From: Fred K. Gringioni on

"kenpitts" <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f1dcdd30-a2e7-48da-9f02-136704676e73(a)r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

> I've lost 50 lbs since September Randy. I'm doing something about it.



Congratulations (seriously).

From: Fred K. Gringioni on

"kenpitts" <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4d3be88a-dee9-417b-8988-


> find the current crop of far left Democrats every bit as distasteful
> as you find these people. But, when elected, they have every right to
> chase after this radical agenda as we see them doing. They will pay a
> price in November.



They'll pay a price in November, but not for the reason you state.

The reasons why they'll take a beating are:

1) the party which occupies the executive branch traditionally takes a
beating during midterm elections

2) the economy sucks and the party in power also traditionally takes a
beating when the economy sucks

The Democrats took a gigantic beating in 1994 and right wing ideologues like
yourself would like to claim that it was because of Clinton's liberal
agenda. That's not what it was. The economy sucked, the Dems were the party
in power so they lost control of both houses of Congress, but the economy
turned around by 1996 and Clinton go re-elected.

It's all about the economy.

From: Carbon on
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 09:04:00 -0700, kenpitts wrote:
> On Apr 10, 10:28 am, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 08:08:10 -0700, kenpitts wrote:
>>> On Apr 10, 9:10 am, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <2010041010002379981-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>,
>>>> none_of_your_busin...(a)all.com says...
>>>>> On 2010-04-08 18:45:17 -0400, kenpitts said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Fred, Watson and Mickleson at the top of the leader board, with
>>>>>> Tiger on the ourside looking in. Could we just take this to the
>>>>>> back nine Sunday? I would take any of the three as winner right
>>>>>> now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your dream come true at Augusta would be for them to replace the
>>>>> Green Jacket with a White Sheet.
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you give them yours, if you can part with it for any
>>>> lenght of time.
>>>
>>> Brown is one of these bleeding-heart, guilt-ridden, urban, white
>>> liberals. He can be sympathetic for radical causes like the rabble
>>> that invade global economic summits but he would never (rightly so)
>>> show anything but disdain for the Klan. His problem is that
>>> conservatives like me and Laville must be marginalized and explained
>>> away as members of the Klan or worse. Please refer to Saul Alinsky
>>> here.
>>>
>>> I wonder how, with his Democratic alliances, he works it out that
>>> Southern Democrats were the ones who stood in the school house doors
>>> and tried to block he passage of the Civil Rights Act. Rockefeller
>>> Republicans pushed that over the top. Also, his head probably
>>> explodes when he thinks about Robert "Sheets" Byrd, Democratic
>>> senator from West Virginia.
>>
>> Type "southern strategy" into the Google. The Republicans actively
>> recruited Southern racists years ago, and they moved pretty much en
>> masse to the Republican party. You surely know this already...
>
> Was what I said about what happened in the 60's not true? Byrd is still
> a member of the Senate in spite of the fact that he was a member of the
> Klan, an officer in fact.
>
> You make it sound like conservatives in the South should somehow go
> without representation, be disenfranchised. Like it or not, they are
> still citizens.
>
> I find the current crop of far left Democrats every bit as distasteful
> as you find these people. But, when elected, they have every right to
> chase after this radical agenda as we see them doing. They will pay a
> price in November.

Southern racists were predominately Democrat, then fairly quickly they
were predominately Republican. For almost my entire lifetime, racists
have overwhelmingly voted Republican. What's next? The Civil War?
From: R&B on
On 2010-04-10 11:08:10 -0400, kenpitts said:

> On Apr 10, 9:10�am, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote:
>> In article <2010041010002379981-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>,
>> none_of_your_busin...(a)all.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 2010-04-08 18:45:17 -0400, kenpitts said:
>>
>>>> Fred, Watson and Mickleson at the top of the leader board, with Tiger
>>>> on the ourside looking in. Could we just take this to the back nine
>>>> Sunday? I would take any of the three as winner right now.
>>
>>>> Ken
>>
>>> Your dream come true at Augusta would be for them to replace the Green
>>> Jacket with a White Sheet.
>>
>>> Randy
>>
>> Why don't you give them yours, if you can part with it for any lenght of
>> time.
>
> Brown is one of these bleeding-heart, guilt-ridden, urban, white
> liberals. He can be sympathetic for radical causes like the rabble
> that invade global economic summits but he would never (rightly so)
> show anything but disdain for the Klan. His problem is that
> conservatives like me and Laville must be marginalized and explained
> away as members of the Klan or worse. Please refer to Saul Alinsky
> here.


