 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / February 2008(OT:) Mike Huckabee on Meet the Press...
just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all along. Then again, so did Dean a few years ago. > just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for everything, > never got flustered, and maintained his composure all along. > > Then again, so did Dean a few years ago. Praise Jesus, and the world is only 6000 years old! That's Huckabee, although he's keeping that part of himself under wraps lately. >> just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for everything, >> never got flustered, and maintained his composure all along. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > That's Huckabee, although he's keeping that part of himself under wraps > lately. Hey. He held his own and was unflappable. > Hey. He held his own and was unflappable. But did he tell the truth while doing that, or does that not matter? In article <edaabb9a-a7fb-427f-8bea-23269c4d7db8@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote: > > > Hey. He held his own and was unflappable. > > But did he tell the truth while doing that, or does that not matter? I suppose you're going to say hillary tells the truth?  Signature"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Hillary Clinton > In article > <edaabb9a-a7fb-427f-8bea-23269c4d7db8@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I suppose you're going to say hillary tells the truth? I suppose you are hallucinating. This is about Huckabee. > > In article > > <edaabb9a-a7fb-427f-8bea-23269c4d7db8@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I suppose you are hallucinating. This is about Huckabee. I was talking about hillary. Butt out. Signature"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Hillary Clinton > > > In article > > > <edaabb9a-a7fb-427f-8bea-23269c4d7db8@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I was talking about hillary. Butt out. I was talking about the subject of the thread. >> > > In article >> > > <edaabb9a-a7fb-427f-8bea-23269c4d7db8@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > I was talking about the subject of the thread. I believe so. If he hadn't been, Russert would have been all over it. > >> > > In article > >> > > <edaabb9a-a7fb-427f-8bea-23269c4d7db8@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > I believe so. If he hadn't been, Russert would have been all over it. jsb hates it when someone changes a minor point in a topic, but he does it all the time. I am convinced JSB is a two-faced son-of-a-gun. Signature"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Hillary Clinton > Hey. He held his own and was unflappable. > >> But did he tell the truth while doing that, or does that not >> matter? > > I believe so. If he hadn't been, Russert would have been all over it. Russert is a tough interviewer only against people who answer all his questions directly, something few politicians do. >> Hey. He held his own and was unflappable. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Russert is a tough interviewer only against people who answer all his > questions directly, something few politicians do. This softball throwing pansy impresses you? LOL > >> Hey. He held his own and was unflappable. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > This softball throwing pansy impresses you? Certainly not when he's fawning over McCain, but with other guests, when Russert proves that they contradicted themselves, most guests just talk their ways out by simply not addressing the proof. >> This softball throwing pansy impresses you? > > Certainly not when he's fawning over McCain, but with other guests, > when Russert proves that they contradicted themselves, most guests > just talk their ways out by simply not addressing the proof. Just when he's fawning over someone on the left, causing him to cream his jeans. Got it. > In article > <edaabb9a-a7fb-427f-8bea-23269c4d7db8@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I suppose you're going to say hillary tells the truth? I didn't mention her. I asked about Huckabee, so was he truthful on Meet the Press? > just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for everything, > never got flustered, and maintained his composure all along. > > Then again, so did Dean a few years ago. He probably got all the questions in advance. McCain is the liberal's nightmare. The Democrats know they can beat Huckabee (a former Baptist Preacher), but are terrified of facing McCain in the general election. > > just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for > > everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Baptist Preacher), but are terrified of facing McCain in the general > election. Why? Whether it's Obama, Clinton or McCain they'll still have one of their own. Signature"Some folks are wise and some are otherwise." ~ Tobias George Smolett >> > just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >> > everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Why? Whether it's Obama, Clinton or McCain they'll still have one of > their own. Where did you read or hear that? Who told you to say it? >>> > just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >>> > everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Where did you read or hear that? Who told you to say it? Ever think maybe he formed his own opinion? >>>> > just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >>>> > everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Ever think maybe he formed his own