First time visitor? Learn more.

Saturday Lecture

by coldwarrior ( 65 Comments › )
Filed under Open thread at November 10th, 2012 - 8:30 am

I got nothing this week

 

Wife had MI, Nothreat died, 0 re-elected.

 

see yinz next week.

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

65 Responses to “Saturday Lecture”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | November 10, 2012 8:46 am

    I hope the wife is recovering well, CW. A good woman lights up one’s life….I know mine has.


  2. AZfederalist
    2 | November 10, 2012 8:50 am

    Continued prayers for Mrs. Coldwarrior’s rapid recovery.

    Yep, this was a tough week all around


  3. AZfederalist
    3 | November 10, 2012 8:51 am

    Oh, you might want to fix the main page. Link to this at the top of the page posting is not working. Link below the Special Report is fine


  4. coldwarrior
    4 | November 10, 2012 9:02 am

    AZfederalist wrote:

    Oh, you might want to fix the main page. Link to this at the top of the page posting is not working. Link below the Special Report is fine

    somehting screwy is going on with our server….


  5. 6 | November 10, 2012 10:24 am

    Continued prayers for Mrs Coldwater.


  6. John Difool
    7 | November 10, 2012 10:30 am

    Supposedly the extra-marital affair between Petaeus & Broadwell ended in Sep. of 2011 shortly before or just after Petraeus took over as CIA head & it was Broadwell who ended it. Petraeus then continued to send thousands of e-mails her way from Langley still persuing her.

    Why would a woman who ended an affair have the desire to gain access to the top-spooks e-mails at the CIA later on? Blackmail?

    Could the woman who once wrote a very glowing biography of her lover now want access to the thousands of steamy e-mails in order to get new material for a tell-all book & cash out?

    Trying to get the head guy’s e-mails at the CIA could certainly get you a long vacation stay at one of our nations finest federal prisons. In the old days you may have become the victim of an unfortunate accident or it may have gotten you disappeared completely.

    Or could it be, just be that maybe Putin the boys got their hooks into her?

    Not that it makes a difference because Obama & Puting are working together now.


  7. RIX
    8 | November 10, 2012 10:39 am

    The Media , including FNC seems to be accepting the
    story that Obama knew nothing about the Patraeus
    situation until he submitted his resignation.
    Does it seem plausible that the FBI had this info &
    it never passed to the Executive Branch?


  8. 9 | November 10, 2012 10:42 am

    @ RIX:

    Blackmail?


  9. Purre
    10 | November 10, 2012 10:45 am

    @ RIX:
    Not to me, but if they keep that line, then it should be investigated and IF they find person who sat on that information, he should be fired at the very least.


  10. RIX
    11 | November 10, 2012 10:46 am

    @ Macker:
    There is a lot going on here. Petraeus should be compelled to
    testify.


  11. RIX
    12 | November 10, 2012 10:50 am

    Purre wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Not to me, but if they keep that line, then it should be investigated and IF they find person who sat on that information, he should be fired at the very least.

    I just don’t believe that Obama didn’t have prior knowledge.
    Petreaus at first backed up the ridiculous video story about
    Benghazi.
    Was it a quid pro quo, “you keep your pension.”


  12. John Difool
    13 | November 10, 2012 10:51 am

    RIX wrote:

    The Media , including FNC seems to be accepting the
    story that Obama knew nothing about the Patraeus
    situation until he submitted his resignation.
    Does it seem plausible that the FBI had this info &
    it never passed to the Executive Branch?

    Better question: Does it seem plausible that the head of an agency who’s main job is to administer cointel, gather intelligence & monitor threats worldwide emanating from places like China, Russia & the Middle East wouldn’t know that the FBI was ghosting him?

    If not we are fucked worse than I imagined. Imagine what the Russians & Chinese could do/are doing with such a weak agency.

    These guys are supposed to have their antennas up & finely tuned 24-7, 365 and trust noone. The first guys they should be able to see coming are their fellow countrymen.


  13. 14 | November 10, 2012 10:53 am

    Good luck to your wife, guy. Mine has her medical problems, but if something like that happened to her I’d go completely around the bend.


  14. RIX
    15 | November 10, 2012 10:54 am

    (CNSNews.com)

    -- The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) released the results of an informal exit poll on Friday that shows more than 85 percent of American Muslim voters picked President Barack Obama in Tuesday’s election.

