[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Kiddie Leaders :-)



>From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Children's books?
>
>So, did everybody read that Madonna is writing a set of children's books?  
>If Madonna can do it, then why not The Who Group?

The Who Group?
Is that what we're calling them now?
<sigh>

>After all, Pete's got 
>that publishing company...

Yeah, Pete's got more than that at the moment.
I'm not so sure that Pete and "The Who Group" putting out kiddy books at this time is really a good idea.  No need to draw yet more attention to kids, etc.
Timing seems pretty bad.
Plus, Madonna is all about motherhood at this time.
Pete and The Who don't exactly conjure up images of rocking chairs and low lit nursery's with bed-time stories, etc.
Well, unless you imagine them destroying one...........

>Interesting idea?  :)
>
>From: "An English Boy" <peter_dennis_blandford_townshend@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: Children's books?
>
>keets.....you are the BEST!
>
>GREAT IDEA!

Oh Jeez, Lew's been drinking happy-juice again.  ;-)

>From: Zenswhen <bushchoked@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: Senator, you're no Hitler (no Who)
>
>>I'm not sold on that premise.
>
>Kevin:
>
>Even the "administration" admits it.

I forget what we were talking about.
More terror attacks if we go in?
I think it depends on who in the administration is talking.
*They* can't even come to a consensus on this whole thing.

>Clinton's staff warned Bush's about Laden and Bush's team chose to ignore it. Clinton tried to 
>get Saddam with the UN and the GOP pounded him.

that's my recollection as well.

>If people ask me about my sig, and seemingly I AM the only one they ask about their sig (for >some reason) no matter the other political ones found here, I will respond.

Yes you will.  ;-)
And, that's what happened this round.

>But I have not instigated any such conversation, you will note.

I will note, and I have noted.

>Not have I set out to.

There were only a very few times (like 2) over the past many years that you preemptively included a political dig in a Who message.  It's been very rare.
I've been watching, and as you say, it's usually someone taking issue with you sig., making a comment, and then opening the door for "debate".

IMO, I don't have a problem with it, as long as it doesn't degenerate into name calling and personal insults, and other stupidity like that.
I absolutely love a good and intellectual debate.
We need more of it in this country.  Now, more than ever.

>I must say that Mc calling what someone else writes "blather" is pretty damned humorous. Maybe 
>if he'd wiped the drool off his chin first...

<snicker>  There's a visual for ya!

>From: Keithjmoon70@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Senator, you're no Hitler (no Who)
>
>> Bush is thinking about the past. 
> 
>Yeah,  September 11th 2001 to be exact.  He did not forget about it. He is 
>not backing down under crushing world pressure and is protecting our home. 
>Thank God for Britain. 
>
>He is the right man for this time period.

<big sigh>
I've been thinking about this post for the past several days (parents are in town, and thus sucking away the little spare time I usually have)....

I watch the news nightly.  I listen to NPR all day.  I read The Washington Post daily.  I read NY Times, and CNN on Line, and others during lunch.
This weekend, I was forced by my very Republican Dad to watch the gamut of Sunday talk shows, including Meet the Press, Mcglochlin (sp?) Group, etc.

To my surprise, even the staunchest Republicans don't feel very good about W these days.  I heard Republican after Republican (not to mention the Dems) strongly criticize W for his handling of this entire situation.  For his repeated linking of political and international issues to his religious belief system.
I heard loud concern, BY REPUBLICANS, that the price of this war being too high in international political terms.  It didn't need to be this way.

Every single one of them agree with me that Bush ef'd up big time at the onset by trying to distance themselves from the Mid East at the beginning of his presidency, and then really made huge mistakes by trying to circumvent the UN, and finally being made to deal with The UN due to public opinion pressure and pressure by high ranking Republicans like his Dad, his dad's administration, other world leaders.

Now, even though W is working with The UN, we see complaint after complaint about Bush's arrogance, bullying tactics, strong arming, and then not even having the courtesy and respect to lobby countries in person.

Sorry Jon.
Bush is the *wrong* "Leader", not matter *what* time.
*No* one responds favorably to bullying, arrogance, and condescension.

Kevin in VT