opinion? Not a chance. He's repeating what the pundits told him to say. >> Ever think maybe he formed his own opinion? > > Not a chance. He's repeating what the pundits told him to say. So, who pulls your string, Talking Tina? >>>>> just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >>>>> everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>>> >>>> He probably got all the question ahead... I doubt this completely. All you have to do is watch the youtube detailing how Huckabee sliced and diced Wolf Blitzer with no effort whatsoever. It was a work of art. >>>>>> just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >>>>>> everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > It was a work of art. Even so, he thinks the world is only 6000 years old. You don't have to be stupid to have delusions. >>>>>> He probably got all the question ahead... >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Even so, he thinks the world is only 6000 years old. You don't have to be > stupid to have delusions. Just exactly, plus or minus a million, how old IS the world, Joe? >>>>>>> He probably got all the question ahead... >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Just exactly, plus or minus a million, how old IS the world, Joe? I didn't claim to know how old the world was. You will now disagree with that statement. >>>>>>>> He probably got all the question ahead... >>>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I didn't claim to know how old the world was. You will now disagree with > that statement. Why would I have asked the question if i though you did? It was an honest question. You will now claim that I'm not telling the truth. >>>>>>>>> He probably got all the question ahead... >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > You will now claim that I'm not telling the truth. I know it's older than non-scientist Huckabee claims. Since he can't possibly support his claim scientifically, I think we have a pretty good idea where his nonsense came from. Wanna go there? >>>> Just exactly, plus or minus a million, how old IS the world, Joe? >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > possibly support his claim scientifically, I think we have a pretty good > idea where his nonsense came from. Wanna go there? I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, when he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." So the only difference between you and Huck is that you're both weighted at opposite ends of the chronology. If Biblical debate with me is your desire, you're quite out of your league. >>>>> Just exactly, plus or minus a million, how old IS the world, Joe? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, when > he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." Of course. He had to leave the previous nonsense behind. > So the only difference between you and Huck is that you're both weighted > at opposite ends of the chronology. All I know is that paleontologists discuss MUCH higher numbers than non-scientist Huckabee. Certain types of people have a dangerous disdain for science. That's not appropriate for a president. Thinking in extremes now, aren't there people who refuse medical treatment, hoping god will handle things? Someone like that would make a hell of a president. Imagine the president addressing the nation after a major anthrax attack, telling us he's not going to mobilize the appropriate assistance because god will handle it. > If Biblical debate with me is your desire, you're quite out of your > league. I know. I was going to ask if you knew of any religious information which supported Huckabee's estimate (which he has been told to keep quiet about because he's on a roll). >> I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, when >> he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." > > Of course. He had to leave the previous nonsense behind. A wise man admits and corrects his error(s). >> So the only difference between you and Huck is that you're both weighted >> at opposite ends of the chronology. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > he's not going to mobilize the appropriate assistance because god will > handle it. I don't think he has a disdain for science, though I'd not make that claim for every evangelical. >> If Biblical debate with me is your desire, you're quite out of your >> league. > > I know. I was going to ask if you knew of any religious information which > supported Huckabee's estimate (which he has been told to keep quiet about > because he's on a roll). All I can offer is my own take. When some moronic Catholic priest set the age of the earth at 6K years a few hundred years ago, he counted "so-and-so begats" and multiplied them by 40, an accepted number of years for a generation. He used the total to "calculate" the earth's age. What he failed to consider is that only those people who are important enough to bear mentioning are listed in the Bible. An analogy would be to say that your great-great-grandfather begat you, JSB, with no mention made whatsoever of your ggf, gf, and father due to their not being important in your family history. Skews the priest's figures easily. Other than than, I'll say, "I don't know." > >>>> Just exactly, plus or minus a million, how old IS the world, Joe? > >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, > when he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." But that's a typical disingenous answer, the kind we get from almost all politicians, including every current presidential candidate. Even Ron Paul fudged