No, actually, I don't believe I've ever said anything to indicate
whether I believe David is a racist. I have no reason to believe he is.

You, on the other hand, have made statements here in RSG that give a
pretty clear indication, starting with your 1996 diatribes about the
desirability of keeping blacks out of private country clubs and your
remarks about how Tiger Woods has only invited "the ghetto element"
into golf.

One needn't dig too deep to find such remarks from you.


> I wonder how, with his Democratic alliances, he works it out that
> Southern Democrats were the ones who stood in the school house doors
> and tried to block he passage of the Civil Rights Act.


George Wallace? I don't think you'll find many Democrats who would claim him.

Plus, it was the Republicans who turned to the "Southern Strategy" in
'68. Plus, Ronald Reagan announced his candidacy for president in the
very town where civil rights workers were killed. It is Republicans
who have opposed every "equal employment" initiative in the modern era.
And it was the Republican National Convention in 2008 that looked like
a white supremacist rally. You had to look pretty closely to spot even
one person of color on the convention hall floor.


> Rockefeller
> Republicans pushed that over the top.


Oh, really? And who was the president who had to make back room deals
to get it through? That would be *Democratic* President LBJ.

Besides, Nelson Rockefeller would be run out of the Republican Party
today, and you know it. Hell, even Barry Goldwater would be considered
a flaming liberal by the standards of today's radical Republican party.
Hell, Goldwater's own descendents...and Republican President
Eisenhower's descendents -- they're all Democrats now. Why? Because
they've seen the Republican Party become a regional, racist,
reactionary, radicalized party of a diminishing number of people.


Randy

From: R&B on
On 2010-04-10 12:47:07 -0400, Fred K. Gringioni said:

> "kenpitts" <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:4d3be88a-dee9-417b-8988-
>
>
>> find the current crop of far left Democrats every bit as distasteful
>> as you find these people. But, when elected, they have every right to
>> chase after this radical agenda as we see them doing. They will pay a
>> price in November.
>
>
>
> They'll pay a price in November, but not for the reason you state.
>
> The reasons why they'll take a beating are:
>
> 1) the party which occupies the executive branch traditionally takes a
> beating during midterm elections
>
> 2) the economy sucks and the party in power also traditionally takes a
> beating when the economy sucks
>
> The Democrats took a gigantic beating in 1994 and right wing ideologues
> like yourself would like to claim that it was because of Clinton's
> liberal agenda. That's not what it was. The economy sucked, the Dems
> were the party in power so they lost control of both houses of
> Congress, but the economy turned around by 1996 and Clinton go
> re-elected.
>
> It's all about the economy.


You are, of course, correct.

However, to assume that things won't be looking up by the time the
November elections roll around is a little premature. Nobody's
predicting that the turnaround will be complete by then. But there are
improving signs even now.

There's no issue that more unifies Americans of both parties than the
issue of Wall Street and Banking regulation. The vast majority of
Americans hate the bail-outs, and most of all, they hate that the Wall
Street douchebags keep failing and still walking away with
taxpayer-funded golden parachutes as their reward for failing.

Republicans will likely continue to be the Grand Obstructionist Party
when the Obama Administration pushes for increased regulation and
oversight on the banking industry and Wall Street. Republicans are so
married to being the Party of No that they will likely allow their
momentum to carry them forward with a similar strategy in the fight
over banking regulation. This could prove politically suicidal, given
the overwhelmingly negative perception the people have toward the
banking industry and Wall Street.

Don't think for a minute that won't be played up in the campaign this fall.

And remember, in the Health Care vote, every Republican voted in favor
allowing 45,000 Americans to die each year due to having no health
insurance. Now that reform has passed and the world as we know it
hasn't ended, all the Republican lies in the lead-up to the health care
vote will finally come to light and folks will realize that reform
actually helped them. The Republicans surely won't benefit from the
truth getting out there.

Randy