XM question for Garmin 396/496 owers [Archive]

Mike[_22_]

August 23rd 08, 06:29 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:DsUrk.310590$yE1.222838@attbi_s21...
>>> Yes, yes, and yes. Everything -- airspace, navigation, and radar
>>> returns --
>>> can be shown on the same map. (You can add satellite, too.)
>>> Sadly, the 496's screen is so little that it's difficult to see any of
>>> this
>>> great stuff.
>>
>> That's because you have your 496 mounted in the dock in your panel.
>> I use a RAM suction cup mount to place the 496 within 12-inches of my
>> face. I don't like the yoke mount that comes with the 496.
>
> Even before I had it panel docked (which, BTW, makes it more -- not
> less -- readable, by putting it at nearly eye-level) that dinky screen
> drove me nuts. I like your suction mount solution better than a yoke
> mount (which I -- like most people -- used), though. When it was yoke
> mounted I couldn't scrunch down far enough to "make the screen bigger by
> getting closer" -- especially with old(er) eyes. Now, if needed, the
> co-pilot can stick their face right up to that miniscule screen.

I take the opposite view of the 496. I like it because it has a small
screen. I have mine mounted on the yoke, which is where I prefer it. It is
convenient there, doesn't get in the way, and is easy to read. If it had a
bigger screen, the problem becomes where do you put it? The G1000 has a
huge MFD, but it's all the way over on the co-pilot's side and is
inconvenient for the pilot to manipulate. The older Bonanzas with their
yoke configuration has a nice place to mount a tablet PC, which is a great
mounting location. However if you don't have that type of yoke, you are out
of luck. I don't particularly like the interface for the tablet PC XM
weather applications anyway and prefer Garmin's approach, but that just may
be because I've used Garmin products for so long.

Mike[_22_]

August 23rd 08, 06:39 PM

"John Smith" > wrote in message
...
>> > What are the weather overlay capabilities of these units? Can you
>> > overlay
>> > a radar map on top of your airspace map? Across a route you are
>> > navigating?
>
> Think of the presentation you see when you go to aviationweather.gov.
> That is pretty much what you get on the 496.

It does look something like that, but there is a difference that most people
don't know about that makes a huge difference.

XM has their own very powerful weather processor rather than use the NWS's
processing functions. What this means is they are taking the raw scan data
and developing their own composite. The NWS waits until all scans are
finished and then they process all of them at once. The result is the
weather 'jumps' every few minutes when the update is performed and the new
composite is developed. XM processes each scan as it comes in and updates
accordingly. The result is a much faster update.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 24th 08, 03:12 AM

> The 496 has a faster processor and updates faster when you are switching
> views. IMO that's the biggest advantage although there are a few bells
> and whistles you get with the 496 not found on the 396.

Yes -- although the 496 is still painfully slow to use. Scrolling is an
exercise in patience and frustration, and work-arounds to this problem are
unsatisfactory.

Hopefully a future iteration will address this issue, but -- as long as
there is no direct competition from Lowrance or AvMap -- there is little
incentive for Garmin to improve such a niche product.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 24th 08, 03:21 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:ms3sk.311329$yE1.83256@attbi_s21:

>> The 496 has a faster processor and updates faster when you are
>> switching views. IMO that's the biggest advantage although there are
>> a few bells and whistles you get with the 496 not found on the 396.
>
> Yes -- although the 496 is still painfully slow to use.

Perfect for you. It will match the speed of your tiny mind.

Bertie

Jon Woellhaf[_2_]

August 24th 08, 10:34 PM

Thanks for the XM weather processing info, Mike. I didn't know that.

I have my 496 on the yoke, using a RAM mount. I agree the location and
screen size are just right.

f-newguy

August 25th 08, 02:25 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:IvKrk.309937$yE1.95597@attbi_s21...
>> What are the weather overlay capabilities of these units? Can you
>> overlay a radar map on top of your airspace map? Across a route you are
>> navigating?
>
> Yes, yes, and yes. Everything -- airspace, navigation, and radar
> returns -- can be shown on the same map. (You can add satellite, too.)
>
> Sadly, the 496's screen is so little that it's difficult to see any of
> this great stuff.

Horse****. You can see it fine all if you put it on the yoke where it
belongs.

Note to newbies: Honeck dogged Garmin until he realized the 496 beat the
crap out of anything else that would tell him where the hairy stuff was,
then he had to buy one.

Now he has to whine about the screen size or whatever, nitpicking in an
effort to avoid admitting he's been full of **** all along. IOW, typical
Honeck.

aluckyguess

August 25th 08, 04:32 AM

On Aug 24, 6:25*pm, "f-newguy" > wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>
> news:IvKrk.309937$yE1.95597@attbi_s21...
>
> >> What are the weather overlay capabilities of these units? *Can you
> >> overlay a radar map on top of your airspace map? Across a route you are
> >> navigating?
>
> > Yes, yes, and yes. *Everything -- airspace, navigation, and radar
> > returns -- *can be shown on the same map. *(You can add satellite, too.)
>
> > Sadly, the 496's screen is so little that it's difficult to see any of
> > this great stuff.
>
> Horse****. *You can see it fine all if you put it on the yoke where it
> belongs.
>
> Note to newbies: *Honeck dogged Garmin until he realized the 496 beat the
> crap out of anything else that would tell him where the hairy stuff was,
> then he had to buy one.
>
> Now he has to whine about the screen size or whatever, *nitpicking in an
> effort to avoid admitting he's been full of **** all along. * IOW, typical
> Honeck.

I think the 496 id the greatest gagget ever made. Its an amazing
piece. the size is fine if u have your glasses on.

Gig 601Xl Builder

August 25th 08, 10:07 PM

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> What are the weather overlay capabilities of these units? Can you
> overlay a radar map on top of your airspace map? Across a route you are
> navigating?
>
> The reason I ask is that the Bendix/King AV8OR I have does not have
> these capabilities and I'm trying to get a better understanding of what
> capabilities I'm forgoing by choosing the AV8OR over a Garmin product.
>

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=156&pID=6426

Gig 601Xl Builder

August 25th 08, 10:08 PM

Jay Maynard wrote:
> On 2008-08-23, John Smith > wrote:
>> That's because you have your 496 mounted in the dock in your panel.
>> I use a RAM suction cup mount to place the 496 within 12-inches of my
>> face. I don't like the yoke mount that comes with the 496.
>> I zoom in and out to obtain the best weather picture as necessary.
>
> That's one reason my 496 is mounted on the center console, to the front of
> the map case/arm rest. It's a lot more redaable there. The other reason is
> that there's not a lot of other places to put it in the Zodiac...

There would be Jay if you didn't have the Avionics stack out of a G-V in
there.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 25th 08, 10:40 PM

> Note to newbies: Honeck dogged Garmin until he realized the 496 beat the
> crap out of anything else that would tell him where the hairy stuff was,
> then he had to buy one.

Wow -- is that even English?

I don't know who you are, "F-Guy", but I calls 'em as I see 'em. I've
owned and flown behind half a dozen GPS's, from Magellans to Lowrances, from
AvMaps to Garmins -- and I'm here to tell you that the 496 is an incredibly
over-priced piece of crap, with ONE major, unequivocally outstanding
feature -- seamless, built-in XM satellite weather.

Were it not for XM capability, the 496 would be an almost laughably bad GPS.
It would also no longer be made, as no one would have bought it. Sadly,
because there is no other logical alternative, I won't fly without it on
board -- but the moment AvMap or Lowrance matches Garmin's XM capability,
the 496 will be on Ebay.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Mike[_22_]

August 25th 08, 10:51 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:EFFsk.258766$TT4.124426@attbi_s22...
>> Note to newbies: Honeck dogged Garmin until he realized the 496 beat the
>> crap out of anything else that would tell him where the hairy stuff was,
>> then he had to buy one.
>
> Wow -- is that even English?
>
> I don't know who you are, "F-Guy", but I calls 'em as I see 'em. I've
> owned and flown behind half a dozen GPS's, from Magellans to Lowrances,
> from AvMaps to Garmins -- and I'm here to tell you that the 496 is an
> incredibly over-priced piece of crap, with ONE major, unequivocally
> outstanding feature -- seamless, built-in XM satellite weather.
>
> Were it not for XM capability, the 496 would be an almost laughably bad
> GPS. It would also no longer be made, as no one would have bought it.
> Sadly, because there is no other logical alternative, I won't fly without
> it on board -- but the moment AvMap or Lowrance matches Garmin's XM
> capability, the 496 will be on Ebay.

Whoever he is, he described you pretty accurately. Garmin has a superior
GPS you any of the others you mentioned, and yes I've used or owned all the
ones you mentioned and numerous panel mounts like the Kings and Apollos.
That's why Garmin outsells all the rest put together even before the 396 was
introduced and exponentially so afterward. If any of the rest were worth
having, they would have had a XM interface years ago. So you are certainly
entitled to your opinion, but it's clearly in the minority.

Shirl

August 26th 08, 12:43 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> I don't know who you are, "F-Guy", but I calls 'em as I see 'em. I've
> owned and flown behind half a dozen GPS's, from Magellans to Lowrances, from
> AvMaps to Garmins -- and I'm here to tell you that the 496 is an incredibly
> over-priced piece of crap, with ONE major, unequivocally outstanding
> feature -- seamless, built-in XM satellite weather.
>
> Were it not for XM capability, the 496 would be an almost laughably bad GPS.
> It would also no longer be made, as no one would have bought it. Sadly,
> because there is no other logical alternative, I won't fly without it on
> board -- but the moment AvMap or Lowrance matches Garmin's XM capability,
> the 496 will be on Ebay.

I've had a Garmin for 3 years that I still adore. It hasn't fallen short
in any area, AFAIC. But I'm curious, Jay, since you've used them all ...
what specifically do the others have that's so much better than the
Garmin?

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 26th 08, 04:26 AM

> I've had a Garmin for 3 years that I still adore. It hasn't fallen short
> in any area, AFAIC. But I'm curious, Jay, since you've used them all ...
> what specifically do the others have that's so much better than the
> Garmin?

I've posted this here before, but for the record:

1. Screen Size.
As with so many things, screen size really, REALLY matters in a GPS. Garmin
falls far short in this regard. If you've ever flown with a Lowrance 2000c,
or an AvMap, the Garmin 396/496 is almost unusable.

2. Processing speed.
Because the screen on the 496 is so damned small, you can't see any details
(like obstructions, antennas, etc.) unless you are zoomed in. Of course, if
you are zoomed way in, checking the METAR at the next airport ahead means
that you have to scroll your cursor off the top of the screen (following the
course line) in order to run your cursor across that little METAR symbol.
(Which, in the 496, is how you access airport weather at each reporting
station.)