    They must think that Obama will be really tough on terrorism./


  15. John Difool
    16 | November 10, 2012 10:56 am

    RIX wrote:

    (CNSNews.com)
    -- The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) released the results of an informal exit poll on Friday that shows more than 85 percent of American Muslim voters picked President Barack Obama in Tuesday’s election.
    They must think that Obama will be really tough on terrorism./

    They’re going to side with who ever is going to bode worse for the infidel that’s for sure.


  16. RIX
    17 | November 10, 2012 10:58 am

    @ John Difool:
    I’ll go even a step further into a conspiracy theory.
    This affair took place while Petraeus was still in the Army.
    Did he get the CIA job because the BHO Admin knew
    that if they ever needed it, they could control his message
    eg. “Benghazi was the result of a video”?
    Just a conspiracy theory.


  17. RIX
    18 | November 10, 2012 11:00 am

    @ John Difool:

    They’re going to side with who ever is going to bode worse for the infidel that’s for sure.

    Exactly & BHO is a good bet.


  18. RIX
    19 | November 10, 2012 11:04 am

    Under pressure from senators, the State Department is allowing some lawmakers to look at cables and other documents related to the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, but only today and tomorrow, when most senators are not in Washington.

    This is from Michelle Malkin. See how cooperative & transparent
    BHO & hillary are.


  19. John Difool
    20 | November 10, 2012 11:18 am

    RIX wrote:

    @ John Difool:
    I’ll go even a step further into a conspiracy theory.
    This affair took place while Petraeus was still in the Army.
    Did he get the CIA job because the BHO Admin knew
    that if they ever needed it, they could control his message
    eg. “Benghazi was the result of a video”?
    Just a conspiracy theory.

    Yes. The FBI would’ve been there at the beginning combed through every aspect of his personal life with a fine-tooth comb & looked for stuff like this specifically: The job interview/background check from hell.

    A married paramour who a married general may be sharing sensitive pillow-talk with compromising national security is exactly what they would be looking for.

    However, once he got the job the FBI in essence would’ve backed off & left him alone, so this makes no sense at all.

    Which brings me to the point I was going for:

    The FBI already knew & reported to the president & he gave Petraeus the job anyway.

    Why?

    Because as we all know, Obama didn’t like Petraeus. Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.

    1: This was a good deal for the Obama administration because they got street cred with conservatives for putting a guy many of us respected into the top post at the CIA, making us feel we were well looked after at least in that regard.

    2: Petraeus’ name was being floated as a possible opponent against Obama in ’12 before he took the CIA position or possibly ’16 against whoever won the Dem primary, maybe Hillary Clinton.

    3: They had the wild-card up their sleeve to be used at a later date having full knowledge of the affair & they could play it anyway they wanted to, whatever came up later on.. Destroying his career, destroying his chances at a presidential run & destroying his credibility & integrity.

    A beautiful trifecta.


  20. John Difool
    21 | November 10, 2012 11:29 am

    @ John Difool:

    The other thing I left out was, getting the job at the CIA was probably an ultimatum. Come to our side or we’ll leak this out.

    Petraeus made a lot of noise, was a headache & a thorn in the side as a general for Obama. The left despised him.

    He most likely went along with & allowed himself to be effectively neutered thinking he was safe at the CIA ,could retire peacefully up the road & just go fishing like all good generals do.


  21. huckfunn
    22 | November 10, 2012 11:34 am

    If you like jazz, here’s a pretty cool tune for a lazy Saturday morning.


  22. theoutsider
    23 | November 10, 2012 11:40 am

    @ John Difool:
    Are you a Benghazi troofer? Seems like you are. You better join up with 911 trooofers and Birthers, as soon as possible.


  23. 24 | November 10, 2012 11:41 am

    The fact that Petraeus is excused from testimony is the putrid cherry atop this crap cake. Why in the hell is he not testifying, why is no one compelling him, and why is he not doing so voluntarily?


  24. huckfunn
    25 | November 10, 2012 11:45 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    The fact that Petraeus is excused from testimony is the putrid cherry atop this crap cake. Why in the hell is he not testifying, why is no one compelling him, and why is he not doing so voluntarily?

    Exactly. Last week he was quoted as saying he was eager to testify. Now that he’s a private citizen, he should be even more eager to testify. What has changed? Something definitely stinks.