on this -- not as much as the others (at least he came right out and said he didn't believe in evolution), but he still resorted to the common "nobody really knows for sure" excuse. It's too bad that religious cults have so much power to supress reason. > So the only difference between you and Huck is that you're both > weighted at opposite ends of the chronology. > > If Biblical debate with me is your desire, you're quite out of your league. >> I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, >> when he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." > > But that's a typical disingenous answer, the kind we get from almost > all politicians, including every current presidential candidate. And any honest scientist. So sorry. >>> I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, >>> when he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > And any honest scientist. So sorry. Sorry nothing. The point isn't that nobody can pin down an exact age. The point is that Huckabee once commented that 6000 sounded right to him. If you think it's valid for him to use the number 6000, then I need you to explain why you think paleontologists are wrong about the age of dinosaurs. Be very specific about the errors scientists are constantly making. http://images.salon.com/comics/tomo/2007/02/26/tomo/story.jpg >>>> I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, >>>> when he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Sorry nothing. The point isn't that nobody can pin down an exact age. Exactly my point. Thanks for the affirmation. > The > point is that Huckabee once commented that 6000 sounded right to him. If you [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://images.salon.com/comics/tomo/2007/02/26/tomo/story.jpg Why would I be specific in answering your question, when you've still not answered mine? >>>>> I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, >>>>> when he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Why would I be specific in answering your question, when you've still not > answered mine? Nobody can answer YOUR question, if the question you're referring to is "How old is the earth"? But, you can tell me why you think Huckabee's estimate should be respected by anyone. You can tell me indirectly, by explaining by paleontologists are wrong. >> Why would I be specific in answering your question, when you've still not >> answered mine? > > Nobody can answer YOUR question, if the question you're referring to is "How > old is the earth"? I didn't ask for dogma. Just your opinion, plus or minus a few million. > But, you can tell me why you think Huckabee's estimate should be respected > by anyone. You can tell me indirectly, by explaining by paleontologists are > wrong. I can completely respect his "I don't know". Beating the dead horse of his earlier answer is just that. >>> Why would I be specific in answering your question, when you've still >>> not [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I didn't ask for dogma. Just your opinion, plus or minus a few million. I'll just use the number I read last week in an article about dinosaurs: 250 million years, give or take a week. >> But, you can tell me why you think Huckabee's estimate should be >> respected [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I can completely respect his "I don't know". I could respect it, too, if two conditions existed: 1) He wasn't a politician 2) He wasn't trying to cover the tracks left by his previous comment about 6000 years Some will say he gained new knowledge, so his "I don't know" was perfectly sincere, but I don't buy it. >>>> Why would I be specific in answering your question, when you've still >>>> not [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I'll just use the number I read last week in an article about dinosaurs: 250 > million years, give or take a week. I could live with that. Surprised? >> I can completely respect his [Huckabee's] "I don't know". > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Some will say he gained new knowledge, so his "I don't know" was perfectly > sincere, but I don't buy it. That's fine. You'd never vote for him anyway, so I doubt he's losing sleep over that tally. OTOH, his candidacy is all but dead. The best never run, win, or stay anyway, so we'll be having another four to eight years of mediocrity at best. >>>>> Why would I be specific in answering your question, when you've still >>>>> not [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > anyway, so we'll be having another four to eight years of mediocrity at > best. I hope you don't think he was one of the best. If he privately has doubts about science, imagine how he might try and rape the budgets of agencies whose existence revolve around science. >> OTOH, his candidacy is all but dead. The best never run, win, or stay >> anyway, so we'll be having another four to eight years of mediocrity at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > about science, imagine how he might try and rape the budgets of agencies > whose existence revolve around science. Nowhere have I claimed he was the best. Mistake number 1. Mistake number 2 is to assume that a creationist would cut budgets for other non-speculative sciences. I know of none who advocate this. >>> OTOH, his candidacy is all but dead. The best never run, win, or stay >>> anyway, so we'll be having another four to eight years of mediocrity at [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Mistake number 2 is to assume that a creationist would cut budgets for > other