In the 496 (which supposedly has a far faster processor than the 396) this
is an exercise in extreme frustration. You scroll your cursor off the edge
of the screen, toward your target airport, and the screen will go completely
blank. Then, you wait.

Count to four, sloooowly. The screen redraws, and maybe -- MAYBE -- your
cursor is somewhere near where you left off. However, if you left your
finger on the scroll button when it went blank, God only knows where your
screen will redraw, cuz the unit keeps scrolling even though the screen has
gone blank.

So, you quickly develop the habit of stopping zooming when the screen goes
blank. Of course, if you're zoomed in -- and you're next weather reporting
station is, say, fifty miles ahead -- you may have to go through this
ridiculous exercise half a dozen (or more) times. That doesn't sound like
much, but if you're in marginal VFR, or flying toward deteriorating
weather, waiting 20 seconds (or more) to access the weather ahead is
unacceptable. Especially if you want to know, say, the results from the
closest five AWOS's ahead.

So why not just zoom out before scrolling, you ask? Seems logical -- except
that you're back to fighting the limitations of that ridiculously small
screen. When you zoom out, the screen (by necessity) must "declutter"
itself, or it would be a solid mish-mash of airports. Thus, after you zoom
out, the airport you were looking for just DISAPPEARS! You're left
guessing approximately where that airport was on the now zoomed-out screen
(so that you can hopefully zoom back IN to try to find it), which -- if
you're in unfamiliar territory -- is not easy. It's a total cluster-**** of
a set up, and Garmin can ONLY cure this by making the screen the size of,
oh, I don't know -- how about that same as ALL THE OTHER GPS's ON THE
MARKET?

Of course, if you don't fly cross country flights, this limitation won't
matter to you. Of course, that begs the question: If you don't fly cross
country flights, why would you need to spend 3 AMUs to get on-board weather?

3. Screen Orientation
Any aviation GPS needs to be oriented "portrait", to show what's coming.
The 496 (descended from automobile GPS's) can only be displayed in
"landscape" mode. Thus, you've got a GREAT view of what's going past you on
the sides, and a limited view of what's actually ahead. Dumb.

It's a really bad compromise, and -- unless you've flown behind a true
aviation GPS like the 2000c or the AvMap (which can be displayed in either
mode) -- you can't begin to appreciate how dumb the 496's layout is.

Don't get me wrong -- the 496 has many good features. Obviously they are
the only show in town for integrated weather, and having that on board is
worth every level of frustration I've outlined -- for now. I wouldn't have
shelled out the $$ if I didn't believe it to be the best portable weather
display on the market -- which surely isn't saying much, but there you have
it.

Other nice features:
The built-in AOPA directory is incredibly handy. We travel a lot, and use
it for everything from finding hotels to restaurants. The built-in airport
diagrams makes taxiing at strange (larger) airports a breeze, although that
damned little screen makes it a continual "zoom in/zoom out" exercise.

The automobile functionality is where the 496 really shines. The unit is
obviously a very well thought-out automotive GPS first and foremost, and it
works best in your car. The landscape screen is fine for driving maps, and
the voice (we call her "Bitchin' Betty") that tells you exactly where to
turn really takes the stress out of driving around strange cities.

XM music is really, really nice to have. We already had a CD player, but XM
gives you a nearly infinite number of music choices, all piped through the
stereo intercom. (Which, when played through the new Lightspeed Zulus, is
truly amazing. Audiophile quality, really.)

So it's really a mixed bag, but the bottom line is this: The 496 design is
an excellent automotive GPS that was forced into service as an aviation GPS.
They then gobbed integrated weather onto a less-than-optimal design, which
means that in order to make the unit work as designed you have to do a LOT
of button mashing. The processor simply can't keep up with the demands of
overlaying/displaying all that information while scrolling, so overall
usability suffers.

This is the main reason we panel docked it on the CO-pilots side of the
plane. Over there, the co-pilot can go through the "zoom in/zoom out"
cha-cha, check the weather ahead, set up the XM music, and generally screw
around with the unit. Meanwhile, the pilot navigates by using the
yoke-mounted Lowrance 2000c, which is a superior aviation GPS in every
regard.

BTW, the Lowrance cost less than 25% of what we paid for the 496. If you
don't want/need weather on board, I can't recommend this unit enough.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Shirl

August 26th 08, 07:29 AM

Jay, thank you for taking the time to write such a thorough answer to my
question. I hadn't seen your previous review of the 496. I haven't done
the kind of long/far x-c flying that requires having weather on board,
so I haven't had the weather-related needs from the GPS. I've heard the
complaint about the small screen and also about seeing the color screen
in the sun, but I haven't experienced problems in either of those areas.
A friend showed me the Lowrance, and I have to agree, the size of that
screen is terrific; but in a small, tandem-seat cockpit, there isn't as
much room, either...the Garmin fits perfectly. I'm not sure where I
could put the Lowrance and have it be as out of the way yet readily
visible. I'd love to try the Lowrance or AvMap one day, though.

Thanks again.

Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > I've had a Garmin for 3 years that I still adore. It hasn't fallen short
> > in any area, AFAIC. But I'm curious, Jay, since you've used them all ...
> > what specifically do the others have that's so much better than the
> > Garmin?
>
> I've posted this here before, but for the record:
>
> 1. Screen Size.
> As with so many things, screen size really, REALLY matters in a GPS. Garmin
> falls far short in this regard. If you've ever flown with a Lowrance 2000c,
> or an AvMap, the Garmin 396/496 is almost unusable.
>
> 2. Processing speed.
> Because the screen on the 496 is so damned small, you can't see any details
> (like obstructions, antennas, etc.) unless you are zoomed in. Of course, if
> you are zoomed way in, checking the METAR at the next airport ahead means
> that you have to scroll your cursor off the top of the screen (following the
> course line) in order to run your cursor across that little METAR symbol.
> (Which, in the 496, is how you access airport weather at each reporting
> station.)
>
> In the 496 (which supposedly has a far faster processor than the 396) this
> is an exercise in extreme frustration. You scroll your cursor off the edge
> of the screen, toward your target airport, and the screen will go completely
> blank. Then, you wait.
>
> Count to four, sloooowly. The screen redraws, and maybe -- MAYBE -- your
> cursor is somewhere near where you left off. However, if you left your
> finger on the scroll button when it went blank, God only knows where your
> screen will redraw, cuz the unit keeps scrolling even though the screen has
> gone blank.
>
> So, you quickly develop the habit of stopping zooming when the screen goes
> blank. Of course, if you're zoomed in -- and you're next weather reporting
> station is, say, fifty miles ahead -- you may have to go through this
> ridiculous exercise half a dozen (or more) times. That doesn't sound like
> much, but if you're in marginal VFR, or flying toward deteriorating
> weather, waiting 20 seconds (or more) to access the weather ahead is
> unacceptable. Especially if you want to know, say, the results from the
> closest five AWOS's ahead.
>
> So why not just zoom out before scrolling, you ask? Seems logical -- except
> that you're back to fighting the limitations of that ridiculously small
> screen. When you zoom out, the screen (by necessity) must "declutter"
> itself, or it would be a solid mish-mash of airports. Thus, after you zoom
> out, the airport you were looking for just DISAPPEARS! You're left
> guessing approximately where that airport was on the now zoomed-out screen
> (so that you can hopefully zoom back IN to try to find it), which -- if
> you're in unfamiliar territory -- is not easy. It's a total cluster-**** of
> a set up, and Garmin can ONLY cure this by making the screen the size of,
> oh, I don't know -- how about that same as ALL THE OTHER GPS's ON THE
> MARKET?
>
> Of course, if you don't fly cross country flights, this limitation won't
> matter to you. Of course, that begs the question: If you don't fly cross
> country flights, why would you need to spend 3 AMUs to get on-board weather?
>
> 3. Screen Orientation
> Any aviation GPS needs to be oriented "portrait", to show what's coming.
> The 496 (descended from automobile GPS's) can only be displayed in
> "landscape" mode. Thus, you've got a GREAT view of what's going past you on
> the sides, and a limited view of what's actually ahead. Dumb.
>
> It's a really bad compromise, and -- unless you've flown behind a true
> aviation GPS like the 2000c or the AvMap (which can be displayed in either
> mode) -- you can't begin to appreciate how dumb the 496's layout is.
>
> Don't get me wrong -- the 496 has many good features. Obviously they are
> the only show in town for integrated weather, and having that on board is
> worth every level of frustration I've outlined -- for now. I wouldn't have
> shelled out the $$ if I didn't believe it to be the best portable weather
> display on the market -- which surely isn't saying much, but there you have
> it.
>
> Other nice features:
> The built-in AOPA directory is incredibly handy. We travel a lot, and use
> it for everything from finding hotels to restaurants. The built-in airport
> diagrams makes taxiing at strange (larger) airports a breeze, although that
> damned little screen makes it a continual "zoom in/zoom out" exercise.
>
> The automobile functionality is where the 496 really shines. The unit is
> obviously a very well thought-out automotive GPS first and foremost, and it
> works best in your car. The landscape screen is fine for driving maps, and
> the voice (we call her "Bitchin' Betty") that tells you exactly where to
> turn really takes the stress out of driving around strange cities.
>
> XM music is really, really nice to have. We already had a CD player, but XM
> gives you a nearly infinite number of music choices, all piped through the
> stereo intercom. (Which, when played through the new Lightspeed Zulus, is
> truly amazing. Audiophile quality, really.)
>
> So it's really a mixed bag, but the bottom line is this: The 496 design is
> an excellent automotive GPS that was forced into service as an aviation GPS.
> They then gobbed integrated weather onto a less-than-optimal design, which
> means that in order to make the unit work as designed you have to do a LOT
> of button mashing. The processor simply can't keep up with the demands of
> overlaying/displaying all that information while scrolling, so overall
> usability suffers.
>
> This is the main reason we panel docked it on the CO-pilots side of the
> plane. Over there, the co-pilot can go through the "zoom in/zoom out"
> cha-cha, check the weather ahead, set up the XM music, and generally screw
> around with the unit. Meanwhile, the pilot navigates by using the
> yoke-mounted Lowrance 2000c, which is a superior aviation GPS in every
> regard.
>
> BTW, the Lowrance cost less than 25% of what we paid for the 496. If you
> don't want/need weather on board, I can't recommend this unit enough.

john smith

August 26th 08, 03:54 PM

In article <JJKsk.314227$yE1.47214@attbi_s21>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> So, you quickly develop the habit of stopping zooming when the screen goes
> blank. Of course, if you're zoomed in -- and you're next weather reporting
> station is, say, fifty miles ahead -- you may have to go through this
> ridiculous exercise half a dozen (or more) times. That doesn't sound like
> much, but if you're in marginal VFR, or flying toward deteriorating
> weather, waiting 20 seconds (or more) to access the weather ahead is
> unacceptable. Especially if you want to know, say, the results from the
> closest five AWOS's ahead.

