What's this about Norm Retiring.

Page 5 of 6  
Gary writes:

A fact, a fact, a kingdom, more or less, for a fact. "It happened" says almost what Doug said a psot earlier. Nothing.

When did I learn of such things? Early '50s. Late '40s. What was JFK doing then? Recovering from back problems caused by PT 109 and getting ready for politics. He wasn't getting us almost annihilated. Just because Civil Defense was still touted in '60 doesn't put the cause in JFK's pocket. It was a decade or 2 old by then, as a result of a lot of intrigue over atomic secrets and a lot of residual fright over WWII. You want to blame Ike? More went on under his adminstration than under JFK's. Maybe we can go back to Truman, under whose admin most of it began?
Do you recall the atomic clock? How many minutes we were from midnight. Do you think that came on board during JFK's watch?
Read back a few years. You may have lived it, but it sounds like you were too young to pay attention.
Charlie Self "It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man." H. L. Mencken
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Rather neat book called _One Hell of a Gamble_ written on the crisis, Gives a look at what the Soviet archives have to say. Kennedy was viewed as a mental lightweight by the Soviets, so it surprised the hell out of them when he put up versus shut up. Fortunately, Ike hadn't resisted the military industrial complex too much, and we had the big stick to brandish, even though we didn't realize how big it really was by comparison.
As to assertions that Khrushchev was an empty blusterer, remember, he had the courage to call Stalin a murderer in '56, with only a few of the top Stalinists in their premature graves at the time. He looked like a buffoon - wouldn't have survived in Stalin's USSR if he hadn't, but he was a crafty bugger.
One the Soviets respected was former VP Nixon of "kitchen debate" fame. Years later, Soviets (and former Soviets with whom I worked, and who had lived through those days, mentioned Nixon with the same degree of respect they used when they mentioned Regan. You don't want to know what they thought of Jimmy.
The Communists did not fail, they succeeded. Everyone had a job, a dwelling, medical care, education and pension. Problem was, there were no "rich" to tax to pay for all of that, only a self-styled elite who "knew and served the best interests of the working man," (Trotsky) and they were as unwilling to work for no gain as everyone else.
The system died when people ceased to believe in a better future.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snippage>

Companies and countries almost always die, when people cease to believe in a better future. Hope, and faith, are primary motivating factors in almost all human endeavor. Or so it seems from here.
Patriarch, cross posted to rec.woodworking.philosophy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Only thing that trumps an empty stomach.
"patriarch snipped-for-privacy@nospam.comcastDOTnet>" <<patriarch> wrote in message

almost
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
He seems to get the same reverence down there as Trudeau gets up here. JFK was a man who could deliver scripted speeches fairly well but never seemed to actually accomplish anything completely successfully.
He always has struck me as a guy who used the opportunity that Americans gave him as en easy way to get laid. Maybe the voters should have given him a shiny convertible instead and he could've gotten laid much more cheaply. He seems to have had the sexual proclivities of a billy goat.
In fact, that whole family seems to personify the lowest collection of morality in politics almost anywhere. The entire clan from Joe on down seems to have had connections to some very bad people and seems to have p*ssed them off with catastrophic results.
I look at JFK and I see a man as slimy as Nixon but only marginally better at hiding it /for/ /a/ /while/.
Gerry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Reagan did all of that single-handedly? Wow! What a genius of a man. But could he turn water into wine?
The man was a second-rate actor who could read a script, sort of - the embodiment of the-right-place-at-the-right-time, dumb luck.
Gerry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thank's to Spiro - I learned what "nolo contendere" meant...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"charlie b"

discreet with

like
What is sad, is that Clinton inherited a world for the first time in 50 years with great promise (no cold war), a powerful country with a healthy rising economy (recession ended in 1991) and his defining moment of possible great achievement is his sexual proclivities...what a waste. Soggy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

he's remembered mostly for that today, thanks to the relentless harping of the right wing. I bet history will see it differently. I mean middle aged guys in positions of power using their influence to get laid is not news. It might be interesting to speculate what Clinton's legacy will be, but I really doubt it will involve Monica.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As if the left wing never went after anyone.

I think Monica will always be in the history. The media will NEVER let it die. Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Where've you been?
The only thing that matters to the media is that Cheney once worked for Halliburton.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Funny thing, for the first time since the administration took office (or at least since the Iraq invasion), I saw an AP story regarding a hostage in Iraq who worked for KBR (Kellogg, Brown & Root) in which the AP story indicated that KBR was a subsidiary of Haliburton but did *not* say "the company formerly run by Republican Vice-President Dick Cheney". This is the first time that AP has forgotten to add that last bit about Cheney.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

still does.....

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^

^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^

Close. More of "people who should have kept him aware of the situation did not" rather than "he did", but yes. Note the distinction between the two?

Can you give details of when this claim was made? I recall no such weaselage.

You're confusing "this behavior is something I consider inconsistant with his proclaimed philosophy" with "this person said that a specific event which had occured, had not (under oath)."

OK, so maybe Clinton isn't a pathological liar, but a habitual one. Does it matter?

Indeed. Anyone capable of getting themselves elected to that office shouldn't be trusted to actually do the job. However, some more so than others.
How the hell did we get here (this topic) anyway?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 12:42:50 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@thanks.com wrote:

What amazes me is that now it is "the relentless harping of the right wing" and that the left (or at least Clinton apologists) say it is no surprise that middle-aged guys in positions of power use their influence to gain favors. Before Clinton's transgressions, the left, and particularly the NOW gang and their supporters were continually screaming about how evil it was that those things happened and supported everything possible, including lawsuits and other actions to change this country into a gender-neutral neutered society. Remember Bob Packwood? He lost his position over actions that were less egregious than Clinton's. Remember the hoopla over the appointment and confirmation hearings for a certain black Supreme Court justice? He was tarred and feathered and labeled as unsuitable for his position for allegedly making only comments that were deemed as "offensive" years later by the person who allegedly heard those comments. The only difference in the latter two cases was the fact that those were conservatives being attacked by the left. The big difference is that neither of those latter two conservatives committed perjury during legal proceedings related to the behavior in question. The irony is truly amazing -- as is the hypocrisy of the left in this matter.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The biggest difference is that those of the "right" normally resign rather than try to brazen it out.

to
evil
is
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 02:48:19 GMT, Mark & Juanita

maybe. do you know the "truth"?

that's politics for ya.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Assiduously avoiding adding any argumentative (and, alternatively, ambiguous) articles about Abrahm's ascendant anti-employment ambitions, Ah am!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ambiguous)
You have successfully shown that you are an assonant.
Agkistrodon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Alliteration'R'Us: Stan stood, stunned, stuttering, stock still, and stupefied.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.