I used to run 'assessment centres' some years back - the only purpose (other than me getting paid) I noticed was to prove over and over that senior managers were generally fuckwits. IQs often not in to top 30% and critical reasoning scores well below that. The accountants were above this and the bwankers below. I wouldn't mind running them again for our politicians - I can only suppose I'd have to invent a BozoQ test. Over here, my guess is Blair and Mandleson are CIA, but I can't explain why Brown is so anti-sensible for Britain. I think we need to bring the lot back into selection through the board. I don't think we can have half-wits in leadership positions, but otherwise believe selection and voting in is more dangerous than chance. We actually need far fewer of the bastards than we have now anyway. Remember that statements about Vietnam in the 60s? Obama just did that over again. That psycho CIA boss Angleton used to say the Chinese and Russians were killing themselves to distract the West back then. Maybe the Soviets haven't dismantled and are just waiting for us to bankrupt ourselves? Personally, I'm inclined towards a Franco- German collusion to step in with the Force de Frappe and a bunch of resurrected storm-troopers after we are fatally weakened - you Yanks should know the strategy, it used to be yours.
On 3 Dec, 02:40, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > Who's to say they didn't? I long suspected the entire thing was a setup from > one side of the house or the other; the GOP to bring him down, or the Dems, > to distract from domestic security and foreign policy errors in the Clinton > administration. > > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:35 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm surprised the Russians didn't ply the White House with Monicas. > > > On 3 Dec, 00:58, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > You know people for as long as I can remember have called me strange, > > > > and for as long as I can remember my normal response as been 'No I'm > > > > quite normal, it is you lot that are strange'. I say this jokingly, I > > > > have always regarded it in a joking manor, for I know that not all > > > > people want to think deeply (and some not even shollowly) about things > > > > and not all people 'get' where I'm copming from. > > > > > Increasingly though I really do think people are strange. Like this > > > > little gem from Don. > > > > > 'Sure she deserves derision for contributing to the soiling of the > > > > American Presidency' > > > > > She deserves derision for saying yes to the most powefull man on the > > > > planet when he wanted sexual favours of her? > > > > > Well bugger me, what a strange attitude to have. > > > > I thought I was being chivalrous by not calling her what she was. A > > > whore. She was flashing her g-string in the corridors and e-mailed > > > her friends about "putting on her Presidential knee-pads" before she > > > even met the guy. I've long since recognized I live in this world > > > with folks that have different opinions on what is right and what is > > > wrong. Hell, I even refrain from judgement as much as possible > > > especially when I don't know the full facts. The recent T. Woods > > > episode comes to mind. But what we're talking about is well > > > researched and documented. The girl was a skank. Maybe she's grown > > > up now and handles herself better. I hope so for her sake. It's in > > > all our natures to be selfish but banging the teenaged chippy intern > > > in the Oval Office antechamber seems a bit extreme. Why not get a > > > hotel and a real call girl? His lack of discretion was appalling and > > > proves what little respect he has for the Office and, for that matter, > > > his wife. Shameful all the way 'round I'd say. > > > > Your attitude is, however, not uncommon. I see it as more evidence > > > that our western culture is going down the crapper. Of course these > > > things happen all the time in business but in the past it was > > > considered a shameful weakness when you got busted. Now it's cool to > > > be the Dawg. Makes me ill. > > > > -Don > > > > > On 1 Dec, 22:17, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I'm biased? Well yeah. Duh. It might be worth your while to reread > > > >> your post here when you're feeling a bit calmer. A little bit of the > > > >> pot calling the kettle black I think. I disagree on Monica's motives. > > > >> Women are collectors just as much as men are. It's part of the > > > >> groupie mentality. A cum stained dress is one hell of an autograph. > > > >> Clearly it was a memento. You are missing the point when you blame > > > >> the girl. Sure she deserves derision for contributing to the soiling > > > >> of the American Presidency but that hardly removes guilt from Clinton. > > > >> She initially lied herself about the affair. She only came clean > > > >> when the FBI told her Clinton was meeting privately with Ms. Mondale > > > >> and keeping her waiting at a security check point. Jealousy had her > > > >> wagging her tongue; not political motivation. I bet Arch can back me > > > >> up on this one. The wife or girl friend will lie themselves into > > > >> prison for their man until they think he's cheating on them. Then > > > >> it's pay back time. Let's use Occam's Razor here and keep the > > > >> emotions in check; shall we? > > > > >> For the record I'm glad he wasn't removed from office. Except for > > > >> being a sorry excuse for a man he was a pretty good president. He had > > > >> a MUCH better grasp on economics then the current resident of 1600 > > > >> Pennsylvania Ave. From your earlier post you seem to agree with > > > >> former president Nixon. "If the president