non-speculative sciences. I know of none who advocate this. They do like to meddle, though. Kansas..... >>>> OTOH, his candidacy is all but dead. The best never run, win, or stay >>>> anyway, so we'll be having another four to eight years of mediocrity at [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > They do like to meddle, though. Kansas..... Nice backpedal. >>>>> OTOH, his candidacy is all but dead. The best never run, win, or stay >>>>> anyway, so we'll be having another four to eight years of mediocrity [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Nice backpedal. Not backpedaling at all. Neither of us can predict what a crank like Huckebee might do once in office. We can only look at the past and extrapolate. And, the president certainly is capable of being a total pain in the a.s to legislators when he wants an agency's budget "adjusted". He can arrange for information to be adjusted to his liking, or hidden completely. When I was in high school, one of the two biology teachers refused to teach evolution, even though it was required in the state's syllabus. Parents devised a myriad of ways to petition the principal to make sure their kids were placed with the smart teacher instead of the creationist, but there was an obvious limit to how many kids could fit into a classroom. I don't recall if or how the creationist was finally dealt with, but I remember my parents talking about the horrors of tenure. >>> They do like to meddle, though. Kansas..... >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > can arrange for information to be adjusted to his liking, or hidden > completely. So because, at one time, he said 6K years, that makes him a crank? > When I was in high school, one of the two biology teachers refused to teach > evolution, even though it was required in the state's syllabus. Parents [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I don't recall if or how the creationist was finally dealt with, but I > remember my parents talking about the horrors of tenure. The horrors of tenure aren't exhibited solely in one direction, Joe. The theory of evolution is just that. The most reputable, honest scientists do not call it fact, even today. Yet the public school system is replete with those on the left who teach utter nonsense within many subjects. >>>> They do like to meddle, though. Kansas..... >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > So because, at one time, he said 6K years, that makes him a crank? Absolutely, inarguably yes. If I could speak to him personally over an extended period of time, it's possible I might eventually believe that he had flushed the nonsense out of his head, perhaps after becoming properly educated. But, I can't do that. So, to protect future generations, I have no choice but to assume he's dangerous. >> When I was in high school, one of the two biology teachers refused to >> teach [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > do not call it fact, even today. Yet the public school system is replete > with those on the left who teach utter nonsense within many subjects. Some reputable scientists say that the ability of bacteria to develop resistance to drugs is one example of evolution. Others say genetic selection is NOT an example. Both may be right. If your only definition of evolution is "people used to be fish", then we have a real problem. >> So because, at one time, he said 6K years, that makes him a crank? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > educated. But, I can't do that. So, to protect future generations, I have no > choice but to assume he's dangerous. Dangerous in your opinion. The horrors of tenure aren't exhibited solely in one direction, Joe. The >> theory of evolution is just that. The most reputable, honest scientists >> do not call it fact, even today. Yet the public school system is replete >> with those on the left who teach utter nonsense within many subjects. > > Some reputable scientists say that the ability of bacteria to develop > resistance to drugs is one example of evolution. Some would also make the argument that the many breeds of dogs we have are another. > Others say genetic > selection is NOT an example. Both may be right. If your only definition of > evolution is "people used to be fish", then we have a real problem. Mutation or adaptation resulting in dominant characteristics exist without question. The indisputable evidence for transitional life forms is fleeting at best. >>> So because, at one time, he said 6K years, that makes him a crank? >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Dangerous in your opinion. I know you're not so naive as to think that a president, even (and perhaps especially) in his unofficial capacity, doesn't exert influence over certain agencies to promote his own personal agenda. Every president does this. Remember the twat that Bush installed at the EPA? > The horrors of tenure aren't exhibited solely in one direction, Joe. The >>> theory of evolution is just that. The most reputable, honest scientists [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > question. The indisputable evidence for transitional life forms is > fleeting at best. If the human genome project ever settles the age-old question about gill slits in human embryos, perhaps we'll finally have an answer. >> Dangerous in your opinion. > > I know you're not so naive as to think that a president, even (and perhaps > especially) in his unofficial capacity, doesn't exert influence over certain > agencies to promote his own personal agenda. Every president