|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Calling all Belgians
On Apr 5, 4:33 pm, Curtis L. Russell wrote:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:58:43 +0200, Ewoud Dronkert wrote: Bill C wrote: Realistically, how tough a job is ambassador to Belgium? You have to (learn to) speak French and Dutch. Can't you just speak English louder and louder until they understand? Listening mode is probably irrelevant. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels... That could well be the strategy of the new ambassador, along with complaints that you just can't get a good American beer there. Bill C |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Calling all Belgians
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:58:43 +0200, Ewoud Dronkert
wrote: Bill C wrote: Realistically, how tough a job is ambassador to Belgium? You have to (learn to) speak French and Dutch. Can't you just speak English louder and louder until they understand? Listening mode is probably irrelevant. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels... |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Calling all Belgians
On 5 Apr 2007 13:07:20 -0700, "Bill C"
wrote: That could well be the strategy of the new ambassador, along with complaints that you just can't get a good American beer there. That's not funny. Anyone that gets sent to Belgium should be required to demonstrate a working knowledge and appreciation of doubles and triples. If not, I am available. I can't speak French or Dutch, but I have watched a lot of Hercule Poirot. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
OT Calling all Belgians
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 08:32:16 -0400, RonSonic
wrote: "(E)xplicit lies to influence a presidential election." sounds a lot like the Kerry campaign. You're so full of it. -- JT **************************** Remove "remove" to reply Visit http://www.jt10000.com **************************** |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
OT Calling all Belgians
On 5 Apr 2007 05:59:56 -0700, "Bill C"
wrote: There's no way you can argue that ideology today isnt THE basis for legal positions that are appointed today either. Ideology is one thing. Blind loyalty to individuals is quite another. Bush isn't even following his own expressed ideology in government. -- JT **************************** Remove "remove" to reply Visit http://www.jt10000.com **************************** |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
OT Calling all Belgians
On Apr 5, 6:25 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote: On 5 Apr 2007 05:59:56 -0700, "Bill C" wrote: There's no way you can argue that ideology today isnt THE basis for legal positions that are appointed today either. Ideology is one thing. Blind loyalty to individuals is quite another. Bush isn't even following his own expressed ideology in government. -- JT **************************** Remove "remove" to reply Visithttp://www.jt10000.com **************************** Agreed, That's why his "unfavorable" is sky high even with his own party and Gonzales, still has a job. He, and a handful of his faithful are convinced that history, and god, are going to find he was our best President ever. It's similar to what a shrink wrote about Joan of Arc, who he's clearly channelling. He said that "If she were alive today she wouldn't be leading a country, she'd be in a psych ward being treated for schizophrenia." I'm betting history treats Bush a lot more like Grant, Hoover, and Nixon, than Lincoln. Bill C |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
OT Calling all Belgians
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 06:41:21 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote: More evidence (as if we needed it) that Bush doesn't regognize a role for other branches of government. However, he does recognize the role of the US Constitution. See: Article II, Section 2. In any case, Clinton did it so why can't Bush? Payback's a bitch. Kerry takes it on the chin again. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
OT Calling all Belgians
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:16:42 -0400, Jack Hollis
wrote: On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 06:41:21 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: More evidence (as if we needed it) that Bush doesn't regognize a role for other branches of government. However, he does recognize the role of the US Constitution. See: Article II, Section 2. In any case, Clinton did it so why can't Bush? Clinton did what -- appointed someone who gave $50K to help a group propagate specific lies about another candidate and nothing else? No policy positions, just straight up lies about a veteran? Payback's a bitch. Who is Bush paying back? -- JT **************************** Remove "remove" to reply Visit http://www.jt10000.com **************************** |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
OT Calling all Belgians
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:16:42 -0400, Jack Hollis
wrote: On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 06:41:21 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: More evidence (as if we needed it) that Bush doesn't regognize a role for other branches of government. However, he does recognize the role of the US Constitution. See: Article II, Section 2. In any case, Clinton did it so why can't Bush? Payback's a bitch. Kerry takes it on the chin again. One other thing. The problem with your comment is it's the lame relativism: "Everybody plays politics, so it's not so bad." Or "Everybody plays poltiics, so you can't complain." Baloney. Yeah, everybody plays politics, but some are more corrupt and more political than others, and BushII and Cheney have played it more extreme than any president since. Well maybe ever. Surely since Nixon. The most corrupt and the most contempt for the rule of law and the role of other branches over government in a few decades. -- JT **************************** Remove "remove" to reply Visit http://www.jt10000.com **************************** |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
OT Calling all Belgians
"Jack Hollis" wrote in message
... On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 06:41:21 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: More evidence (as if we needed it) that Bush doesn't regognize a role for other branches of government. However, he does recognize the role of the US Constitution. See: Article II, Section 2. In any case, Clinton did it so why can't Bush? Payback's a bitch. Kerry takes it on the chin again. Clinton fired 92 Federal prosecutors including 2 or 3 of them who were investigating corruption in the Arkansas governors office during Clinton's administration. Not one word was said by any Liberals. Now we're seeing this silly screaming about firing some prosecutors who were in fact ignoring direct orders to prosecute illegal aliens and it is being made out to be something else altogether. I do find it interesting that Clinton installed some highly dubious ambassadors, that he side-stepped Whitehouse security precautions and actually brought in Chinese secret agents who THEN handed over large sums of cash money to him and again - forgive me but did any Liberal complain about that? In fact, after Al Gore was caught carrying in paper shopping bags full of cash, not a single charge was brought and Liberals admired his hutzpah so much they ran him for President. So let's not cry that Bush appointed an Ambassador to Belgium who is better qualified than most Democrats. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Calling Vermont Jerry.... Calling Vermot Jerry.... | Calogero Carlucci | Racing | 3 | June 18th 06 04:51 AM |
Australian Federal Police said Marty Wallace is calling and the calls are coming from Western Power Corporation/The Griffin Coal Mining Companys Muja Power Station. someone is calling me on my cell and | I AM A CHRISTIAN | Racing | 4 | September 18th 05 08:13 PM |
Australian Federal Police said Marty Wallace is calling and the calls are coming from Western Power Corporation/The Griffin Coal Mining Companys Muja Power Station. someone is calling me on my cell and | I AM A CHRISTIAN | Techniques | 4 | September 18th 05 08:13 PM |
Australian Federal Police said Marty Wallace is calling and the calls are coming from Western Power Corporation/The Griffin Coal Mining Companys Muja Power Station. someone is calling me on my cell and | I AM A CHRISTIAN | Australia | 2 | September 18th 05 02:39 PM |
For the Belgians | Bob Schwartz | Racing | 0 | July 21st 05 04:45 AM |