Quit whining and learn how to use the thing! You have had it three years
now and still haven't learned the following:

1) Press the NRST button
2) Bump the rocker switch on tab to the right (WX)
3) Scroll down the list of closest airports and select any with the
flag indicating there is a METAR.

f-newguy

August 26th 08, 04:27 PM

"John Smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article <JJKsk.314227$yE1.47214@attbi_s21>,
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> So, you quickly develop the habit of stopping zooming when the screen
>> goes
>> blank. Of course, if you're zoomed in -- and you're next weather
>> reporting
>> station is, say, fifty miles ahead -- you may have to go through this
>> ridiculous exercise half a dozen (or more) times. That doesn't sound
>> like
>> much, but if you're in marginal VFR, or flying toward deteriorating
>> weather, waiting 20 seconds (or more) to access the weather ahead is
>> unacceptable. Especially if you want to know, say, the results from the
>> closest five AWOS's ahead.
>
> Quit whining and learn how to use the thing!

Hah! Never happen. He has to keep carping about the 496 - his insatiable
ego requires that it be inferior to the ones he bought first.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 26th 08, 05:24 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:EFFsk.258766$TT4.124426@attbi_s22:

>> Note to newbies: Honeck dogged Garmin until he realized the 496 beat
>> the crap out of anything else that would tell him where the hairy
>> stuff was, then he had to buy one.
>
> Wow -- is that even English?
>
> I don't know who you are, "F-Guy", but I calls 'em as I see 'em.
> I've owned and flown behind half a dozen GPS's, from Magellans to
> Lowrances, from AvMaps to Garmins -- and I'm here to tell you that the
> 496 is an incredibly over-priced piece of crap, with ONE major,
> unequivocally outstanding feature -- seamless, built-in XM satellite
> weather.
>
> Were it not for XM capability, the 496 would be an almost laughably
> bad GPS. It would also no longer be made, as no one would have bought
> it. Sadly, because there is no other logical alternative, I won't
> fly without it on board -- but the moment AvMap or Lowrance matches
> Garmin's XM capability, the 496 will be on Ebay.

God you're an asshole.

Bertie

Ramsey

August 26th 08, 05:51 PM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> news:EFFsk.258766$TT4.124426@attbi_s22:
>
>>> Note to newbies: Honeck dogged Garmin until he realized the 496 beat
>>> the crap out of anything else that would tell him where the hairy
>>> stuff was, then he had to buy one.
>>
>> Wow -- is that even English?
>>
>> I don't know who you are, "F-Guy", but I calls 'em as I see 'em.
>> I've owned and flown behind half a dozen GPS's, from Magellans to
>> Lowrances, from AvMaps to Garmins -- and I'm here to tell you that the
>> 496 is an incredibly over-priced piece of crap, with ONE major,
>> unequivocally outstanding feature -- seamless, built-in XM satellite
>> weather.
>>
>> Were it not for XM capability, the 496 would be an almost laughably
>> bad GPS. It would also no longer be made, as no one would have bought
>> it. Sadly, because there is no other logical alternative, I won't
>> fly without it on board -- but the moment AvMap or Lowrance matches
>> Garmin's XM capability, the 496 will be on Ebay.
>
>
>
> God you're an asshole.
>
>
> Bertie
>

Don't worry, you still have him beat hands down.

..... or hands in pants, in your case.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 26th 08, 05:57 PM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>> news:EFFsk.258766$TT4.124426@attbi_s22:
>>
>>>> Note to newbies: Honeck dogged Garmin until he realized the 496
beat
>>>> the crap out of anything else that would tell him where the hairy
>>>> stuff was, then he had to buy one.
>>>
>>> Wow -- is that even English?
>>>
>>> I don't know who you are, "F-Guy", but I calls 'em as I see 'em.
>>> I've owned and flown behind half a dozen GPS's, from Magellans to
>>> Lowrances, from AvMaps to Garmins -- and I'm here to tell you that
the
>>> 496 is an incredibly over-priced piece of crap, with ONE major,
>>> unequivocally outstanding feature -- seamless, built-in XM satellite
>>> weather.
>>>
>>> Were it not for XM capability, the 496 would be an almost laughably
>>> bad GPS. It would also no longer be made, as no one would have
bought
>>> it. Sadly, because there is no other logical alternative, I won't
>>> fly without it on board -- but the moment AvMap or Lowrance matches
>>> Garmin's XM capability, the 496 will be on Ebay.
>>
>>
>>
>> God you're an asshole.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> Don't worry, you still have him beat hands down.
>
> .... or hands in pants, in your case.
>
>
>

Awwww, you really got me there lameoh boi.

Bertie

Mike[_22_]

August 26th 08, 06:13 PM

"Shirl" > wrote in message
...
> Jay, thank you for taking the time to write such a thorough answer to my
> question. I hadn't seen your previous review of the 496. I haven't done
> the kind of long/far x-c flying that requires having weather on board,
> so I haven't had the weather-related needs from the GPS. I've heard the
> complaint about the small screen and also about seeing the color screen
> in the sun, but I haven't experienced problems in either of those areas.
> A friend showed me the Lowrance, and I have to agree, the size of that
> screen is terrific; but in a small, tandem-seat cockpit, there isn't as
> much room, either...the Garmin fits perfectly. I'm not sure where I
> could put the Lowrance and have it be as out of the way yet readily
> visible. I'd love to try the Lowrance or AvMap one day, though.

What you should understand is that Jay's opinion regarding the 496 is very
much in the minority. Everyone else I've heard of would never consider
going from a Garmin product to any of the others he mentioned. The
interface to the 496 is far more intuitive than any of the others he
mentioned, and as you've already noted, screen size (which is his biggest
complaint) is a non-issue. The scrolling issue is also not a problem for
those who are more concerned with flying the airplane than screwing with a
GPS. Set the thing up and forget about it. Use the nearest function if you
need METAR updates.

I've flown with lots of Garmin products including some of their older
products, 296, 430, 530, MFD, and G1000. The great thing about Garmin
products is if you can learn one of them, you are way ahead of the game when
you move on to another. If you have any aspirations about moving up to an
IFR GPS equipped aircraft, this is a big plus as Garmin has the vast
majority of market share there as well. As far as Lowrance goes, you learn
one of them and you might know how to get around in another, but their
product line currently consists of a whopping 2 and no panel mounts. As
they haven't updated their product line in quite some time, I don't really
see Lowrance being in the aviation market in a few years. AvMap even has
less market share.

ADS will bring a lot of changes to the GPS market in the coming decade.
Garmin always stays on the cutting edge of things and you can look for them
to implement first. Lowrance and others don't even have XM weather which
has been around for years. PFD/MFD avionics are the shape of things to come
and Garmin is way ahead in that game as well.

Kyle Boatright

August 26th 08, 11:35 PM

"Mike" > wrote in message
news:EQWsk.782$5C.657@trnddc02...
> "Shirl" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Jay, thank you for taking the time to write such a thorough answer to my
>> question. I hadn't seen your previous review of the 496. I haven't done
>> the kind of long/far x-c flying that requires having weather on board,
>> so I haven't had the weather-related needs from the GPS. I've heard the
>> complaint about the small screen and also about seeing the color screen
>> in the sun, but I haven't experienced problems in either of those areas.
>> A friend showed me the Lowrance, and I have to agree, the size of that
>> screen is terrific; but in a small, tandem-seat cockpit, there isn't as
>> much room, either...the Garmin fits perfectly. I'm not sure where I
>> could put the Lowrance and have it be as out of the way yet readily
>> visible. I'd love to try the Lowrance or AvMap one day, though.
>
> What you should understand is that Jay's opinion regarding the 496 is very
> much in the minority. Everyone else I've heard of would never consider
> going from a Garmin product to any of the others he mentioned. The
> interface to the 496 is far more intuitive than any of the others he
> mentioned, and as you've already noted, screen size (which is his biggest
> complaint) is a non-issue. The scrolling issue is also not a problem for
> those who are more concerned with flying the airplane than screwing with a
> GPS. Set the thing up and forget about it. Use the nearest function if
> you need METAR updates.
>
<<<mucho snippage>>>

I'm with Jay in preferring Lowrance products over Garmin, primarily because
of the screen aspect ratio. Unfortunately, Lowrance seems to be quitely
abandoning the Aviation GPS market. They are not *telling* anyone they have
stopped developing new products (particularly one with XM), but their
absence in the market with new products is telling.

That said, I prefer the Lowrance 600C over the 2000C. The 2KC is just too
darned big for my cockpit. Now if I was in a big 'ol load hauling airplane,
I'd probably have space, but I'm in an RV where space is limited and there
are no yokes.

KB

Shirl

August 27th 08, 02:26 AM

"Mike" >:
> What you should understand is that Jay's opinion regarding the
> 496 is very much in the minority. Everyone else I've heard of
> would never consider going from a Garmin product to any of
> the others he mentioned.

I am open to TRYING another, but the reason I asked Jay what
specifically he felt makes the Garmin "laughable" is because in 3 years
of use, I've never had ONE complaint with mine...though as I've said, I
don't use it for weather.

> The scrolling issue is also not a problem for those who are more
> concerned with flying the airplane than screwing with a GPS. Set
> the thing up and forget about it.

That's pretty much how I use it...set it up before taking off. I look at
it frequently, but only change it if I need to divert (not often).

Like the other poster said, with no yoke and a tandem-seat cockpit,
there isn't a lot of room. Though a bigger screen is a nice feature, the
Garmin fits perfectly in the limited space, and the size of its screen
has never been an issue with me. I've heard people say the screen is too
small, and that the color in the sun was an issue, but that hasn't been
my experience. It has my vote, 100%.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 27th 08, 05:28 AM

>> The scrolling issue is also not a problem for those who are more
>> concerned with flying the airplane than screwing with a GPS. Set
>> the thing up and forget about it.
>
> That's pretty much how I use it...set it up before taking off. I look at
> it frequently, but only change it if I need to divert (not often).

Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 27th 08, 05:35 AM

> Quit whining and learn how to use the thing! You have had it three years
> now and still haven't learned the following:
>
> 1) Press the NRST button
> 2) Bump the rocker switch on tab to the right (WX)
> 3) Scroll down the list of closest airports and select any with the
> flag indicating there is a METAR.

That's a great feature to use when you're in familiar territory. On a long
cross-country flight, however, it's pretty much useless, since "nearest"
might (and probably will) bring up an airport that's no where near your
course line. Hell, it might even be behind you, which doesn't do you a
tinker's damn worth of good when you're flying toward deteriorating
conditions.

Face it -- it's a stupid box, with a stupidly slow processor. The 496
COULD be awesome, but Garmin hasn't done a thing to improve it in several
years -- nor will they, until some other manufacturer forces their hand.

