Hurricane Rita

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

Going outside into the warm sunshine, will listen to the lovely song of the crows and the seagulls. Sadly, no beer. :sigh:

Sandy Eggo weather today: we have a stationary high, forecast at the beaches ~83 degrees, up to 95 inland, clear and bright. Maybe I should take some iced tea.

[piqaboo]

In the FL Keys, I had a drink called a Hurricane Andrew. It was fruity, cold, high octane, and came garnished with an inside out umbrella.

What would a Hurricane Rita be? Pat O'Brien's hurricane mix, with tequila and a slice of lime?

[Shapley]

OT,

re:I wonder if you(rhetorical) would feel differently if it was your child who was offered as a sacrifice to the gods of oil?

I don't know how I'll feel when and if my son goes off to war, wherever, whenever, and for whatever cause it may be. I will accept, provided that the military is still voluntary, that he has understood the consequences of his signatory status (which I'll make darned sure I've explained to him, provided I'm still around to do so), and that he has volunteered to serve based on the needs or perceived needs of the military.

V/R
Shapley

[OperaTenor]

Originally posted by piqaboo:
I gotta say "create the internet" still sounds as stupid as something Bush would slip up and say.

Piq equal opportunity basher Aboo

Did you bother reading the entire link?

[OperaTenor]

Originally posted by Selma in Sandy Eggo:
Not inferred, implied.

No, inferred. I inferred, by what you wrote, that you were calling me a whining nitwit.

If I had meant "implied", I would have said "implied".

<small>[ 09-28-2005, 03:10 PM: Message edited by: OperaTenor ]</small>

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

...Selma, by inference, called...

No, in this usage, "Selma" is the subject. "called" would be the verb. The "by inference" is a modifier for "Selma". Or, maybe "called". Selma implied a conclusion by offering a perceived parallel; you inferred that the parallel was valid. And clearly took offense.

Here, have an ice tea!

<small>[ 09-28-2005, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Selma in Sandy Eggo ]</small>

[OperaTenor]

Or maybe it was "by my inference", where "my" would be implied.

Are you trying to tell me you intended no offense?!

<small>[ 09-28-2005, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: OperaTenor ]</small>

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

Don't you want ice tea?

Perhaps people who criticize politicians so savagely, including personal remarks, accusations of stupidity, and assumption of evil motives are perceived as thickskinned themselves. Didn't think you were sensitive.

I do not enjoy the repeated personal attacks on the president. You may feel them justified but I begin to think your focus is a bit too tight. Disputing his policies and agenda are fine.

Are you sure about the ice tea?

[Haggis@wk]

Om Mani Padme Hum, Om Mani Padme Hum, Om Mani Padme Hum, (Help me out here Piq!)

Om Mani Padme Hum, deep cleansing breathes

"(Ed. "Maybe you should suggest some navel gazing while chanting?")

Oh yeah!!! that'll go over like a Baby Ruth bar in a punch bowl!!!

Om Mani Padme Hum
Om Mani Padme Hum

[Shapley]

Lovely day for a glass of iced tea.

[OperaTenor]

Originally posted by Selma in Sandy Eggo:

I do not enjoy the repeated personal attacks on the president. You may feel them justified but I begin to think your focus is a bit too tight. Disputing his policies and agenda are fine.

Nobody's forcing you to read this thread, or any other topic in the Barracks.

I want my child to grow up in the America I at least thought I grew up in, so when it comes to national security, and what I perceive to be the subordination of it to wholesale abuse of power, it becomes very personal for me.

[Shapley]

Make mine unsweetened, with lemon.

[Shapley]

OT,

I thought you grew up during the French IndoChina conflict? I think that, if you believe what you are saying in posts about this war being "another Vietnam", then your child is growing up in the America you grew up in.

That being said, President Bush will be out of office in another three years, three months and twenty-one days, and then you can open a bottle of that free bubble-up, and have a can of that rainbow stew!

V/R
Shapley

<small>[ 09-28-2005, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: Shapley ]</small>

[BigJon@Work]

Originally posted by OperaTenor:

Originally posted by BigJon@Work:
[b] Oh! And by the way OT, the Halliburton picture ain't pretty.

Hmm, I didn't realize nearly doubling in share price over the last twelve months constitutes a picture that "ain't pretty". If that's the case, what would you consider to be good performance, an increase by a factor of ten?!

Lemme know what stock that is so I can buy.

Halliburton's share price chart for the past twelve months

[/b]

OT, do I really need to explain this to you? Or are you trolling.

[OperaTenor]

Originally posted by BigJon@Work:
OT, do I really need to explain this to you?

Don't bother. I'm just a whining nitwit, so I wouldn't understand anyway.

[piqaboo]

bigJon,
I'd appreciate it if you explain it to me, because 'the picture aint pretty" is kinda ambiguous

[Marye]

Well... geez so, let's see, I am a socialized medicine loving, bleeding heart left < cough > liberal, who thinks gay marriage is ok with her, and doesn't mind if you are smoking a joint at the same time, sissy who says, sorry way too often (as we do up here) from Canada. So bigJon, I don't get it either. Sorry.. damn

[BigJon@Work]

Originally posted by piqaboo:
bigJon,
I'd appreciate it if you explain it to me, because 'the picture aint pretty" is kinda ambiguous

If you were any of those things, (ed-including blonde) I wouldn't even take the time to reply to you. Now your husband on the other hand . . . :p

Halliburton has lost over 4 billion dollars in the last four full years. They might break even this year, but it is looking like another losing year. Their market cap is essentially one year's revenue, which is terrible. Yes the stock has gone up this year, but only because of speculators thinking that they might finally get enough gov contracts to make money. The stock recovered from a status that was nearly junk. Should the war end now, the stock would probaly drop right back down to that level again. No investor with a brain would touch this dog.

As I said before, they are in a high risk, low reward business. They need to make huge bets of capital and people on projects that are speculative and eaily prone to veering off the tracks into money-losing quagmires of unimaginable proportions. It's a business for the strong of stomach and the stiff of lip.

[Shapley]

Piq,

I guess I left your question unanswered as to why I told you to "calm down".

You had indicated in your post that I somehow implied that patronage was alright when Republicans do it, but wrong when Clinton did it. I never said any such thing. I said I railed against it when I was in politics, only to find out that almost no one who is actually involved in Government has any desire to see it go away. They all fuss and complain when the other side does it, but it's just a smoke screeen.

When I was County Chairman for the Republican Party, I attended a County Chairman's meeting. Of the approximately 100 Chairmen in attendance, I was one of two that did not work for the government. The main focus of the meeting was how to get more of their people jobs in the government.

As I said, it isn't part of the system, it is the system. I don't like it, and that is one of the main reasons I'm no longer in politics.

V/R
Shapley

[BigJon@Work]

Doonesbury finally tells a joke . . . and its funny!
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/db/2005/db050928.gif