does this. > Remember the twat that Bush installed at the EPA? Sure. Remember the murdering, incompetent amazon Hillary installed as AG under her "co-presidency"? Mutation or adaptation resulting in dominant characteristics exist without >> question. The indisputable evidence for transitional life forms is >> fleeting at best. > > If the human genome project ever settles the age-old question about gill > slits in human embryos, perhaps we'll finally have an answer. Vestigial organs are nothing noteworthy. How 'bout that appendix, eh? >>> Dangerous in your opinion. >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Vestigial organs are nothing noteworthy. How 'bout that appendix, eh? What kind of work do you do? You might've told me before, but I forgot. > What kind of work do you do? You might've told me before, but I forgot. I'm retired from 30+years with a telecommunications company. Currently I work part-time as a personal trainer in a gym. Good stuff. You can't be my age and not be a great condition, and have any credibility with clientele. Keeps me on my toes, along with martial arts, etc. >> What kind of work do you do? You might've told me before, but I forgot. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > any credibility with clientele. Keeps me on my toes, along with martial > arts, etc. OK. I just wanted to know what your areas of expertise were NOT. >>> What kind of work do you do? You might've told me before, but I forgot. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > OK. I just wanted to know what your areas of expertise were NOT. Thought so. Yours? >>>> What kind of work do you do? You might've told me before, but I forgot. >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Thought so. Yours? Exactly the same lack of expertise. So, when I tell you Huckabee is dangerous, you can assume I'm correct because I am. >>>> Good stuff. You can't be my age and not be a great condition, and have >>>> any credibility with clientele. Keeps me on my toes, along with martial [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Exactly the same lack of expertise. So, when I tell you Huckabee is > dangerous, you can assume I'm correct because I am. Yeah, right. >>>>> Good stuff. You can't be my age and not be a great condition, and >>>>> have [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Yeah, right. Your only problem with this issue is that there are two possible reasons Huckabee might still believe his 6000 year theory. Reason #1: Ignorance Reason #2: RELIGION!!! It's #2!!! Religion!!! religion religion religion religion >>> Exactly the same lack of expertise. So, when I tell you Huckabee is >>> dangerous, you can assume I'm correct because I am. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > religion religion religion religion Wrong again. It's science. I truly believe that he, and many like him, might start out believing 6K. But after confronted with the facts, they realize their error. >>>> Exactly the same lack of expertise. So, when I tell you Huckabee is >>>> dangerous, you can assume I'm correct because I am. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > might start out believing 6K. But after confronted with the facts, they > realize their error. When did you first learn about dinosaurs? High school earth science, maybe? >> Wrong again. It's science. I truly believe that he, and many like him, >> might start out believing 6K. But after confronted with the facts, they >> realize their error. > > When did you first learn about dinosaurs? High school earth science, maybe? Nope. I was a dino-nut before kindergarten. >>> Wrong again. It's science. I truly believe that he, and many like him, >>> might start out believing 6K. But after confronted with the facts, they [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Nope. I was a dino-nut before kindergarten. I'm prepared to buy you a double-thick foam kneepad like gardeners use and ship it to you, gift wrapped with a bow. It sounds like you'd want it handy in case you ever got close to Huckabee. Huckabee is 52. How can anyone in this country get past the age of (to pick a number) 25 without ever seeing the words "million years" mentioned in the same context as dinosaurs, fossils, etc? How is that possible? >>> When did you first learn about dinosaurs? High school earth science, >>> maybe? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > a number) 25 without ever seeing the words "million years" mentioned in the > same context as dinosaurs, fossils, etc? How is that possible? Wrong assumption. There are many Christians who go from "million' to "thousands" when they come to Believe. Some stay, some can't ignore the science. Huckabee might be of the latter category. I don't know. ;-) >>>> When did you first learn about dinosaurs? High school earth science, >>>> maybe? [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > "thousands" when they come to Believe. Some stay, some can't ignore the > science. Huckabee might be of the latter category. I don't know. ;-) Would you like this one? http://www.groworganic.com/item_GO123_Garden_Kneeling_Pad.html?welcome=T Or, something with back support? http://www.gardeners.com/Healthy+Back+Garden+Kneeler/GardeningTools_PlantingTool s,37-024,default,cp.html >> Wrong assumption. There are many Christians who go from "million' to >> "thousands" when they come to Believe. Some stay, some can't ignore the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Or, something with back support? > http://www.gardeners.com/Healthy+Back+Garden+Kneeler/GardeningTools_PlantingTool