Mark my words -- as soon as AvMap (or ANYONE) comes out with a GPS with
integrated weather, the new Garmin 596 (or whatever they call it) will
address every one of the issues we're discussing.

Until then, why spend the money on R&D? As a stockholder, Garmin's approach
makes perfect sense. As a user, it sucks.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Shirl

August 27th 08, 06:46 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?

I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit, I
seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly with
frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be honest, he's
never had any complaints with his either -- he uses it as a back-up to
an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the 396 and its weather on
several flights to and from AZ to Little Rock, AR (in a Bonanza F33A),
said it was great.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 27th 08, 07:46 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:OQ4tk.260588$TT4.229677@attbi_s22:

>> Quit whining and learn how to use the thing! You have had it three
>> years now and still haven't learned the following:
>>
>> 1) Press the NRST button
>> 2) Bump the rocker switch on tab to the right (WX)
>> 3) Scroll down the list of closest airports and select any with the
>> flag indicating there is a METAR.
>
> That's a great feature to use when you're in familiar territory. On a
> long cross-country flight, however, it's pretty much useless, since
> "nearest" might (and probably will) bring up an airport that's no
> where near your course line. Hell, it might even be behind you, which
> doesn't do you a tinker's damn worth of good when you're flying toward
> deteriorating conditions.
>
> Face it -- it's a stupid box, with a stupidly slow processor. The
> 496 COULD be awesome, but Garmin hasn't done a thing to improve it in
> several years -- nor will they, until some other manufacturer forces
> their hand.
>
> Mark my words -- as soon as AvMap (or ANYONE) comes out with a GPS
> with integrated weather, the new Garmin 596 (or whatever they call it)
> will address every one of the issues we're discussing.
>
> Until then, why spend the money on R&D? As a stockholder, Garmin's
> approach makes perfect sense. As a user, it sucks.

You're an idiot.

Bertie

john smith

August 27th 08, 01:40 PM

In article <OQ4tk.260588$TT4.229677@attbi_s22>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> That's a great feature to use when you're in familiar territory. On a long
> cross-country flight, however, it's pretty much useless, since "nearest"
> might (and probably will) bring up an airport that's no where near your
> course line. Hell, it might even be behind you, which doesn't do you a
> tinker's damn worth of good when you're flying toward deteriorating
> conditions.

Have you even looked at the NRST page? The very first tab gives you
airport, heading and range from your present position. Take your pick.

Look at your sectional (you do carry and use a current sectional don't
you?), look at the 496 NAV page with weather overlay, look at the NRST
page and select your airports and METARs. No scrolling is necessary.
Zooming out gives you the big weather picture along your route of
flight.

Why do you insist on making it so difficult?

> Mark my words -- as soon as AvMap (or ANYONE) comes out with a GPS with
> integrated weather, the new Garmin 596 (or whatever they call it) will
> address every one of the issues we're discussing.

And tell us again how many years "the others" have been promising that
XM WX was imminent?

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 27th 08, 02:22 PM

>> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
>
> I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit, I
> seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly with
> frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be honest, he's
> never had any complaints with his either -- he uses it as a back-up to
> an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the 396 and its weather on
> several flights to and from AZ to Little Rock, AR (in a Bonanza F33A),
> said it was great.

And it is. There is simply NO substitute for on-board weather on a long
flight, which is why I bought the danged thing in the first place. It's a
fantastic enhancement to safety, and makes long cross-country flights much
more doable and relaxing.

We're talking about matters of degree here. Is the 496 a perfectly
functional GPS? Sure. Does it work as a weather avoidance tool? You bet.
What I'm complaining about is the fact that for three THOUSAND dollars, I
purchased a tool that requires "work-arounds" to make the thing usable. To
put that in perspective, I could purchase SEVEN laptops (like the one I'm
typing on) for the same price.

For that kind of money, I don't want to screw around with "work-arounds". I
want a tool that works the way it should -- and could -- right out of the
box. I've already outlined the things the 496 does right, and they are
legion. However, my advice (FWIW): If you want weather and haven't bitten
the bullet yet, wait for the next generation of weather-integrated GPSs.
As with all things computerized, they'll be faster, better, and (maybe)
cheaper.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 27th 08, 05:40 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Byctk.261087$TT4.35918@attbi_s22:

>>> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
>>
>> I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit, I
>> seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly with
>> frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be honest,
>> he's never had any complaints with his either -- he uses it as a
>> back-up to an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the 396 and its
>> weather on several flights to and from AZ to Little Rock, AR (in a
>> Bonanza F33A), said it was great.
>
> And it is. There is simply NO substitute for on-board weather on a
> long flight, which is why I bought the danged thing in the first
> place. It's a fantastic enhancement to safety, and makes long
> cross-country flights much more doable and relaxing.

Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?

Bertie

Mike[_22_]

August 27th 08, 08:38 PM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> news:Byctk.261087$TT4.35918@attbi_s22:
>
>>>> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
>>>
>>> I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit, I
>>> seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly with
>>> frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be honest,
>>> he's never had any complaints with his either -- he uses it as a
>>> back-up to an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the 396 and its
>>> weather on several flights to and from AZ to Little Rock, AR (in a
>>> Bonanza F33A), said it was great.
>>
>> And it is. There is simply NO substitute for on-board weather on a
>> long flight, which is why I bought the danged thing in the first
>> place. It's a fantastic enhancement to safety, and makes long
>> cross-country flights much more doable and relaxing.
>
>
> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?

ATC can provide weather information as well, and now that the centers have
NEXRAD overlays, that information is even better.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 27th 08, 08:52 PM

"Mike" > wrote in news:V2itk.971$w51.617@trnddc01:

> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>> news:Byctk.261087$TT4.35918@attbi_s22:
>>
>>>>> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
>>>>
>>>> I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit, I
>>>> seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly with
>>>> frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be honest,
>>>> he's never had any complaints with his either -- he uses it as a
>>>> back-up to an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the 396 and its
>>>> weather on several flights to and from AZ to Little Rock, AR (in a
>>>> Bonanza F33A), said it was great.
>>>
>>> And it is. There is simply NO substitute for on-board weather on a
>>> long flight, which is why I bought the danged thing in the first
>>> place. It's a fantastic enhancement to safety, and makes long
>>> cross-country flights much more doable and relaxing.
>>
>>
>> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>
> ATC can provide weather information as well, and now that the centers
> have NEXRAD overlays, that information is even better.
>
>
>

Wel, we get it all acars, but in a light airplane, building a picture
through radio is more than enough. The only thing you need after that is
radar, and if you're flying a cherokee in that sort of weather and relying
on some tandy toy , well,. I don't have to tell you..

Bertie

Mike[_22_]

August 27th 08, 09:06 PM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike" > wrote in news:V2itk.971$w51.617@trnddc01:
>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>> news:Byctk.261087$TT4.35918@attbi_s22:
>>>
>>>>>> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
>>>>>
>>>>> I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit, I
>>>>> seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly with
>>>>> frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be honest,
>>>>> he's never had any complaints with his either -- he uses it as a
>>>>> back-up to an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the 396 and its
>>>>> weather on several flights to and from AZ to Little Rock, AR (in a
>>>>> Bonanza F33A), said it was great.
>>>>
>>>> And it is. There is simply NO substitute for on-board weather on a
>>>> long flight, which is why I bought the danged thing in the first
>>>> place. It's a fantastic enhancement to safety, and makes long
>>>> cross-country flights much more doable and relaxing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>>
>> ATC can provide weather information as well, and now that the centers
>> have NEXRAD overlays, that information is even better.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Wel, we get it all acars, but in a light airplane, building a picture
> through radio is more than enough. The only thing you need after that is
> radar, and if you're flying a cherokee in that sort of weather and relying
> on some tandy toy , well,. I don't have to tell you..

I agree. I did long X-countries for years with nothing more than my
eyeballs, a strikefinder, and a radio. Onboard weather is nice, but if the
496 craps the bed, I'm not going to cancel the trip. I don't know of any
instance were XM weather ever saved anyone's life and in fact it causes some
to get into more trouble than they can deal with.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 27th 08, 10:01 PM

"Mike" > wrote in news:xtitk.972$w51.377@trnddc01:

> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Mike" > wrote in
>> news:V2itk.971$w51.617@trnddc01:
>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>>> news:Byctk.261087$TT4.35918@attbi_s22:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit,
>>>>>> I seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly
>>>>>> with frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be
>>>>>> honest, he's never had any complaints with his either -- he uses
>>>>>> it as a back-up to an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the
>>>>>> 396 and its weather on several flights to and from AZ to Little
>>>>>> Rock, AR (in a Bonanza F33A), said it was great.
>>>>>
>>>>> And it is. There is simply NO substitute for on-board weather on
>>>>> a long flight, which is why I bought the danged thing in the first
>>>>> place. It's a fantastic enhancement to safety, and makes long
>>>>> cross-country flights much more doable and relaxing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>>>
>>> ATC can provide weather information as well, and now that the
>>> centers have NEXRAD overlays, that information is even better.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Wel, we get it all acars, but in a light airplane, building a picture
>> through radio is more than enough. The only thing you need after that
>> is radar, and if you're flying a cherokee in that sort of weather and
>> relying on some tandy toy , well,. I don't have to tell you..
>
> I agree. I did long X-countries for years with nothing more than my
> eyeballs, a strikefinder, and a radio. Onboard weather is nice, but
> if the 496 craps the bed, I'm not going to cancel the trip. I don't
> know of any instance were XM weather ever saved anyone's life and in
> fact it causes some to get into more trouble than they can deal with.
>
>

Well, that's definitely the impression i got of Jay's approach ot using
this stuff. These toys are great things, but if you haven't got basic
skills underneath it, you're lost.

Bertie

JGalban via AviationKB.com

August 27th 08, 10:40 PM

Mike wrote:
>
>I agree. I did long X-countries for years with nothing more than my
>eyeballs, a strikefinder, and a radio. Onboard weather is nice, but if the
>496 craps the bed, I'm not going to cancel the trip. I don't know of any
>instance were XM weather ever saved anyone's life and in fact it causes some
>to get into more trouble than they can deal with.

I've noticed the opposite effect. I fly long cross countries (~700+ nm)
every year with a few buddies that have 396/496 onboard. I've stuck with my
trusty old Garmin 195. They seemed to get spooked by the weather displays
when the typical lines of afternoon thunderstorms start cutting loose. For
the last couple of years, they've been making precautionary landings to wait
out weather, based on their displays. I've continued along, as I've done
for many years, studying the weather out the windows and making the usual
detours around the scary stuff (we're all VFR pilots). Since they got XM,
I've been beating them to our destinations by hours, and in a few cases an
entire day. Even when I call them on the radio and tell them it's not that
bad, they still won't budge.