  25. theoutsider
    26 | November 10, 2012 11:45 am

    @ MacDuff:
    He is not excused from testimony. If he gets calls, he’s required to testify.


  26. 27 | November 10, 2012 11:48 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ John Difool:
    Are you a Benghazi troofer? Seems like you are. You better join up with 911 trooofers and Birthers, as soon as possible.

    Obfuscate much? This is still a highly fluid story that the administration has gone out of their way to avoid and blatantly lie about -- from SecState on down. There are a lot of moving parts and many of the parts are still, even as we speak, still moving.

    Making a correlation with truthers or birthers is utter bullshit.


  27. John Difool
    28 | November 10, 2012 11:50 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ John Difool:
    Are you a Benghazi troofer? Seems like you are. You better join up with 911 trooofers and Birthers, as soon as possible.

    Why is none testifying about Benghazi after ordered by Congress to do so? Why has noone testified about Fast & Furious after ordered by Congress to do so?

    After SCOTUS, Congress is the highest law in the land.

    Why is it executive privilege keeps getting used to keep that from happening?

    As an American you should be deeply disturbed by this because this isn’t a right or left issue, that’s how government no matter who is in charge is supposed to work.The very things you guys say are no big deal you guys would be screaming from the roof-tops if a Republican was CINC.

    You call me a Benghazi troofer but I’ll bet your ideas & viewpoints on 9/11 is very….enlightening


  28. 29 | November 10, 2012 11:50 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    He is not excused from testimony. If he gets calls, he’s required to testify.

    Really? It’s already been announced that he wouldn’t be testifying, an hour or so after his resignation.


  29. unclassifiable
    30 | November 10, 2012 11:56 am

    @ 1389AD:

    Something to think about.

    Bill is actually talking about an Amish-style solution. Virtual parallel societies of virtuous people.

    My only thing is that I do not think the statist will stand for this. The statist will eventually attack it simply because it is successful.

    This needs more thought.


  30. John Difool
    31 | November 10, 2012 11:57 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    theoutsider wrote:
    @ MacDuff:
    He is not excused from testimony. If he gets calls, he’s required to testify.

    Really? It’s already been announced that he wouldn’t be testifying, an hour or so after his resignation.

    Yes & it wasn’t an announcement from him personally, it was an announcement by the administration.

    They made that decision for him now as a private citizen. In other words as a civillian no different than you & i now they told him to shut up.

    However, I’ll bet the goutsider has no problem with that.


  31. eaglesoars
    32 | November 10, 2012 11:58 am

    My 2 cents.

    - the FBI does not run background checks on candidates for CIA positions. The CIA does

    - I disagree that Fox is buying the ‘Obama didn’t know’ line

    - I weary of the hagiography of this man. (1) He joined an admin that anyone but the willfully blind can see is the most corrupt in our history. His oath was to the constitution and he chose to serve a president who undermines/scorns it at every opportunity. He should have refused the offer and resigned. (2) When he testified before the Senate on Sep 14 re Benghazi, he lied.

    - From the NYTs The Ethiscist column. Scroll down to the 2nd letter. Is this from Broadwell’s husband?

    - The other day when many of us were discussing w/Rodan what conservatives need to do now, I said one thing we should hope for is that Obama over-reaches somehow and his admin becomes so mired in scandal it is for all practical purposed, paralyzed and discredited. This just might be what I was hoping for.


  32. heysoos
    33 | November 10, 2012 12:00 pm

    John Difool wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:
    theoutsider wrote:
    @ MacDuff:
    He is not excused from testimony. If he gets calls, he’s required to testify.
    Really? It’s already been announced that he wouldn’t be testifying, an hour or so after his resignation.

    Yes & it wasn’t an announcement from him personally, it was an announcement by the administration.
    They made that decision for him now as a private citizen. In other words as a civillian no different than you & i now they told him to shut up.
    However, I’ll bet the goutsider has no problem with that.

    he has no trouble with that because he has no clear understanding of the big picture…he’s a bot


  33. John Difool
    34 | November 10, 2012 12:04 pm

    Here’s another thing. Petraeus sent Broadwell thousands of e-mails from his desk at Langley after she called it quits on the affair. Why would she be the one trying to hack or gain access to his e-mails if she were the one who broke it off?

    Sounds like it could be a set-up by the FBI or NSA.

