From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #296 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, October 20 2004 Volume 13 : Number 296 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? [Tom Cl] Re: pre-reap? [Capuchin ] Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? [Christopher Gr] Spooked, finally [Barbara Soutar ] Re: two weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? [Barbara Soutar ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #295 [James Dignan ] Re: pre-reap? [James Dignan ] Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? [2fs ] It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding) [Ken Weingold ] Robyn at Sine in NYC (LES) Oct 27th !! ["Danny Lieberman" ] Re: pre-reap? [2fs ] RE: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? [Christopher Gr] Apropos of nothing said lately (0%RH) [Carrie Galbraith ] Re: My new crew [Ken Weingold ] Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? [Bret ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:29:40 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? On Oct 19, 2004, at 1:47 PM, Capuchin wrote: > Anyway, we just got rid of the polling places. That seems to have > helped > quite a bit. Then where do people go to vote? Am I missing something here? Also, I don't see anything wrong with showing your ID when you vote. It just proves you are who you say you are when they cross your name off in the book. Your name isn't on your ballot. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:41:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: pre-reap? On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 gshell@americangroupisp.com wrote: > When was the last you heard a woman call another woman a bastard, for > instance? I have heard women call men bastards and never in a positive > manner. I have also heard men call other men bastards. I have never > heard a man call a woman, for instance "a sorry ass'd bastard". It is in > fact a particularly gendered term in modern use. Perhaps, but is the front seat of a motorcycle called "the bastard seat"? Nope. It ain't called the "scrotum pad", either. Nobody is arguing that the term "bitch" is not used as an insult and usually refers to women (and, in fact, is intended as a kind of double-insult to men implying that they are like women and, therefore, weak -- thus insulting women generally and the particular man to which the abuse is directed). > >Both "bitch" and "pussy" are - and both are inherently denigrating. > > And bastard isn't? That is wrong. What has "bastard" to do with this? > Bitch is used quite often in a totally non-gendered manner to mean a > hassle or a hard time. Sure. It's intended to reflect the stereotypical image of the nagging wife who is nothing but a dog kept 'round the house for rutting and rearing. > I have heard the term used and the image of a scornful, scolding, bad > woman is not what comes to mind or is used in association. That's EXACTLY what is intended to be associated with the term. > When I think of pussy, or use the term, I am thinking and or doing > nothing denigrating. I love everything about the word and all of the > associations that come to my mind. It doesn't matter how you feel about pussies, Greg. It's denigrating to reduce a person to one body part -- it's particularly vulgar when that part is a sexual organ. > >"Garbage man" and your other examples, while they assume that a person > >is male, does not insult him. > > But doesn't it insult her? And referring to criminals in a general > manner as, "bad guys" is not an insult to him? My personal belief is that there are almost no male-specific words in english and the term "man" and "guy" are used to mean people generally and "woman" and "gal" refer to particular kinds of men. It's a shortcoming of the language. > When you used the term 'neanderthal' in a previous note, you were > referring only to men. Neanderthal is not a gender specific term, yet > you used it as such. Please explain this? He used the term to refer to people with a "stone age" idea of the relationship between men and women. While this characterization may not be an accurate reflection of Neanderthal culture, it does recall the classic cartoon image of the caveman clubbing a woman over the head and dragging her back to his cave for domestic and sexual slavery. I don't think it's inaccurate at all to use "Neanderthal" as a short-hand for "pre-intellectual" humans in some contexts. So, are you just taking it as given that the pillion seat is for women only? J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:05:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, FSThomas wrote: > "If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a > 'pre-emptive strike' (particularly well-suited to states in which test > techniques have been tried in the past)." > > Lovely. If it's not happening, just make it up! and then > What else can it mean? "If no signs of intimidation techniques have > emerged yet..." then what's the problem? If there's no so-called > intimidation, there. Is. No. Intimidation. The pre-emption referred to in that DNC document clearly consists of publicizing the *risk* of intimidation or deception, in order to prevent anyone from attempting such intimidation or deception. They suggest issuing a press release reviewing past instances of intimidation, for example. Nothing about "making up" false accusations of intimidation. Did you actually read the document whose URL you posted? http://ochremedia.com/blog/media/dnc.jpg - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:27:17 -0400 From: Barbara Soutar Subject: Spooked, finally Well I got my copy of Spooked. After all the non-rawking references, I just want to say that he's aging gracefully, just like me. I think of any Robyn album as a gift coming straight from his life experience. To reject it would be churlish. I love his lyrics and his voice. The only critical comment I would make is that I doubt that he'll win many new fans with this particular CD. You have to already like him to enjoy this one perhaps. As for the ongoing bitch/bastard argument, I believe that the point about being a bastard is it's an equal opportunity insult, as in its literal meaning of being born out of wedlock. Bitches are just female dogs who are protecting their puppies from harm. See? No real insult there. Barbara Soutar Victoria, British Columbia ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:30:46 -0400 From: Barbara Soutar Subject: Re: two weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? FS Thomas said: "I just fear what happens if Kerry loses." Hmmmm, a very peculiar comment. Exactly what happened when Gore lost that is causing you to have fears now? Nothing the Democrats did. Just a non-stop horror show with Bush and co. Barbara Soutar Victoria, BC ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:27:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Tom Clark wrote: > On Oct 19, 2004, at 1:47 PM, Capuchin wrote: > > Anyway, we just got rid of the polling places. That seems to have > > helped quite a bit. > > Then where do people go to vote? Am I missing something here? We vote by mail. Basically, everyone is just assumed an "absentee" and given a mail ballot. The greatest flaw with this system is that the ballots are NOT postage paid(!!!). It's not considered a poll tax because you CAN take your ballot down to the county election office and drop it off for free (and since you have three weeks to do so, it's not considered undue burden). However, in one county four years ago, there were so many local measures that the ballot (combined with the two security envelopes in which it must be sent) weighed too much to be delivered with a regular first-class postage stamp and thousands of votes were not counted because they were returned for insufficient postage. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:13:20 -0700 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? At 01:47 PM 10/19/2004 -0700, Capuchin wrote: >A cop is nothing but a hired thug. His entire purpose in life is to >intimidate. Oh, Jesus... will the idiocy never stop? - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:45:40 -0500 From: Subject: Re: pre-reap? [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:41 , Capuchin sent: >Nobody is arguing that the term "bitch" is not used as an insult and >usually refers to women (and, in fact, is intended as a kind of >double-insult to men implying that they are like women and, therefore, >weak -- thus insulting women generally and the particular man to which the >abuse is directed). I don't recall ever hearing a guy called a bitch, though it probably happens. The term 'bitch seat' at least when I have heard it used, was not meant as an insult to women and shouldn't be taken as that. >> >Both "bitch" and "pussy" are - and both are inherently denigrating. >> >> And bastard isn't? That is wrong. > >What has "bastard" to do with this? In an earlier note I said that if the guy normally rode "bitch", we could call it the bastard pad instead of the bitch pad. To which Jeff said bastard is not a gender specific term, to which I explained it was. >> Bitch is used quite often in a totally non-gendered manner to mean a >> hassle or a hard time. > >Sure. It's intended to reflect the stereotypical image of the nagging >wife who is nothing but a dog kept 'round the house for rutting and >rearing. I disagree. I do not associate a human form or any sort or stereotypical image to the term when used in this manner. >> I have heard the term used and the image of a scornful, scolding, bad >> woman is not what comes to mind or is used in association. > >That's EXACTLY what is intended to be associated with the term. If all terms meant the same thing to everyone in all cases that would be true. > >> When I think of pussy, or use the term, I am thinking and or doing >> nothing denigrating. I love everything about the word and all of the >> associations that come to my mind. > >It doesn't matter how you feel about pussies, Greg. Actually, I think that is all that matters in this case. > It's denigrating to reduce a person to one body part -- it's particularly vulgar > when that part is a sexual organ. Sure, it's insulting, denigrating and shameful to refer to anyone as something like a sexual organ, even a piece of shit or whatever, but if I remember correctly this part of the discussion involved calling a female a bitch or a pussy. My reply stated that I don't remember the term pussy ever being used to insult a female. And I normally use the term in reference to something, specifically the vagina or just a slang term for having sex with a woman. I don't use it in an insulting or denigrating manner, in fact when I say pussy, it's almost always used as a compliment. >> When you used the term 'neanderthal' in a previous note, you were >> referring only to men. Neanderthal is not a gender specific term, yet >> you used it as such. Please explain this? > >He used the term to refer to people with a "stone age" idea of the >relationship between men and women. While this characterization may not >be an accurate reflection of Neanderthal culture, it does recall the >classic cartoon image of the caveman clubbing a woman over the head and >dragging her back to his cave for domestic and sexual slavery. >I don't think it's inaccurate at all to use "Neanderthal" as a short-hand >for "pre-intellectual" humans in some contexts. So Jeff is saying the 100th Anniversary Harley-Davidson Rally was attended almost entirely by club wielding cavemen who beat females into submission and then drag them around by their hair, at encouragement of the very same females? >are you just taking it as given that the pillion seat is for women only? I never said it was for women only, nor did I ever imply that men are not supposed to sit there. What did I write specifically that made you think this. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:40:37 +1300 From: James Dignan Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #295 Ferris sez: >"If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a >'pre-emptive strike' (particularly well-suited to states in which test >techniques have been tried in the past)." > >Lovely. If it's not happening, just make it up! I thought we stopped talking about the reasons for invading Iraq weeks ago. James - -- James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:42:00 +1300 From: James Dignan Subject: Re: pre-reap? >Not that I care as a non-motorcyclist, but I don't suppose all >motorcyclists are neanderthal sexist pigs, are they? (Although judging >from the crowd at the Harley 100th anniversary annoyance in Milwaukee >last year, an awful lot of them are...) a few are, but not all of them. My outlaws* are both motorcyclists, and neither of them is a neanderthal sexist pig. Then again, she doesn't ride much these days and he's not a Harley fan. As he puts it "God may have made the Harley, but the Devil rides a Guzzi." *I'm not married, so they're not in-laws later, Greg frothed mildly: >When you used the term 'neanderthal', you were referring only to men. hmmm. That's not how I read it. Women were neanderthals too, you know. Why do you automatically assume that someone is talking about a man when they could equally be talking about a woman? It is the automatic assumption that is the sexism there. >Also, do you consider words like 'mankind', 'human', 'manhandle' >etc... equally sexist? mankind, yes. Manhandle, no - like chairman it developed from the word "main" meaning "hand", so it's no more sexist than "cyclamen" or "specimen". Human... a difficult one, but usually regarded as being as neutral as "person" (why not "peroffspring"?) >How about this? There is a new strain of cannabis from canada called >'fat bastard'. bastard isn't a sexist term. Women can be bastards too. Men can be bitches as well, although that tends to have a more specific sexual connotation. later again: >When was the last you heard a woman call another woman a bastard, >for instance? Thursday or Friday last week, at a guess. Certainly less than a week ago. >And bastard isn't? That is wrong. When was the last time you heard >it used in a non-denigrating manner in reference to anything [...]? you're joking, right? On a regular basis, maybe every couple of days. Ah, Fegmaniax. You're all a bunch of funny bastards, and I love ya all. James - -- James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 20:15:46 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:13:20 -0700, Jason R. Thornton wrote: > Oh, Jesus... will the idiocy never stop? No, my son - it will not. - --Jesus ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:45:49 -0700 From: "Marc Alberts" Subject: RE: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? Tom Clark wrote: > On Oct 19, 2004, at 1:47 PM, Capuchin wrote: > > > Anyway, we just got rid of the polling places. That seems to have > > helped > > quite a bit. > > Then where do people go to vote? Am I missing something here? The same way I vote here--absentee ballot. All these worries about early voting in Florida amuse me a bit, since I've already voted, as of Sunday. > Also, I don't see anything wrong with showing your ID when you vote. > It just proves you are who you say you are when they cross your name > off in the book. Your name isn't on your ballot. I don't understand the problem with that, either. Seems to be about the best way to ensure that there is a minimum of voter fraud. Marc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:47:36 -0500 From: Subject: Re: pre-reap? [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:42 , James Dignan sent: >hmmm. That's not how I read it. Women were neanderthals too, you >know. Yes and that was the point I was making and also mentioned. >Why do you automatically assume that someone is talking about a >man when they could equally be talking about a woman? I don't. But he wasn't talking about women, he was talking about men, using a stereotype based on his misconception regarding the bikers at the rally. That is how I read it. >bastard isn't a sexist term. Women can be bastards too. Men can be >bitches as well, although that tends to have a more specific sexual >connotation. Regarding these men that you refer to as bitches, what exactly do you mean? Before I left work today I asked seven different people individually, 4 women and 3 men, to tell me the first thing that popped into their mind after I said "that sorry assed bastard". The first and only thing that entered each of their minds was the image of a man, that then usually went hairy, short, fat, and then mean. Two of the women each had a child and neither had ever been married. I asked both if anyone, including themselves had ever referred to their kids as bastards? Both understood the association and the social meaning, but both said that in this day and age the term bastard is no longer used, at least not in the US to describe children born out of wedlock, except possibly by extremely conservative religious yahoos. The term bastard, at least in these parts is not considered socially acceptable in describing any child and is no longer used, even in a legal context. >later again: >>When was the last you heard a woman call another woman a bastard, >>for instance? > >Thursday or Friday last week, at a guess. Certainly less than a week ago. Could you please quote the phrase as near as possible and explain the circumstance in which it was used? >>And bastard isn't? That is wrong. When was the last time you heard >>it used in a non-denigrating manner in reference to anything [...]