Maybe it's a question of interpretation of the displays, but it's not just
my two buddies that have the tendency to get on the ground because of what
they see with XM. I've gotten unsolicted XM based advice several times (just
last month, in fact) when stopping at an airport for fuel. When I actually
launch, the weather is almost always better than the gloomy XM pilot's
prediction.

I'm not against having weather in the cockpit. I just figure that, as a
VFR pilot, what I see out the window is what really matters. As long as I
have an out, I'll just continue to fly up to the weather and check it out in
person. Perhaps when cockpit weather becomes cheap enough for this cheap
*******, it'll show up in my cockpit :-))

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 27th 08, 11:00 PM

> I've noticed the opposite effect. I fly long cross countries (~700+ nm)
> every year with a few buddies that have 396/496 onboard. I've stuck with
> my
> trusty old Garmin 195. They seemed to get spooked by the weather
> displays
> when the typical lines of afternoon thunderstorms start cutting loose.
> For
> the last couple of years, they've been making precautionary landings to
> wait
> out weather, based on their displays. I've continued along, as I've done
> for many years, studying the weather out the windows and making the usual
> detours around the scary stuff (we're all VFR pilots). Since they got
> XM,
> I've been beating them to our destinations by hours, and in a few cases an
> entire day. Even when I call them on the radio and tell them it's not
> that
> bad, they still won't budge.

Our experience has been diametrically opposed. In our "pre-XM" days we made
many (ultimately pointless) precautionary landings whilst on long x-country
flights -- and haven't made a single one since getting on-board weather
three years ago. To the contrary, we have made a whole bunch of flights
that would simply not have happened before XM, period.

When it comes to weather, there is simply no substitute for knowing what's
over the horizon. And a picture (even the dinky picture that the 496
presents) is truly worth a thousand words.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Kyle Boatright

August 27th 08, 11:19 PM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> news:Byctk.261087$TT4.35918@attbi_s22:
>
>>>> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
>>>
>>> I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit, I
>>> seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly with
>>> frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be honest,
>>> he's never had any complaints with his either -- he uses it as a
>>> back-up to an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the 396 and its
>>> weather on several flights to and from AZ to Little Rock, AR (in a
>>> Bonanza F33A), said it was great.
>>
>> And it is. There is simply NO substitute for on-board weather on a
>> long flight, which is why I bought the danged thing in the first
>> place. It's a fantastic enhancement to safety, and makes long
>> cross-country flights much more doable and relaxing.
>
>
> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>
>
> Bertie

Ever try to raise flight service on a busy day when CB's are popping up all
around? Beyond that, when you're a thousand miles from home and the FSS is
calling out weather boundaries using landmarks you've never heard of, it is
pretty hard to visualize what in the heck they are talking about.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 27th 08, 11:29 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:H7ktk.261615$TT4.34592@attbi_s22:

>> I've noticed the opposite effect. I fly long cross countries
>> (~700+ nm)
>> every year with a few buddies that have 396/496 onboard. I've stuck
>> with my
>> trusty old Garmin 195. They seemed to get spooked by the weather
>> displays
>> when the typical lines of afternoon thunderstorms start cutting
>> loose. For
>> the last couple of years, they've been making precautionary landings
>> to wait
>> out weather, based on their displays. I've continued along, as I've
>> done for many years, studying the weather out the windows and making
>> the usual detours around the scary stuff (we're all VFR pilots).
>> Since they got XM,
>> I've been beating them to our destinations by hours, and in a few
>> cases an entire day. Even when I call them on the radio and tell
>> them it's not that
>> bad, they still won't budge.
>
> Our experience has been diametrically opposed.

That's because you're an idiot.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 27th 08, 11:32 PM

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>> news:Byctk.261087$TT4.35918@attbi_s22:
>>
>>>>> Which Garmin GPS do you have, Shirl?
>>>>
>>>> I have the old 296. It does everything I need it to, but I admit, I
>>>> seldom do long x-cs to unknown places. A friend I used to fly with
>>>> frequently has a 396 -- I saw how the weather works. To be honest,
>>>> he's never had any complaints with his either -- he uses it as a
>>>> back-up to an old, panel-mounted GPS and relied on the 396 and its
>>>> weather on several flights to and from AZ to Little Rock, AR (in a
>>>> Bonanza F33A), said it was great.
>>>
>>> And it is. There is simply NO substitute for on-board weather on a
>>> long flight, which is why I bought the danged thing in the first
>>> place. It's a fantastic enhancement to safety, and makes long
>>> cross-country flights much more doable and relaxing.
>>
>>
>> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Ever try to raise flight service on a busy day when CB's are popping
> up all around?

Sure.

> Beyond that, when you're a thousand miles from home
> and the FSS is calling out weather boundaries using landmarks you've
> never heard of, it is pretty hard to visualize what in the heck they
> are talking about.

Well, I manage somehow most days...

In th eairplaniers, we have acars, but seldom use it for anything other
than destination and alterante weather.

I'm not saying that they're useless in themselves, I'm sayin that Jay's
idiotic approach to their use is idiotic.
He's attempting to replace good operating practices with technology.
He said as much last time this discussion came up.

That never works well.

Bertie

Bertie

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 28th 08, 03:23 AM

>> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Ever try to raise flight service on a busy day when CB's are popping up
> all around? Beyond that, when you're a thousand miles from home and the
> FSS is calling out weather boundaries using landmarks you've never heard
> of, it is pretty hard to visualize what in the heck they are talking
> about.

Kyle, you're wasting your breath. Until you (and others) stop treating this
"Bertie" like a pilot (as if "he" would have any clue what flight service
is), he will continue to grace this group with his brilliant "fjukkwit"
commentary. Ignore him (as do most of us) and this troll-of-trolls will
ultimately go away...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 28th 08, 03:31 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:g_ntk.317017$yE1.219587@attbi_s21:

>>> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> Ever try to raise flight service on a busy day when CB's are popping
>> up all around? Beyond that, when you're a thousand miles from home
>> and the FSS is calling out weather boundaries using landmarks you've
>> never heard of, it is pretty hard to visualize what in the heck they
>> are talking about.
>
> Kyle, you're wasting your breath. Until you (and others) stop
> treating this "Bertie" like a pilot (as if "he" would have any clue
> what flight service is), he will continue to grace this group with his
> brilliant "fjukkwit" commentary. Ignore him (as do most of us) and
> this troll-of-trolls will ultimately go away...

Bwawhahwha

Guess again, fjukktard.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 28th 08, 04:59 AM

Nomen Nescio > wrote in
:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: "Jay Honeck" >
>
>>
>>Kyle, you're wasting your breath. Until you (and others) stop
>>treating this "Bertie" like a pilot (as if "he" would have any clue
>>what flight service is), he will continue to grace this group with his
>>brilliant "fjukkwit" commentary. Ignore him (as do most of us) and
>>this troll-of-trolls will ultimately go away...
>
> Jay, If "Bertie" isn't a pilot, he's doing one hell of a job faking
> it.

Standard k00k tactic. It's what we live for.

Bertie
>

john smith

August 28th 08, 02:53 PM

In article <89507b852d1f3@uwe>,
"JGalban via AviationKB.com" <u32749@uwe> wrote:

[snipped for brevity]
> I'm not against having weather in the cockpit. I just figure that, as a
> VFR pilot, what I see out the window is what really matters. As long as I
> have an out, I'll just continue to fly up to the weather and check it out in
> person. Perhaps when cockpit weather becomes cheap enough for this cheap
> *******, it'll show up in my cockpit :-))

Having XM WX onboard and integrating the electronic information with
what one sees through the plexi is what makes a inflight decisions to
press on or land important.

It also depends upon where you live (local knowledge) and where you are
flying. In the Eastern US, pop-up storms can sometimes be more severe
than a line of storms. (I was once on a long cross country when pop-ups
turned into a long, broad line of Level 6's.)

When you start out in clear blue and and the little puffies start to
form and become more prevelent with an increasing overcast, it is time
to evaluate your route of flight more thoroughly.

Dan Luke[_2_]

August 28th 08, 03:35 PM

"JGalban via AviationKB.com" wrote:
>
> Maybe it's a question of interpretation of the displays, but it's not
> just
> my two buddies that have the tendency to get on the ground because of what
> they see with XM. I've gotten unsolicted XM based advice several times
> (just
> last month, in fact) when stopping at an airport for fuel. When I
> actually
> launch, the weather is almost always better than the gloomy XM pilot's
> prediction.

Sounds like they have limited experience--both with convective weather and
XM Wx.

I now make trips I would have scrubbed before I got XM Wx five years ago,
simply because I know I can get dynamic, big-picture convective updates on
days when there is a lot of instability. In those five years I've had to
land short and wait only once.

XM Wx has improved my dispatch rate and my piece of mind. I'd certainly
hate to fly here in the SE U. S. without it.

--
Dan
T-182T at 4R4

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 28th 08, 04:16 PM

> Jay, If "Bertie" isn't a pilot, he's doing one hell of a job faking it.

Agreed. However, every now and then he drops clear hints of his real
situation -- like the comment about using flight service.

Real pilots know how utterly useless an in-air weather briefing can be on a
long cross-country flight, when FSS starts blathering on about "strong
thunderstorms located 56 miles on the 223 radial from Clusterfunk VOR" -- as
you're frantically trying to find "Clusterfunk" on one of your sectional
maps that are strewn around the cockpit. And that's the best-case
scenario -- often you can't even get through to them.

Compare this with the incredible utility of having Nexrad radar, with a
satellite overlay, displaying "live" (well, okay, 4 to 9 minutes old) in the
cockpit, showing you precisely what the weather is doing ahead, and it's
easy to spot a pretender.

Only someone who has never actually walked the walk would talk such
nonsense.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 28th 08, 10:29 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:_iztk.262651$TT4.100433@attbi_s22:

>> Jay, If "Bertie" isn't a pilot, he's doing one hell of a job faking
>> it.
>
> Agreed. However, every now and then he drops clear hints of his real
> situation -- like the comment about using flight service.

Yeah, right, fjukkktard.

>
> Real pilots know how utterly useless an in-air weather briefing can be
> on a long cross-country flight,

Useless to a moron like you, anyway.

>
> Only someone who has never actually walked the walk would talk such
> nonsense.

Yeah, right.

Bertie

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

August 29th 08, 12:35 AM

on 8/27/2008 10:30 PM Nomen Nescio said the following:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: "Jay Honeck" >
>
>> Kyle, you're wasting your breath. Until you (and others) stop treating this
>> "Bertie" like a pilot (as if "he" would have any clue what flight service
>> is), he will continue to grace this group with his brilliant "fjukkwit"
>> commentary. Ignore him (as do most of us) and this troll-of-trolls will
>> ultimately go away...
>
> Jay, If "Bertie" isn't a pilot, he's doing one hell of a job faking it.