s,37-024,default,cp.html You're obsessed. Interesting how easily this was found by you. Previous need? >>> Wrong assumption. There are many Christians who go from "million' to >>> "thousands" when they come to Believe. Some stay, some can't ignore the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Previous need? Way too many gardening links, which reminds me that I have to do a seed inventory today and get my orders placed. > Way too many gardening links, which reminds me that I have to do a seed > inventory today and get my orders placed. Polyploid? >> Way too many gardening links, which reminds me that I have to do a seed >> inventory today and get my orders placed. > > Polyploid? Some, probably. >>> Way too many gardening links, which reminds me that I have to do a seed >>> inventory today and get my orders placed. >> >> Polyploid? > > Some, probably. What genus? ;-) >>>> Way too many gardening links, which reminds me that I have to do a seed >>>> inventory today and get my orders placed. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What genus? ;-) Sounds like you have the afternoon off. Here's the list. Your assignment: Find family, genus and species for each item. And, try that "Big Tetra Mix" Burpee zinnia sometime. 8 feet tall. This is it, in late May, only about 5 feet tall at the time. By August, it was threatening to eat the mailman: http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c197/ancientangler/ZinniaJungle.jpg Arugula Basil Genovese Bean Kentucky Blue Pole Bean-Lima Fordhook No. 242 Broccoli Green Goliath Broccoli Org Green Sprouting Calabrese Broccoli Raab Spring Browallia Blue Bells Improved Canna Collected in L.I. Cantaloupe SuperSun Hybrid Carrot Nantes Half Long Chives Cobaea Mountain Glory Blue Collards Georgia Coriander Coriandrum sativum Corn Silver Queen Cornflower Blue Boy Cosmos Bright Lights Mixed Cucumber Bush Champion Cucumber Little Delicious (pickle) Dandelion Amelioré Dill Anethum graveolens-Mammoth Endive Galia Escarole Batavian Full Heart Fennel Florence Fennel Garlic Harris - planted Oct 2004 Impatiens Flavours Hybrid-Vanilla Kale Dwarf Blue Curled Vates Kale Flowering Nagoya Hybrid Lettuce Burpee Bibb (Butterhead) Lettuce Buttercrunch Lettuce Green Ice Lettuce Little Caesar Romaine Marigold Climax Mixed Moonflower Giant White Mustard India Tendergreen Nasturtium Fordhook Favorites Nasturtium Double Dwarf Jewel Mixed Onion Evergreen Long White Bunching Oregano Greek Pak Choi Joi Choi Hybrid Parsley Extra Curled Dwarf Parsley Single Italian Pea Mammoth Melting Sugar Pea Wando Pepper Crispy Hybrid Pepper Long Slim Red Cayenne Pepper Jalapeño M Portulaca Magic Carpet Mixed Purslane Goldgelber Spinach Bloomsdale Long Standing Spinach Harmony Hybrid Squash Cocozelle Bush Zucchini Squash Butterbush Statice Mixed Bold Colors Sweet Pea Old Spice Mix Swiss Chard Burpee Rhubarb Chard Thyme Common Thyme Tomato Gardener's Delight (Cherry) Tomato Rutgers Zinnia Big Tetra Mix >>>>> Way too many gardening links, which reminds me that I have to do a seed >>>>> inventory today and get my orders placed. [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > Tomato Rutgers > Zinnia Big Tetra Mix Struck a nerve, though I'm sure you guessed at what I was teasing you about. <g> > Remember the murdering, incompetent amazon Hillary installed as > AG under her "co-presidency"? You say that every time you write an alimony check to her. Janet Reno wasn't that bad and was a thorn to the Clintons on Whitewater and related scandals. > > If the human genome project ever settles the age-old question about gill > > slits in human embryos, perhaps we'll finally have an answer. > > Vestigial organs are nothing noteworthy. How 'bout that appendix, eh? Isn't it thought that the appendix may help the immune system develop in the earlier years? How can that be nothing. And what about organs that are hard to explain without evolution, like men's nipples? >> Remember the murdering, incompetent amazon Hillary installed as >> AG under her "co-presidency"? > > You say that every time you write an alimony check to her. Clever comment. In your mind. > Janet Reno wasn't that bad and was a thorn to the Clintons on > Whitewater and related scandals. Can you say "non sequitur"? >>> If the human genome project ever settles the age-old question about gill >>> slits in human embryos, perhaps we'll finally have an answer. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > And what about organs that are hard to explain without evolution, like > men's nipples? Have at it. I'm all ears. > Remember the murdering, incompetent amazon Hillary installed as > AG under her "co-presidency"? > > > You say that every time you write an alimony check to her. > > Clever comment. In your mind. I blame the audience. > > Janet Reno wasn't that bad and was a thorn to the Clintons on > > Whitewater and related scandals. > > Can you say "non sequitur"? If Reno was nothing but Hillary's puppet, why didn't she do a better job covering up for the Clintons? >>> If the human genome project ever settles the age-old question about gill >>> slits in human embryos, perhaps we'll finally have an answer. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Have at it. I'm all ears. I'm asking. Those weren't rhetorical questions. >> Clever comment. In your mind. > > I blame the audience. In this case, one. >>> Janet Reno wasn't that bad and was a thorn to the Clintons on >>> Whitewater and related scandals. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > If Reno was nothing but Hillary's puppet, why didn't she do a better > job covering up for the Clintons? You and I both know we'll never know the extent of what she covered up. >>> And what about organs that are hard to explain without evolution, like >>> men's nipples? >> >> Have at it. I'm all ears. > > I'm asking. Those weren't rhetorical questions. Nor was mine. Have at it. I've heard satisfactory explanations. What are yours? > So because, at one time, he said 6K years, that makes him a crank? If he was adult at that time, then yes. > The horrors of tenure aren't exhibited solely in one direction, Joe. > The theory of evolution is just that. The most reputable, honest > scientists do not call it fact, even today. They'd say that evolution is a fact, but any theory of evolution isn't. > I've never heard Huck say the earth was only 6,000 years old. AAMOF, > when he blitzed Blitzter, he even said, "I don't know." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > And any honest scientist. So sorry. But the scientists aren't lying when they say that; the politicians are. >> just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >> everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all >> along. > All you have to do is watch the youtube > detailing how Huckabee sliced and diced Wolf Blitzer with no effort > whatsoever. > > It was a work of art. Wolf Blitzer, the completely conventional and easily intimidated journalist? He's no Charlie Rose, Mike Wallace, or Terry Gross. >>> just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >>> everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Wolf Blitzer, the completely conventional and easily intimidated > journalist? He's no Charlie Rose, Mike Wallace, or Terry Gross. Bring 'em on. Your Emperors have no clothes. > Where did you read or hear that? Who told you to say it? You have become such a bore. Don't you have any new lines? >> Where did you read or hear that? Who told you to say it? > > You have become such a bore. Don't you have any new lines? When you repeat what every news pundit is saying, it's clear you're just regurgitating. > > > Where did you read or hear that? Who told you to say it? > > > > You have become such a bore. Don't you have any new lines? > > When you repeat what every news pundit is saying, it's clear you're > just regurgitating. Sorry to burst your bubble Joey boy. I have a life and don't have time to watch TV political shows or read the Opinion page. I form my own opinions based upon my experiences and guiding principles. Occassionally I drop in here to see what the hot topic is. Whatever you're railing against is probably what I would support. It is ironic for you that your efforts have the exact opposite effect you are trying to achieve. Now go back to your room before your mother scolds you for staying up too late. Signature"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable but more useful than a life spent doing nothing." ~ George Bernard Shaw >> > > Where did you read or hear that? Who told you to say it? >> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > for you that your efforts have the exact opposite effect you are trying > to achieve. There are cartoons about your news sources - the ones you parrot. http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0706,tomorrow,75758,9.html > > Sorry to burst your bubble Joey boy. I have a life and don't have time > > to watch TV political shows or read the Opinion page. I form my own [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > There are cartoons about your news sources - the ones you parrot. > http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0706,tomorrow,75758,9.html The vehemently anti-union Village Voice? >> > Sorry to burst your bubble Joey boy. I have a life and don't have time >> > to watch TV political shows or read the Opinion page. I form my own [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > The vehemently anti-union Village Voice? The cartoon was the point, not the entity which published it. For some reason, the cartoonist doesn't host **ALL** his cartoon archives on his own site. >>> > just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >>> > everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Where did you read or hear that? Who told you to say it? You've never read any of McCain's history or heard him speak have you? If you had, you might realize that he is nothing more than a closet neo-liberal. At least Hillary and Obama are honest about it. >>>> > just couldn't be ruffled by Tim Russert. Had an answer for >>>> > everything, never got flustered, and maintained his composure all [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > you had, you might realize that he is nothing more than a closet > neo-liberal. At least Hillary and Obama are honest about it. I've read quite a bit about his ideas. My bigger concern is that some kiddies want to elect another president whose main skill is blurting out slogans specifically concocted to polarize people. McCain doesn't seem like that type. At some point, we'll need a president who can negotiate and get things done. > You've never read any of McCain's history or heard him speak have > you? If you had, you might realize that he is nothing more than a > closet neo-liberal. At least Hillary and Obama are honest about it. For once I agree with you. > Why? Whether it's Obama, Clinton or McCain they'll still have one of > their own. I think you are wrong about that, but if a lot other Republicans agree then I guess we will never find out. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.