact that he was President. These men, paid to work for the public trust, spent eight years working diligently to paralyze any and all Clinton policies, including anti-terror initiatives that, if enacted, would have gone a long way towards thwarting the September 11 attacks. Beyond them lay the worthless television media, which ignored and spun the terrorist issue as it pursued salacious leaks from Ken Starr's office, leaving the American people drowning in a swamp of ignorance on a matter of deadly global importance.
Over and above the theoretical questions regarding whether or not Clinton's anti-terror policies, if passed, would have stopped September 11 lies the very real fact that attacks very much like 9/11 were, in fact, stopped dead by the Clinton administration. The most glaring example of this came on December 31, 1999, when the world gathered to celebrate the passing of the millennium. On that night, al Qaeda was gathering as well.
The terrorist network planned to simultaneously attack the national airports in Washington DC and Los Angeles, the Amman Raddison Hotel in Jordan, a constellation of holy sites in Israel, and the USS The Sullivans at dock in Yemen. Each and every single one of these plots, which ranged from one side of the planet to the other, was foiled by the efforts of the Clinton administration. Speaking for the first time about these millennium plots, in a speech delivered to the Coast Guard Academy on May 17, 2000, Clinton said, "I want to tell you a story that, unfortunately, will not be the last example you will have to face."
Indeed.
Clinton proved that Osama bin Laden and his terror network can be foiled, can be thwarted, can be stopped. The multifaceted and complex nature of the international millennium plots rivals the plans laid before September 11, and involved counter-terrorism actions within several countries and across the entire American intelligence and military community. All resources were brought to bear, and the terrorists went down to defeat. The proof is in the pudding here. September 11, like the millennium plots, could have been avoided.
Couple this with other facts about the Bush administration we now have in hand. The administration was warned about a massive terror plot in the months before September by the security services of several countries, including Israel, Egypt, Germany and Russia. CIA Director George Tenet delivered a specific briefing on the matter to the administration on August 8, 2001. The massive compendium of data on Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda compiled by Sandy Berger, and delivered to Condoleezza Rice upon his departure, went completely and admittedly unread until the attacks took place. The attacks themselves managed, for over an hour, to pierce the most formidable air defense system in the history of the Earth without a single fighter aircraft taking wing until the catastrophe was concluded.
It is not fashionable these days to pine for the return of William Jefferson Clinton. Given the facts above, and the realities we face about the administration of George W. Bush, and the realities we endure regarding the aftermath of September 11, the United States of America would be, and was, well served by its previous leader. That we do not know this, that September 11 happened at all, that it was such a wretched shock to the American people, that we were so woefully unprepared, can be laid at the feet of a failed news media establishment, and at the feet of a pack of power-mad conservative extremists who now have a great deal to atone for.
Had Clinton been heeded, the measures he espoused would have been put in place, and a number of powerful bulwarks would have been thrown into the paths of those commercial airplanes. Had the news media been something other than a purveyor of masturbation fantasies from the far-right, the American people would have know the threats we faced, and would have compelled their Congressmen to act. Had Congress itself been something other than an institution ruled by narrow men whose only desire was to break a sitting President by any means necessary, we would very probably still have a New York skyline dominated by two soaring towers.
Had the Bush administration not continued this pattern of gross partisan ineptitude and heeded the blitz of domestic and international warnings, instead of trooping off to Texas for a month-long vacation, had Bush's National Security Advisor done one hour's worth of her homework, we probably would not be in the grotesque global mess that currently envelops us. Never forget that many of the activists who pushed throughout the 1990s for the annihilation of all things Clinton are now foursquare in charge of the country today.
Edited to add source:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/101303A.shtml
posted on February 17, 2008 07:55:34 PM new
Neglus, Thank you for that great post. While Clinton-bashers were and are busy blaming him for every possible problem in this country, here are some facts for a change.
"The one fact I do know if Clinton had not been playing around but doing his job 911 wouldn't have happened or at least we would have had a warning."
Even Bill Clinton was not capable of fooling around 24/7. I'm sure he squeezed in a few hours of work here and there. Maybe you can read Neglus's post and get a few facts.
posted on February 18, 2008 09:07:21 AM new
"The one fact I do know if Clinton had not been playing around but doing his job 911 wouldn't have happened or at least we would have had a warning."
And what job would that have been, Libra.
Furthermore you want to talk about warnings - what about this one - the Presidential Daily Brief that said Al Qaeda determined to attack the United States.
Perhaps if Bush was doing his job instead of taking a lot of time off during his first 8 months in office he would have recognized the warning that was given.
Lastly, if you remember, the 9/11 Commission said Clinton and Bush should have done more but didn't. At least Clinton had the guts to apologize for not doing more. We haven't heard an apology from Bush yet.
"She Who Must Not Be Named is gone. Banished far, far away with her minions to the outer realms where she can't hurt anyone ever again - the profe
posted on February 18, 2008 06:39:03 PM new
Libra: You STILL call Hillary Clinton a "women." Your education may have been substandard, but there's no excuse for ignorance once you've been set right. Don't you realize that you're judged (unfairly) by the words you put in print? (The only way we have of judging since we don't know you and haven't heard you speak.)
One gal = a woman
More than one gal = women
_____________________
posted on February 18, 2008 07:35:07 PM new
You know roadsmith you are sounding more like mingotree everyday. Take care of your self and don't worry your little head about me. I do just fine. I will and do what I please so find someone else to pick on.
posted on February 18, 2008 07:40:53 PM new
I thank GOD that you don't know me and you never will. You come down to the lower level and talk down to almost everyone here. I have heard how many times about your education, the jobs you held and the offices you ran for. The people you new. I don't really care. Did I miss anything. I probably did.
Talk down to me all you want, I don't really care. I am a human being, with feelings unlike some that post in the RT. To come down to the RT and chatise me because I spelt women wrong must make you happy. I hope I made your day.
posted on February 18, 2008 09:08:24 PM new
Roadsmith is one of the sanest and most compassionate listers on any board. Libra, please don't be driven by the Linda phenomena- at the end she reminded me of John Belushi as Samurai gone wacko, wildly swinging at anything and everything in her path.
posted on February 18, 2008 09:36:25 PM new
Thanks, Pixi.
Libra, I used to teach junior high, and I know that playground behavior when I see it. I don't wish you ill. But you don't need to vociferously defend yourself every time you think you've been libeled. The *last* word isn't always the *best* word.
_____________________