While Jay does a spot-on imitation of a douchebag. Mind the nozzle...

Morgans[_2_]

August 29th 08, 04:13 AM

"Jay Honeck" <> wrote

> Only someone who has never actually walked the walk would talk such
> nonsense.

Nah. Bertie is so totally blinded by the need to slam you, that he will
say anything about every subject to throw a dig your way.

Not that I am saying that your observation is totally wrong, either.

In any case, I still say if we were to totally ignore two people and their
sock puppets (they are really not that hard to pick out) on every subject,
and every post, and every follow-up to their posts, we would soon be rid of
them, and their destruction of this newsgroup.

I fear that will never happen. It seems there are too many people stroking
their egos, with their need to sound knowledgeable about the thread of the
moment.
--
Jim in NC

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 29th 08, 05:35 AM

> I fear that will never happen. It seems there are too many people
> stroking their egos, with their need to sound knowledgeable about the
> thread of the moment.

You're right, of course.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Ramsey

August 29th 08, 12:31 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:g_ntk.317017$yE1.219587@attbi_s21...
>>> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> Ever try to raise flight service on a busy day when CB's are popping up
>> all around? Beyond that, when you're a thousand miles from home and the
>> FSS is calling out weather boundaries using landmarks you've never heard
>> of, it is pretty hard to visualize what in the heck they are talking
>> about.
>
> Kyle, you're wasting your breath. Until you (and others) stop treating
> this "Bertie" like a pilot (as if "he" would have any clue what flight
> service is), he will continue to grace this group with his brilliant
> "fjukkwit" commentary. Ignore him (as do most of us) and this
> troll-of-trolls will ultimately go away...
> --

Bull****, Bertie isn't a troll, he's too stupid. Mx is the troll, Bertie is
just the functional equivalent of a 2 year old, running around hitting
people on the toe with a hammer, because they won't stoop to his level and
play with him. Not to mention the mentality of the sock puppets that suck up
to him. Bertie just attracks that 2% of pilots that are so full of
themselves, they give the other 98% a bad name.

Mx on the other hand lures them in by the dozens. Let's them waste hours
trying to explain (and argue with each other) the most simple concepts, and
then spanks them for being stupid enough to answer him.

Ramsey

August 29th 08, 12:33 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:_iztk.262651$TT4.100433@attbi_s22...
>> Jay, If "Bertie" isn't a pilot, he's doing one hell of a job faking it.
>
> Agreed. However, every now and then he drops clear hints of his real
> situation -- like the comment about using flight service.
>
> Real pilots know how utterly useless an in-air weather briefing can be on
> a long cross-country flight, when FSS starts blathering on about "strong
> thunderstorms located 56 miles on the 223 radial from Clusterfunk VOR" --
> as you're frantically trying to find "Clusterfunk" on one of your
> sectional maps that are strewn around the cockpit. And that's the
> best-case scenario -- often you can't even get through to them.
>
> Compare this with the incredible utility of having Nexrad radar, with a
> satellite overlay, displaying "live" (well, okay, 4 to 9 minutes old) in
> the cockpit, showing you precisely what the weather is doing ahead, and
> it's easy to spot a pretender.
>
> Only someone who has never actually walked the walk would talk such
> nonsense.
> --

Yep! He steps on his ****** all the time. Just no one wants to call bull****
on him, for fear he will dedicate the rest of his (tiny) life to ****ing on
every thread the start, or attempt to join.

Ramsey

August 29th 08, 12:39 PM

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" <> wrote
>
>> Only someone who has never actually walked the walk would talk such
>> nonsense.
>
> Nah. Bertie is so totally blinded by the need to slam you, that he will
> say anything about every subject to throw a dig your way.
>
> Not that I am saying that your observation is totally wrong, either.
>
> In any case, I still say if we were to totally ignore two people and their
> sock puppets (they are really not that hard to pick out) on every subject,
> and every post, and every follow-up to their posts, we would soon be rid
> of them, and their destruction of this newsgroup.
>
> I fear that will never happen. It seems there are too many people
> stroking their egos, with their need to sound knowledgeable about the
> thread of the moment.
> --
> Jim in NC
>

If you can't see by now, that silence will solve nothing, then you must be
totally blind.

1) There is a never ending stream of new people that will always waste weeks
if not months feeding them, before the understand the problem.

2) They just sock puppet and talk to themselves.

When you find a way to solve these two facts, then let's talk about ignoring
them.

Wake up guys.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 29th 08, 06:28 PM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:g_ntk.317017$yE1.219587@attbi_s21...
>>>> Ever heard of Flight service, fjukkwit?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> Ever try to raise flight service on a busy day when CB's are popping
>>> up all around? Beyond that, when you're a thousand miles from home
>>> and the FSS is calling out weather boundaries using landmarks you've
>>> never heard of, it is pretty hard to visualize what in the heck they
>>> are talking about.
>>
>> Kyle, you're wasting your breath. Until you (and others) stop
>> treating this "Bertie" like a pilot (as if "he" would have any clue
>> what flight service is), he will continue to grace this group with
>> his brilliant "fjukkwit" commentary. Ignore him (as do most of us)
>> and this troll-of-trolls will ultimately go away...
>> --
>
> Bull****, Bertie isn't a troll, he's too stupid. Mx is the troll,
> Bertie is just the functional equivalent of a 2 year old, running
> around hitting people on the toe with a hammer, because they won't
> stoop to his level and play with him.

Not so, you play with me all the time.

Bertie
>
>
>

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 29th 08, 06:32 PM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:_iztk.262651$TT4.100433@attbi_s22...
>>> Jay, If "Bertie" isn't a pilot, he's doing one hell of a job faking
>>> it.
>>
>> Agreed. However, every now and then he drops clear hints of his real
>> situation -- like the comment about using flight service.
>>
>> Real pilots know how utterly useless an in-air weather briefing can
>> be on a long cross-country flight, when FSS starts blathering on
>> about "strong thunderstorms located 56 miles on the 223 radial from
>> Clusterfunk VOR" -- as you're frantically trying to find
>> "Clusterfunk" on one of your sectional maps that are strewn around
>> the cockpit. And that's the best-case scenario -- often you can't
>> even get through to them.
>>
>> Compare this with the incredible utility of having Nexrad radar, with
>> a satellite overlay, displaying "live" (well, okay, 4 to 9 minutes
>> old) in the cockpit, showing you precisely what the weather is doing
>> ahead, and it's easy to spot a pretender.
>>
>> Only someone who has never actually walked the walk would talk such
>> nonsense.
>> --

> Yep! He steps on his ****** all the time.
>

Steps on his ******?

Bwawhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhahwhahwh!

God you're a fjukkktard.

But ironically, you are quite correct.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3DVFA_enSE228IE228
&defl=en&q=define:******&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

You being the object of that statement, of course.

> Yep! He steps on his ****** all the time. Just no one wants to call
> bull**** on him, for fear he will dedicate the rest of his (tiny) life
> to ****ing on every thread the start, or attempt to join.
>
>

Nope, not so. I only call those who are worthy of being elevated to
k00kdom.

Like you, for instance.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 29th 08, 06:35 PM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Morgans" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Jay Honeck" <> wrote
>>
>>> Only someone who has never actually walked the walk would talk such
>>> nonsense.
>>
>> Nah. Bertie is so totally blinded by the need to slam you, that he
>> will say anything about every subject to throw a dig your way.
>>
>> Not that I am saying that your observation is totally wrong, either.
>>
>> In any case, I still say if we were to totally ignore two people and
>> their sock puppets (they are really not that hard to pick out) on
>> every subject, and every post, and every follow-up to their posts, we
>> would soon be rid of them, and their destruction of this newsgroup.
>>
>> I fear that will never happen. It seems there are too many people
>> stroking their egos, with their need to sound knowledgeable about the
>> thread of the moment.
>> --
>> Jim in NC
>>
>
> If you can't see by now, that silence will solve nothing, then you
> must be totally blind.
>
> 1) There is a never ending stream of new people that will always waste
> weeks if not months feeding them, before the understand the problem.

God I love usenet.

>
> 2) They just sock puppet and talk to themselves.

Why would I bother when I have you?

Unless you're confessing to actually being one of my sockpuppets, of
course.

Don't forget to include yourself in volume 7 maxie...
>
> When you find a way to solve these two facts, then let's talk about
> ignoring them.
>
> Wake up guys.

Bwawhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhhahw!

Bertie
>

Morgans[_2_]

August 30th 08, 12:28 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote

> If you can't see by now, that silence will solve nothing, then you must be
> totally blind.

If YOU can't see that silence, and informing new people via back channels,
(or one time in a post) as to the situation, then you must be blind.

It HAS worked before.

Remember the Bass wars?

Hint: Seem him around lately?

Wake up, indeed.
--
Jim in NC

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 30th 08, 02:36 AM

> Mx on the other hand lures them in by the dozens. Let's them waste hours
> trying to explain (and argue with each other) the most simple concepts,
> and then spanks them for being stupid enough to answer him.

You're right, of course, but I'll still take ten MXs for every one "Bertie".
At least MX is entertaining (and occasionally starts some VERY interesting,
on-topic threads) while "Bertie" is just an embarrassment.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Morgans[_2_]

August 30th 08, 03:44 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote

> You're right, of course, but I'll still take ten MXs for every one
> "Bertie". At least MX is entertaining (and occasionally starts some VERY
> interesting, on-topic threads) while "Bertie" is just an embarrassment.

I don't think it is a given that we have to make a choice of one or the
other.

IMO, both suck, just they suck in different ways.
--
Jim in NC

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 30th 08, 08:33 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Bu1uk.264679$TT4.149173@attbi_s22:

>> Mx on the other hand lures them in by the dozens. Let's them waste
>> hours trying to explain (and argue with each other) the most simple
>> concepts, and then spanks them for being stupid enough to answer him.
>
> You're right, of course, but I'll still take ten MXs for every one
> "Bertie". At least MX is entertaining (and occasionally starts some
> VERY interesting, on-topic threads) while "Bertie" is just an
> embarrassment.

Bertie has your number.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 30th 08, 08:34 AM

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote
>
>> You're right, of course, but I'll still take ten MXs for every one
>> "Bertie". At least MX is entertaining (and occasionally starts some
>> VERY interesting, on-topic threads) while "Bertie" is just an
>> embarrassment.
>
> I don't think it is a given that we have to make a choice of one or
> the
> other.
>
> IMO, both suck, just they suck in different ways.

Bwawhahwhahwhahw!