? > >you're joking, right? On a regular basis, maybe every couple of days. Would you mind giving an example here as well? On another note, that I failed to mention earlier because I was in a hurry to go DO IT with my new person friend who happens to be of the opposite sex (did I say that without offending anyone?), I went and voted after work today. What a bunch of sorry assed fuckers we have to choose from. At first I wrote in Muqtada al-Sadr for president and almost cast the ballot, but then I remembered what disregard he has for his teeth and weight, plus the fact that he's a dumb ass cleric. Then I entered the name Jim Leahey but realized he's fuck'n Canadian. Damn it, I couldn't think of anyone except maybe Bob Dylan or Donna Pinciotti, but Donna is too young and I don't think Bob would take the job so I entered Ralph Nader. I didn't vote for a single democrat, republican or incumbent and I don't think I ever will again. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:13:03 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding) Has Robyn ever covered this? I saw Caetano Veloso tonight. Excellent. It was with a string orchestra, and mostly American songs from his new album, A Foreign Sound. Though I don't have any of the Dylan albums this song is on, I swear I've heard it before and wonder if Robyn has done it, since the Byrds have also done it. Caetano also did Come As You Are, which is good, since I don't like Nirvana and don't like that song, but it sounded nice from Caetano. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:56:48 -0400 (EDT) From: "Danny Lieberman" Subject: Robyn at Sine in NYC (LES) Oct 27th !! Just saw this at the museum: "US Solo Tour Email your song requests for Robyn's US tour here. Everything considered, nothing guaranteed. " (First I'd noticed that part as well!) " October 27 Sin-i Unadvertised performance with no opening act. Showtime 9:00 pm. This is Robyn's only show in Manhatten this year. " That's 150 Attorney St at Stanton which is approx 5 blocks from me, so I think I can be there! Now, Sine's website says just "A very special Guest" at 8:00. See you kids there !! - -- Danny Lieberman dfl@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:27:13 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: pre-reap? On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:47:36 -0500, gshell@americangroupisp.com wrote: > I don't. But he wasn't talking about women, he was talking about men, using > a stereotype based on his misconception regarding the bikers at the rally. Not quite, here's what I wrote: "Not that I care as a non-motorcyclist, but I don't suppose all motorcyclists are neanderthal sexist pigs, are they? (Although judging from the crowd at the Harley 100th anniversary annoyance in Milwaukee last year, an awful lot of them are...)" You can call it a "misconception" if you want - but in fact, it's a perception, and as I phrased it, I recognize that it's limited and tentative. For what it's worth, easily 90% of the bikers (by which I mean: people actually operating the motorcycle) were male. There were some women bikers, to be sure. But most of the women I saw (and this is based on having to be out trying to drive somewhere as the bikers clogged up the streets) were riding on the controversially-designated seat in question. I saw not one man riding in such a position - and when I asked, including people who actually attended various events for the biker crowd, no one else had either. Further: at least 75% or more of the bikers were white guys (or more accurately: very few were black). At least half looked exactly like what you'd think a biker looks like (i.e., in their forties or fifties, heavy, longish unkempt hair, beard, wearing black leather). This is the picture of America's great nonconformist, the biker... But as far as the notion that "neanderthal" somehow refers to men (generally, not just in the sentence I wrote), elementary logic time: If I said, "a group of glasses-wearing Robyn Hitchcock fans," that doesn't mean that everyone who wears glasses is a Robyn Hitchcock fan. Substitute "neanderthal" for "glasses-wearing," and "bikers" for Robyn fans - and Greg's logic error becomes quite a bit clearer, I think. Oh - and if you really believe that your Humpty-Dumpty-esque usage of "pussy" is a compliment, I suggest you wander into a bar and call a man that...and then try explaining you only meant that he was a source of joy and good feeling. - -- ++Jeff++ The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:16:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: RE: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Marc Alberts wrote: > > Also, I don't see anything wrong with showing your ID when you vote. > > It just proves you are who you say you are when they cross your name > > off in the book. Your name isn't on your ballot. > > I don't understand the problem with that, either. Seems to be about the > best way to ensure that there is a minimum of voter fraud. I don't have a problem with showing ID either ... but it should be noted that many states do NOT require it. Maryland, for example, only requires you to show ID if you registered by mail and this is your first time voting since you registered. Each state has its own rules, but I get the impression that most are similar. (This probably dates back to the time just after the revolution, when most people lived in small towns where everyone knew everyone else, and documentary proof of ID was rare or nonexistent anyway. I personally don't think it makes sense anymore; but then, neither does the Electoral College, and THAT is still law too....) - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 02:21:17 +0300 From: Carrie Galbraith Subject: Apropos of nothing said lately (0%RH) Fegs, It was, more or less, 4 years ago when I unsubscribed from Fegmaniax because of the political ranting on list. I re-subscribed a bit after that election and am most appreciative of what I read this time, now that I have caught up. Is it that the stakes are higher or the choices fewer that we all sound so restrained? A quick note to you all - I voted, several weeks ago, and even accounting for the mail system here, my vote will make it! One interesting thing is the "marginalization" of some of the others here from the States who did not register for the absentee ballot within the 60-days-previous time limit. Since they are allowing "vote by fax" this year it is strange that the 60 days is still in place. I voted only once. I am happy to say I may be the first Feg in Romania! I have found an apartment and settled in somewhat and my classes began this week (only 3 weeks after the start of the semester). The Kafka-esque qualities that make this country questionable as to it's potential membership in the EU have been a continuos source of frustration and amusement. I knew what I was getting in to but was not quite ready for the depth of the dysfunction. Case in point: I need a housing contract to get a permit to stay in the country longer than 3 months. In order to get a housing contract I need the landlord/owner to be willing to work with an agency who then takes my housing contract to a financial government agency to get a stamp on it (for which I pay dearly). However, if the government knows how much the rent is for an apartment, they tax the owner - 40% of the rental amount. They also tax other parts of the income (if any) of the owner. So no one is willing to write the actual amount of the rent for obvious reasons. Which means getting a housing contract that I can take to the local cop shop for my permit becomes a joke. And the pain in the ass to get the Faculty to acknowledge that I am even here? Forget it. And everyone knows NOT to go to the police for anything. They are known as the most corrupt of any institution in the country. Thanks to Shark-Boy for making the BBQ. It was a wonderful day in beautiful Northern Sonoma County and gave me a very good send off. I am here until June of 2005 (at the least) if anyone's travels bring them this way. There is a couch and this is a lovely little city 50K from the Serbian border, not much further to Hungary, only a little further down the road to Bulgaria. The Feg light is always shining. And now back to our regularly scheduled election programming. Be Seeing You, - - c - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - ------------ "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." Thomas Jefferson - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - ------------ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 08:43:29 -0500 From: "Gene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: My new crew Watch out, we're gonna get you. BTW, does anybody recall if there were any *female* Oompah-Loompahs? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:08:14 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: My new crew On Wed, Oct 20, 2004, Gene Hopstetter, Jr. wrote: > Watch out, we're gonna get you. > > BTW, does anybody recall if there were any *female* Oompah-Loompahs? Yes, but the females all stayed back in Loompaland. I believe Wonka snips them when they come to his factory. Not enough, though, I guess, since it seems that Mr. Wonka has had enough of their sorry asses. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:11:08 -0500 From: Bret Subject: Re: 2 weeks to go to the election, will all the newly registered voters make a difference? On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:45:49 -0700, Marc Alberts wrote: > Tom Clark wrote: > > On Oct 19, 2004, at 1:47 PM, Capuchin wrote: > > > > > Anyway, we just got rid of the polling places. That seems to have > > > helped > > > quite a bit. > > > > Then where do people go to vote? Am I missing something here? > > The same way I vote here--absentee ballot. All these worries about early > voting in Florida amuse me a bit, since I've already voted, as of Sunday. > > > Also, I don't see anything wrong with showing your ID when you vote. > > It just proves you are who you say you are when they cross your name > > off in the book. Your name isn't on your ballot. > > I don't understand the problem with that, either. Seems to be about the > best way to ensure that there is a minimum of voter fraud. That *is* the problem. - -b > > Marc > - -- - --Bret Bolton ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #296 ********************************