does it; it's not illegal." > > > >> I still think perjury is a very serious offense. I'm sorry you > > > >> apparently disagree. At least if that president is a Democrat. > > > >> Something tells me you wouldn't be so forgiving if that president was > > > >> a Republican. > > > > >> Don't forget I'm an individual. In your off the rails diatribe you > > > >> seem to be lumping me in with every conservative you've ever had cause > > > >> to hate. I have no enmity towards you personally and I hope you hold > > > >> none towards me. It's your reasoning I have issues with. I have been > > > >> ashamed about many things over the years but not about speaking truth > > > >> to power. Nor am I ashamed of publicly expressing my support for > > > >> keeping as much of my money as I can. How, when or even IF I use my > > > >> money to help others should be up to me and no one else. Democracy > > > >> seems to be turning into some kind of nightmare 'mob rules' scenario > > > >> where the productive people with useful skills work for all the > > > >> deadbeats. This kind of society is doomed to fail. > > > > >> Sorry I went off the reservation myself there a tad. The purity > > > >> police will be displeased. > > > > >> -Don > > > > >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 7:10 AM, Justintruth <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> > Your so totally biased in your viewpoint Don. > > > > >> > You know that an extraordinary amount of money was spent trying to > > > >> > "get Clinton". The special prosecutor remember? Whitewater? etc etc > > > >> > etc etc. Years of attempted distortions and abuse of the legal > > system. > > > >> > Finally they "got him" in one of the oldest traps in the books - its > > > >> > called a honeypot - they trapped him with a woman. > > > > >> > Now you can tell this is true by reflecting on one point and one > > point > > > >> > alone. What woman do you know, who after getting a cum stain on her > > > >> > dress during a blow job, will, instead of rapidly getting it > > cleaned, > > > >> > preserve the stain? What possibly would make her do that? There is > > > >> > only one possible explanation. She wanted evidence. That was what > > she > > > >> > was there for. This was an operation conducted by Linda Trip running > > > >> > her operative Monica. > > > > >> > Now Clinton was trying to evade this massive trap and cornered tried > > > >> > to evade with semantics under oath... so now you "got him" ... > > > >> > suddenly you don't care about sex because you don't need it.... you > > > >> > got him on perjury... or so you thought....you masked your shame in > > > >> > your audacity... you went for impeachment... it was a "high crime > > > >> > or..." Right? > > > > >> > I am not distorting here. This is the truth. A blind man could see > > it. > > > > >> > And you accuse *him* of distortion? Talk about taking a splinter out > > > >> > of someone else's eye when you have a log in your own! > > > > >> > What you are saying is just such a complete distortion. You want to > > > >> > see a liar or a bullshitter, guy? Just look in the mirror. The real > > > >> > problem is the destruction of peoples lives that you have cost and > > the > > > >> > weakening of the ideals we require to remain free. This stuff has > > had > > > >> > consequences. Line the innocent dead up and drive by them in a car > > on > > > >> > a highway and you will take hours to pass them. Many of them > > children. > > > >> > But the worse has been the contamination of our ideals and the > > > >> > prostitution of bravery. You should be ashamed of yourself and what > > > >> > your "distortions" have caused. > > > > >> > ... and still it goes on.... > > > > >> > On Nov 30, 3:20 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> That was pretty cool. Not sure if you're implying Rummy is lying > > here > > > >> >> 'cause if that's your point I'm totally missing it. I remember the > > > >> >> Glass Box. We had one at the local Jo Jo's which became a Denny's > > > >> >> about ten years ago. It was fun to watch the kids try for the > > stuffed > > > >> >> monkey banging the cymbals together. The image is a good analogy > > for > > > >> >> the global warmist's efforts to keep alive their failing 'science.' > > > >> >> Keep chasing that monkey or dragon or whatever if you want to I > > say. > > > >> >> It is wise to remember hope is a fragile thing. > > > > >> >> I think i just went Gabbyly enigmatic there. > > > > >> >> -Don > > > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:53 PM, ornamentalmind > > > > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> > The Poetry of D.H. Rumsfeld > > > >> >> > Recent works by the secretary of defense. > > > > >> >> > By Hart SeelyPosted Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 1:03 PM ET > > > > >> >> > Rumsfeld's free-speaking verseSecretary of Defense Donald > > Rumsfeld is > > > >> >> > an accomplished man. Not only is he guiding the war in Iraq, he > > has > > > >> >> > been a pilot, a congressman, an ambassador, a businessman, and a > > civil > > > >> >> > servant. But few Americans know that he is also a poet. > > > > >> >> > Until now, the secretary's poetry has found only a small and > > skeptical > > > >> >> > audience: the Pentagon press corps. Every day, Rumsfeld regales > > > >> >> > reporters with his jazzy, impromptu riffs. Few of them seem to > > > >> >> > appreciate it. > > > > >> >> > But we should all be listening. Rumsfeld's poetry is paradoxical: > > It > > > >> >> > uses playful language to address the most somber subjects: war, > > > >> >> > terrorism, mortality. Much of it is about indirection > > ... > > read more » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