Right, and you're god's gift to usenet.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 30th 08, 08:36 AM

Nomen Nescio > wrote in
:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: "Jay Honeck" >
>
>>> Jay, If "Bertie" isn't a pilot, he's doing one hell of a job faking
>>> it.
>>
>>Agreed. However, every now and then he drops clear hints of his real
>>situation -- like the comment about using flight service.
>>
>>Real pilots know how utterly useless an in-air weather briefing can be
>>on a long cross-country flight, when FSS starts blathering on about
>>"strong thunderstorms located 56 miles on the 223 radial from
>>Clusterfunk VOR" -- as you're frantically trying to find "Clusterfunk"
>>on one of your sectional maps that are strewn around the cockpit.
>>And that's the best-case scenario -- often you can't even get through
>>to them.
>
> Well. I may be raising some questions about MY pilot status here. But
> I've been surviving in the air for a long time (35 years next month)
> using FSS for my weather info and I've never found it to be all that
> much of a problem finding those storms out 56 m on the "Clusterfunk"
> 223 rad. Though I'll have to admit that the small print on a sectional
> seems to be getting smaller every year.
>>
>>Compare this with the incredible utility of having Nexrad radar, with
>>a satellite overlay, displaying "live" (well, okay, 4 to 9 minutes
>>old) in the cockpit, showing you precisely what the weather is doing
>>ahead, and it's easy to spot a pretender.
>
> I can certainly understand the convenience of a live display.
> I don't have it and I've never even seen it in action, but I could
> find a use for it.
> I'll probably have it, someday, but I've always had a tendency to buy
> a generation or two below "state of the art". And, only then, when I
> NEED to replace something.
> Yea, I'm a cheap SOB. :)
> Maybe I'll make you an offer on yours when you upgrade.
>>

Yeah, these toys are all fine things.

Using them in ignorance is not.

>>Only someone who has never actually walked the walk would talk such
>>nonsense.
>
> Well, my first "calculator" was a slide rule.So I have a bit of a
> higher comfort level with low tech than you kids. I grew up before the
> "instant gratification" generation came along.
>
> And I'd still wager that "Bertie" knows his way around an airplane.
>

I even know how to find the coffee urn.

Bertie

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 30th 08, 02:18 PM

> Well, my first "calculator" was a slide rule.So I have a bit of a higher
> comfort level with low tech than you kids. I grew up before the "instant
> gratification" generation came along.

No one is arguing that you can't fly without a 496 and live weather. Far
from it -- I fly the Ercoupe more than the Pathfinder nowadays, and I tell
the weather in that plane by hanging my arm out the canopy and feeling the
air...

;-)

However, "Bertie" purports to be some sort of "master pilot" here, when, in
fact, he's obviously never flown with on-board weather. Or, worse, he
*has* flown with on-board weather, and still doesn't see the utility of it
versus calling Flight Service?

Either scenario is absurd, and no experienced pilot in the year 2008 would
make such statements.

> And I'd still wager that "Bertie" knows his way around an airplane.

So does MX, but that doesn't prove much.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 30th 08, 02:19 PM

> IMO, both suck, just they suck in different ways.

Well, McCain is at least a veteran.

Oh, wait -- we *were* talking about politics, right?

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 30th 08, 02:38 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:DMbuk.265406$TT4.221634@attbi_s22:

>> Well, my first "calculator" was a slide rule.So I have a bit of a
>> higher comfort level with low tech than you kids. I grew up before
>> the "instant gratification" generation came along.
>
> No one is arguing that you can't fly without a 496 and live weather.
> Far from it -- I fly the Ercoupe more than the Pathfinder nowadays,
> and I tell the weather in that plane by hanging my arm out the canopy
> and feeling the air...
>
> ;-)
>
> However, "Bertie" purports to be some sort of "master pilot" here,
> when, in fact, he's obviously never flown with on-board weather.

Yes, I have you moron.

Or,
> worse, he *has* flown with on-board weather, and still doesn't see the
> utility of it versus calling Flight Service?

I can see the utilty of it.

>
> Either scenario is absurd, and no experienced pilot in the year 2008
> would make such statements.
>
>> And I'd still wager that "Bertie" knows his way around an airplane.
>
> So does MX, but that doesn't prove much.

No he does't you fjukkktard.

And th efact that you can't tell the difference says more about you than
anyone needs to know.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 30th 08, 02:38 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in news:YNbuk.320454
$yE1.170165@attbi_s21:

>> IMO, both suck, just they suck in different ways.
>
> Well, McCain is at least a veteran.

Yeah, so what?

Bertie

Ramsey

August 30th 08, 03:02 PM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...

Mercy snip->
>
> Bertie
>

Then prove it dip****.

I see enough nonsense in your babble, that I have to agree with Jay. You're
nothing but bull****. You might fool the less experienced, but you
underestimate many of us.

Your severe control tendencies, childish babbling when cornered on an issue,
and worship of all the kook and troll nonsense - clearly marks you as
someone with very serious mental health issues. Not to mention your
inability to ignore a post under your name.

I have often been very tempted to keep tweaking you until even your most
adamant supports could no longer deign it. But it's just not worth the all
the noise.

You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to terms with
your own personal issues. And if by accident you really are a pilot, I pity
anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to work with you. I know your
type very well, I grew up next door neighbor just like you.

Ramsey

August 30th 08, 03:09 PM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> news:Bu1uk.264679$TT4.149173@attbi_s22:
>
>>> Mx on the other hand lures them in by the dozens. Let's them waste
>>> hours trying to explain (and argue with each other) the most simple
>>> concepts, and then spanks them for being stupid enough to answer him.
>>
>> You're right, of course, but I'll still take ten MXs for every one
>> "Bertie". At least MX is entertaining (and occasionally starts some
>> VERY interesting, on-topic threads) while "Bertie" is just an
>> embarrassment.
>
>
> Bertie has your number.
>
>
>
> Bertie

Bull****, you don't understand yourself, much less anyone else.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 30th 08, 03:10 PM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> Mercy snip->
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> Then prove it dip****.

Prove what?

>
> I see enough nonsense in your babble, that I have to agree with Jay.
> You're nothing but bull****. You might fool the less experienced, but
> you underestimate many of us.
>

Really?

do tell.

> Your severe control tendencies, childish babbling when cornered on an
> issue, and worship of all the kook and troll nonsense - clearly marks
> you as someone with very serious mental health issues. Not to mention
> your inability to ignore a post under your name.

Inability?

You miss the point MAxie.
>
> I have often been very tempted to keep tweaking you until even your
> most adamant supports could no longer deign it. But it's just not
> worth the all the noise.

Bwawhahwha!

>
> You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to terms
> with your own personal issues. And if by accident you really are a
> pilot, I pity anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to work with
> you. I know your type very well, I grew up next door neighbor just
> like you.

Did he hurt you?

:(

Bertie
>
>
>

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 30th 08, 03:13 PM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>> news:Bu1uk.264679$TT4.149173@attbi_s22:
>>
>>>> Mx on the other hand lures them in by the dozens. Let's them waste
>>>> hours trying to explain (and argue with each other) the most simple
>>>> concepts, and then spanks them for being stupid enough to answer him.
>>>
>>> You're right, of course, but I'll still take ten MXs for every one
>>> "Bertie". At least MX is entertaining (and occasionally starts some
>>> VERY interesting, on-topic threads) while "Bertie" is just an
>>> embarrassment.
>>
>>
>> Bertie has your number.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Bull****, you don't understand yourself, much less anyone else.
>

Berti ehas your number too, Maxie..

It's "zero"

Bertie

Ramsey

August 30th 08, 03:27 PM

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote
>
>> If you can't see by now, that silence will solve nothing, then you must
>> be totally blind.
>
> If YOU can't see that silence, and informing new people via back channels,
> (or one time in a post) as to the situation, then you must be blind.
>
> It HAS worked before.
>
> Remember the Bass wars?
>
> Hint: Seem him around lately?
>
> Wake up, indeed.
> --
> Jim in NC
>
>

Ok, then let's do it your way. We'll start with Mx. What do we need to do?

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 30th 08, 03:31 PM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Morgans" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote
>>
>>> If you can't see by now, that silence will solve nothing, then you
>>> must be totally blind.
>>
>> If YOU can't see that silence, and informing new people via back
>> channels, (or one time in a post) as to the situation, then you must
>> be blind.
>>
>> It HAS worked before.
>>
>> Remember the Bass wars?
>>
>> Hint: Seem him around lately?
>>
>> Wake up, indeed.
>> --
>> Jim in NC
>>
>>
>
> Ok, then let's do it your way. We'll start with Mx. What do we need to
> do?

Wow, yet another dumb and dumber team.

Excellent!

Bertie

Ramsey

August 30th 08, 03:39 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:Bu1uk.264679$TT4.149173@attbi_s22...
>> Mx on the other hand lures them in by the dozens. Let's them waste hours
>> trying to explain (and argue with each other) the most simple concepts,
>> and then spanks them for being stupid enough to answer him.
>
> You're right, of course, but I'll still take ten MXs for every one
> "Bertie". At least MX is entertaining (and occasionally starts some VERY
> interesting, on-topic threads) while "Bertie" is just an embarrassment.
> --

I think they are both very much alike, but Anthony has a little more control
over his destructive side.

I think Anthony sees himself as a passive genius, while Bertie seems to be
more of the garden variety hillbilly-push-n-shove, know-it-all.

Whatever their actual skill sets include, neither demonstrate any ability to
relate to people, or work as a team.

Morgans[_2_]

August 30th 08, 04:00 PM

"Jay Honeck" < wrote

> Well, McCain is at least a veteran.
>
> Oh, wait -- we *were* talking about politics, right?

<Chuckle>

I was thinking, as I wrote it, how it seemed to be the same thing we usually
face at election time.

My prediction is that McCain just hit a home run. He picked a woman for VP,
which will sit well with many Hillary fans.

He picked a big time reformer, which should go a long way towards luring
votes in from disgruntled Republicans, people that like the Dem's
candidate's reform platform who don't think they are ready for the person,
and independents that just want a change, and want their vote to count.

The funny part is that the joke is on all of them. The VP doesn't mean
squat, unless the president croaks.
--
Jim in NC

B A R R Y[_2_]

August 30th 08, 05:28 PM

Morgans wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" < wrote
>
>> Well, McCain is at least a veteran.
>>
>> Oh, wait -- we *were* talking about politics, right?
>
> <Chuckle>
>
> I was thinking, as I wrote it, how it seemed to be the same thing we usually
> face at election time.
>
> My prediction is that McCain just hit a home run. He picked a woman for VP,
> which will sit well with many Hillary fans.
>
> He picked a big time reformer, which should go a long way towards luring
> votes in from disgruntled Republicans, people that like the Dem's
> candidate's reform platform who don't think they are ready for the person,
> and independents that just want a change, and want their vote to count.
>
> The funny part is that the joke is on all of them. The VP doesn't mean
> squat, unless the president croaks.

ANWR is also in her home state...