    If the thousands of e-mails part is true, this is either a man very much enamored with his mistress or a stalker. What kind of info or pillow-talk would he be willing to share with this woman to make her feel special?

    All kinds I’ll bet, maybe even the Benghazi stuff.

    If I were her, I’d pack a toothbrush for the trip to Leavenworth or take out some extra life insurance.


  34. Purre
    35 | November 10, 2012 12:08 pm

    @ unclassifiable:
    I agree with you. His idea won’t work because it assumes passivity from the state and anything like this will get the authorities’ attention. There’s dozens of ways that I know that they can use to come after this kind of movement and probably lot more that I cannot think of. State will not allow competition.


  35. 36 | November 10, 2012 12:09 pm

    40 years ago Nixon was reelected in a landslide, two years later, both he and his Vice-President had resigned in disgrace. Today, Richard Nixon is still hated by the Right, as well as the Left.

    Payback’s a bitch and reality has a nasty habit of seeping into something as seemingly impenetrable as the POTUS bubble.

    Just a little history lesson for some to young to remember.


  36. 37 | November 10, 2012 12:09 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ 1389AD:
    Something to think about.
    Bill is actually talking about an Amish-style solution. Virtual parallel societies of virtuous people.
    My only thing is that I do not think the statist will stand for this. The statist will eventually attack it simply because it is successful.
    This needs more thought.

    That’s what I figure also.

    Another problem -- there are legitimate computerized barter networks around. The problem with them is that the IRS requires everybody to pay their taxes in cash, not barter credits, even though the barter credits tend to become overvalued in cash terms. That makes the barter networks unprofitable and unworkable except in niche markets.


  37. huckfunn
    38 | November 10, 2012 12:11 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    I said one thing we should hope for is that Obama over-reaches somehow and his admin becomes so mired in scandal it is for all practical purposed, paralyzed and discredited.

    Obatomy has already over-reached and it’s been one scandal after another. However as long as MSM has his back and DOJ has his flanks, he can lie and over reach with impunity. The only thing that will paralyze his regime is his own incompetence.


  38. 39 | November 10, 2012 12:12 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    eaglesoars wrote:
    I said one thing we should hope for is that Obama over-reaches somehow and his admin becomes so mired in scandal it is for all practical purposed, paralyzed and discredited.
    Obatomy has already over-reached and it’s been one scandal after another. However as long as MSM has his back and DOJ has his flanks, he can lie and over reach with impunity. The only thing that will paralyze his regime is his own incompetence.

    As of this writing, Robert Mugabe is still in power in Zimbabwe.

    Just sayin’.


  39. eaglesoars
    40 | November 10, 2012 12:20 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    However as long as MSM has his back and DOJ has his flanks

    I understand what you’re saying, but I think Dr K has a point when he said that because this is, thru one prism, a ‘sex’ scandal, the MSM didn’t drop it in the beginning. Now they’ve got the tiger by the tail and can’t let go. As for DOJ, they sowed the wind -- now they’re reaping the whirlwind. If the MSM won’t drop it -- and they won’t -- thereisn’t much DOJ can do.


  40. huckfunn
    42 | November 10, 2012 12:22 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    As of this writing, Robert Mugabe is still in power in Zimbabwe.

    Our system of checks and balances was supposed to prevent the kind of thuggery being practiced by Obama. But that system would only work for a president who felt constrained by the Constitution. Obama has nothing but disdain and scorn for the Constitution.


  41. huckfunn
    43 | November 10, 2012 12:26 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    If the MSM won’t drop it — and they won’t — thereisn’t much DOJ can do.

    I’ll believe it when I see it. The press is as much a part of BO’s presidency as any cabinet member. They’ve had ample opportunity to pursue numerous scandals and have given BO a pass every time.


  42. eaglesoars
    44 | November 10, 2012 12:26 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    But that system would only work for a president who felt constrained by the Constitution.

    And a Congress willing to hold him accountable.


  43. huckfunn
    45 | November 10, 2012 12:28 pm

    Chores, a haircut then football.

    Later


  44. 4_Sticks
    46 | November 10, 2012 12:34 pm

    What a week. First the election then my ‘home town hero/local boy does good’ shoots himself in the … foot ? While its not unusual for an over achiever type to commit personal/professional suicide after a long, stressful career, given Patraeus’ background I’m truly shocked he was foolish enough to get involved like this. In his line of work, its much worse than a garden variety affair with ones secretary. And West Point cadets are garden variety college kids. There is so much more to this failing that I can’t get my brain around it. But I should have learned from the ‘OJ’ story -- just no telling what goes through anothers mans head.
    If you don’t know the history of West Point, the culture etc., you can’t appreciate just how big a personal failure this is. It doesn’t take money to get accepted to WP, it takes, for one, personal recommendations from respected leaders in the community. You have to be considered a person of sterling character from childhood on really. Then he marries Holly, the daughter of the Superintendent of the United States Military Academy after graduation -- which means the General allowed him into his home. He had to be very impressed by this young man. He (Petraeus) knows how many people, besides his wife/family, who went to bat for him over the years, would be crushed by such a failing…. the oaths, the dedication, reputations … man, I just can’t get over it… all for what ? The stress of ‘success’ had to have got to him and rather than put a bullet in his brain, he committed suicide by other means. No other explanation for it … just flat out crazy.


  45. eaglesoars
    47 | November 10, 2012 12:35 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    The press is as much a part of BO’s presidency as any cabinet member

    Indeed. I think that’s why we started hearing the ‘oh puh-leeze’ rationale. “Ike had a affair, Patton had an affair, MacArthur had an affair” blah blah blah.

    The difference being that none of them was susceptible to blackmail. In WW II EVERYBODY had affairs. Just ask my Dad -- he was one of them -- and yes he was married too (but not to Mom)

    And maybe this is just my inner cynic -- but after 37 yrs of marriage he’s cheating, my guess is that this isn’t the first time.

    KT MacFarland was just on Fox. She made some good points -- as in the CIA vetting process HAD to have uncovered his relationship w/Broadwell. Which means the CIA knew from the beginning and apparently didn’t care.


  46. Bumr50
    48 | November 10, 2012 12:35 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    Chores, a haircut then football.

    Don’t get hair in the dishwasher!


  47. eaglesoars
    49 | November 10, 2012 12:38 pm

    4_Sticks wrote:

    you can’t appreciate just how big a personal failure this is

    How about going before the Senate and lying about the murder of 4 Americans?


  48. 4_Sticks
    50 | November 10, 2012 12:40 pm

    pimf ‘And West Point cadets are NOT garden variety college kids.


  49. 4_Sticks
    51 | November 10, 2012 12:41 pm

    @ eaglesoars:

    I know, I know … this is what I’m saying … its such a betrayal all around that I can’t get it through my head who hes become.


  50. 4_Sticks
    52 | November 10, 2012 12:48 pm

    @ 4_Sticks:

    Its like hearing the kid in that one Norman Rockwell picture grew up to be Charlie Manson …

    I know, a mixture of fiction and reality but life/perceptions … its always been a mixed bag.


  51. eaglesoars
    53 | November 10, 2012 12:50 pm

    4_Sticks wrote:

    @ eaglesoars:

    I know, I know … this is what I’m saying … its such a betrayal all around that I can’t get it through my head who hes become.

    Faust comes to mind. That 5th star can be a bitch.


  52. Bumr50
    54 | November 10, 2012 12:53 pm

    GOP Congressman Vows To Subpoena Petraeus To Compel Him To Testify On Benghazi…

    “The fact that he’s resigned and had an affair has nothing to do with whether he will be subpoenaed to Congress. I hope we don’t have to subpoena a four star general and a former CIA director. I would hope he would come voluntarily but if he won’t he will be subpoenaed. And none of what happened today is an offense to a subpoena. He’s either a witness in our case in chief or he’s gonna be a rebuttal witness if Susan Rice and others blame him for their failure of intelligence and failure of information. But there is no way we can get to the bottom of Benghazi without David Petraeus.”


  53. Bumr50
    55 | November 10, 2012 12:54 pm

    @ Bumr50:

    Maybe Petraeus resigning wasn’t part of the plan…?


  54. 56 | November 10, 2012 12:59 pm

    @ eaglesoars:
    Without reliable Republicans in the Senate there isn’t much Congress can do. Obama is proof against impeachment, anyway. He’d just scream raaaaacism, and the MFM would run with that as the story. No, we are stuck with Obama for four more years if the United States lasts that long.


  55. eaglesoars
    57 | November 10, 2012 1:00 pm

    chores. bbl


  56. eaglesoars
    58 | November 10, 2012 1:02 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    No, we are stuck with Obama for four more years if the United States lasts that long.

    I agree that impeachment is not likely. But I stand by my thought that if the MFM doesn’t let go -- and it won’t -- this isn’t going away


  57. 4_Sticks
    59 | November 10, 2012 1:02 pm

    @ eaglesoars:

    Good one. I really can’t imagine that he tossed it all away for a little on he side. I think it would take a team of shrinks to figure this one out. The guys 60 years old for petes sake. What, all of a sudden he becomes a Viagra junkie ? Maybe it is just that simple, who the hell knows. At my age, I should know better than to put too much faith in another man… let down every time it seems. Although I didn’t know him personally growing up, he was a neighbor of mine. I always took a little regional pride in his achievements. As to the ‘affair’, hey, we all fall short … but theres more to it. I’m not gonna get on a high horse about it, its just that I’m so shocked to hear it. At first I said here that at least he had the back bone to turn himself in. A second later I read that the FBI cornered him so he really had no choice. Let down after let down.
    I’ve heard it said that some over achievers are psychopaths. If he was a career/life long bs artist, he certainly fooled a lot of people. You just don’t do this kinda thing unless you’re crazy -- either recent acute or genetic/life long. Suicide watch might be indicated if the former.


  58. 4_Sticks
    60 | November 10, 2012 1:12 pm

    At this point, I’d rather the Reps in the House just come out and say “You wanted him, you got him, we will let him implement his plans to save the country -- we won’t stand in his way, we won’t have a thing to do with what comes next ” … then vanish. This bi partisan sh*t is only so bama can have a whipping boy when it all goes to hell anyway and the msm will carry the water for him. Why pull the band aid off slowly … lets get it on and be done with it. The weak will perish, I won’t survive it, but going on like this is frickin agony.


  59. 4_Sticks
    61 | November 10, 2012 1:22 pm

    Yeah I’m talkin’ out my a**, sorry for the nonsense but I’m beyond consolable this week. Just the fact that Romneys plan to at long last start using our own natural resources was so close at hand .. then poof !!
    For me, this has always been the test of how insane we are as a nation/people. Buying foreign oil -- some from our enemies no less, says so much about how unglued we’ve become. It makes no sense and yet decade after decade goes by and not even one organized protest (that I know of). We just take it and take it ….
    In the early 70s the meme was ‘It would take a DECADE to build the refineries ..”. That was over a quarter a century ago. What makes us just take it up the *&* like we do ??


  60. 4_Sticks
    62 | November 10, 2012 1:23 pm

    So much for this thread eh ….


  61. The Osprey
    63 | November 10, 2012 1:40 pm

    CW: Glad to hear the wife is doing better. You must be absolutely exhausted…


  62. 64 | November 10, 2012 2:22 pm

    4_Sticks wrote:

    So much for this thread eh ….

    I’m not doing very well either. Was in the ER yesterday on account of pre-syncope, bradycardia, and ongoing weakness/sweating and chest pain.

    Said no evidence of recent MI or clot, but that I really need a stress test.

    That’ll have to wait until I have the wherewithal to pay for it.

    Meantime my husband’s high BP is still a major issue, still unresolved.

    :(


  63. 65 | November 10, 2012 3:12 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    huckfunn wrote:
    The press is as much a part of BO’s presidency as any cabinet member
    Indeed. I think that’s why we started hearing the ‘oh puh-leeze’ rationale. “Ike had a affair, Patton had an affair, MacArthur had an affair” blah blah blah.
    The difference being that none of them was susceptible to blackmail. In WW II EVERYBODY had affairs. Just ask my Dad — he was one of them — and yes he was married too (but not to Mom)
    And maybe this is just my inner cynic — but after 37 yrs of marriage he’s cheating, my guess is that this isn’t the first time.
    KT MacFarland was just on Fox. She made some good points — as in the CIA vetting process HAD to have uncovered his relationship w/Broadwell. Which means the CIA knew from the beginning and apparently didn’t care.

    One thing that my mother and father had during WWII. My father was absent on and off for a total of SIX years -- Poland, France, Russia, France again, North Africa.
    It was rough for BOTH of them. They were BOTH in the midst of fighting.
    They both had a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy for their personal lives. It worked out great.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David