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

August 30th 08, 07:09 PM

on 8/30/2008 9:02 AM Ramsey said the following:
> You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to terms with
> your own personal issues. And if by accident you really are a pilot, I pity
> anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to work with you. I know your
> type very well, I grew up next door neighbor just like you.

And did he warn you to never tell your mommy about the little games you
played together? That would explain a lot about you, Maxie...

Ramsey

August 30th 08, 07:41 PM

"Bich Ahrens" > wrote in message
ouse.com...
> on 8/30/2008 9:02 AM Ramsey said the following:
>> You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to terms
>> with your own personal issues. And if by accident you really are a pilot,
>> I pity anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to work with you. I
>> know your type very well, I grew up next door neighbor just like you.
>
> And did he warn you to never tell your mommy about the little games you
> played together? That would explain a lot about you, Maxie...

Ah, but that sounds like the voice of experience Bich.

Did we strike a nerve?

Is that the connection between Bertie and Bich?

That would explain a lot about you too Bich. Why a grown man, and supposed
pilot, would waste his time running around on the Usenet defending some
lamer that wastes his time haunting the troll groups and websites. Lost in
some fascination that he is some kind of world class celebrity, for his
cowardly personal attacks on anyone that disagrees with him, or resists his
control of their forum.

Why else would a supposed pilot want to assist some total stranger in
wrecking a public forum, dedicated to furthering the practice of one of his
favorite activities. It must be personal, have your tried therapy?

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 31st 08, 02:15 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:Bu1uk.264679$TT4.149173@attbi_s22...
>>> Mx on the other hand lures them in by the dozens. Let's them waste
>>> hours trying to explain (and argue with each other) the most simple
>>> concepts, and then spanks them for being stupid enough to answer
>>> him.
>>
>> You're right, of course, but I'll still take ten MXs for every one
>> "Bertie". At least MX is entertaining (and occasionally starts some
>> VERY interesting, on-topic threads) while "Bertie" is just an
>> embarrassment. --
>
> I think they are both very much alike, but Anthony has a little more
> control over his destructive side.

Uh, yeh.

You obviously don't know what control is, puppet boi.
>
> I think Anthony sees himself as a passive genius, while Bertie seems
> to be more of the garden variety hillbilly-push-n-shove, know-it-all.
>
> Whatever their actual skill sets include, neither demonstrate any
> ability to relate to people, or work as a team.

Snort!

I'll sk my crew for a reference afterwards, will I?

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 31st 08, 02:17 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> Mercy snip->
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> Then prove it dip****.
>
> I see enough nonsense in your babble, that I have to agree with Jay.
> You're nothing but bull****. You might fool the less experienced, but
> you underestimate many of us.
>
> Your severe control tendencies, childish babbling when cornered on an
> issue, and worship of all the kook and troll nonsense - clearly marks
> you as someone with very serious mental health issues. Not to mention
> your inability to ignore a post under your name.
>
> I have often been very tempted to keep tweaking you until even your
> most adamant supports could no longer deign it. But it's just not
> worth the all the noise.

Oh tweak away, k00kie boi.
>
> You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to terms
> with your own personal issues. And if by accident you really are a
> pilot, I pity anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to work with
> you. I know your type very well,

Yes, I know. you hate anyone who is smarter than you,

Just about the whole world, in fact!

I grew up next door neighbor just
> like you.

Bwawhahwhahw!

Hurt you did he?

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 31st 08, 02:18 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bich Ahrens" > wrote in message
> ouse.com...
>> on 8/30/2008 9:02 AM Ramsey said the following:
>>> You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to
>>> terms with your own personal issues. And if by accident you really
>>> are a pilot, I pity anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to
>>> work with you. I know your type very well, I grew up next door
>>> neighbor just like you.
>>
>> And did he warn you to never tell your mommy about the little games
>> you played together? That would explain a lot about you, Maxie...
>
> Ah, but that sounds like the voice of experience Bich.
>
> Did we strike a nerve?
>
> Is that the connection between Bertie and Bich?
>
> That would explain a lot about you too Bich. Why a grown man, and
> supposed pilot, would waste his time running around on the Usenet
> defending some lamer that wastes his time haunting the troll groups
> and websites.

Websites?

they have websites?

> Lost in some fascination that he is some kind of world
> class celebrity, for his cowardly personal attacks on anyone that
> disagrees with him, or resists his control of their forum.

The only one I'm controlling here is you, k00kie boi.
>
> Why else would a supposed pilot want to assist some total stranger in
> wrecking a public forum, dedicated to furthering the practice of one
> of his favorite activities. It must be personal, have your tried
> therapy?

I just post..

Others do the wrecking....

Bertie
>
>
>

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 31st 08, 04:23 AM

> My prediction is that McCain just hit a home run. He picked a woman for
> VP, which will sit well with many Hillary fans.

Agree 100%.

I haven't been an overly enthusiastic McCain supporter, but his VP selection
has converted me. It was a truly bold stroke that made Barrack "Hope &
Change" Obama's selection of Joe "Old-school-more-of-the-same-Washington-BS"
Biden look positively timid.

Check out her webpage. She's pictured in her Super Cub on floats! Now
THAT is my kind of VP...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 31st 08, 07:43 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:z8ouk.266279$TT4.3639@attbi_s22:

>> My prediction is that McCain just hit a home run. He picked a woman
>> for VP, which will sit well with many Hillary fans.
>
> Agree 100%.
>
> I haven't been an overly enthusiastic McCain supporter, but his VP
> selection has converted me. It was a truly bold stroke that made
> Barrack "Hope & Change" Obama's selection of Joe
> "Old-school-more-of-the-same-Washington-BS" Biden look positively
> timid.
>
> Check out her webpage. She's pictured in her Super Cub on floats!
> Now THAT is my kind of VP...

Yeah, right.

Bertie

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

August 31st 08, 07:59 AM

on 8/30/2008 1:41 PM Ramsey said the following:
> "Bich Ahrens" > wrote in message
> ouse.com...
>> on 8/30/2008 9:02 AM Ramsey said the following:
>>> You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to terms
>>> with your own personal issues. And if by accident you really are a pilot,
>>> I pity anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to work with you. I
>>> know your type very well, I grew up next door neighbor just like you.
>> And did he warn you to never tell your mommy about the little games you
>> played together? That would explain a lot about you, Maxie...
>
> Ah, but that sounds like the voice of experience Bich.

Experience in recognizing psychotics like you on Usenet, absolutely.

> Did we strike a nerve?

We? All those voices in your head are getting more real all the time,
are they?

> Why else would a supposed pilot want to assist some total stranger in
> wrecking a public forum, dedicated to furthering the practice of one of his
> favorite activities.

I'm not assisting you, Maxie. I'm merely mocking you as the moron you are.

Martin Hotze[_2_]

August 31st 08, 10:08 AM

Morgans schrieb:
> My prediction is that McCain just hit a home run.

IBTD

> He picked a woman for VP,
> which will sit well with many Hillary fans.

IBTD. If she is really as she was presented on several news channels
here, well, than the picture we have here (stereotypes) is well served.

from these news:
- former modell (2nd place)
- pro guns
- pro death penalty
- pro drilling in oekological sensitive areas
- 'anti-green'
- very conservative

these points - IMHO - do not serve Hillary fans. It is not enought to
share the same chromosome setup. :-)

#m

Martin Hotze[_2_]

August 31st 08, 10:11 AM

Jay Honeck schrieb:
>> My prediction is that McCain just hit a home run. He picked a woman for
>> VP, which will sit well with many Hillary fans.
>
> Agree 100%.

hu?

> I haven't been an overly enthusiastic McCain supporter, but his VP selection
> has converted me.

hu?

> It was a truly bold stroke that made Barrack "Hope &
> Change" Obama's selection of Joe "Old-school-more-of-the-same-Washington-BS"
> Biden look positively timid.
>
> Check out her webpage. She's pictured in her Super Cub on floats! Now
> THAT is my kind of VP...

well, you're easy to convince. A wife and a plane, THAT's the way to go.
hmmm.

#m

Jay Honeck[_2_]

August 31st 08, 02:00 PM

> well, you're easy to convince. A wife and a plane, THAT's the way to go.
> hmmm.

And, don't forget, McCain's wife owns a beer distribution company...

:-)

Seriously, however, all of Obama's talk about "Hope & Change" (whatever that
means) seemed to go out the window when he selected "More of the Same" Biden
as his running mate. Until then, he seemed like the real maverick in the
race.

McCain's selection of Governor Palin, on the other hand, represents a bold
new direction, while also harkening back to the "pre-RINO days" (RINO=
"Republican In Name Only" -- the idiots who were elected as Republicans, and
then abandoned all of their principles the moment they hit Washington) of
the Republican party.

She's fiscally conservative (thank goodness), pro-family without being
sickeningly uber-religious, well educated, well spoken, and is comfortable
in front of cameras. That's called a "home run" in politics, and McCain
showed (for at least this moment) a true stroke of leadership genius when he
took this very risky step.

Also, despite what you say about her politics being different than
Hillary's, I think she may sway a lot of women voters, for two reasons:

1. There *are* a lot of single-issue voters, and being a woman is a big
reason they will vote for her.

2. A lot of women HATED Hillary. There was no "middle ground" with
Hillary -- you either loved her, or hated her, and I know just as many women
who despised her as loved her. Palin, on the other hand, seems to be
well-liked by all women, at least so far.

That, of course, can turn on a dime in our country. All it will take is one
compromising photograph, or one sniff of a shady deal, and POOF -- her
candidacy will be gone. It's funny how our system can be so full of
corruption on the one hand, and yet the candidates themselves must be
personally beyond reproach or the media will crucify them.

Either way, whatever happens, this presidential race just went from being a
real yawner to a lot of fun!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Martin Hotze[_2_]

August 31st 08, 03:22 PM

Jay Honeck schrieb:
>> well, you're easy to convince. A wife and a plane, THAT's the way to go.
>> hmmm.
>
> And, don't forget, McCain's wife owns a beer distribution company...
>
> :-)

beer? what "beer"?

> Seriously, however, all of Obama's talk about "Hope & Change" (whatever that
> means) seemed to go out the window when he selected "More of the Same" Biden
> as his running mate. Until then, he seemed like the real maverick in the
> race.

hm, he probably wanted somebody for the more conservative thinking
people. Many said that Obama will be lost in DC, so this might have been
a good decision.

> McCain's selection of Governor Palin, on the other hand, represents a bold
> new direction,

what's new? maybe that some people came to mind that Alaska is part of
the States ...

> while also harkening back to the "pre-RINO days" (RINO=
> "Republican In Name Only" -- the idiots who were elected as Republicans, and
> then abandoned all of their principles the moment they hit Washington) of
> the Republican party.
>
> She's fiscally conservative (thank goodness), pro-family without being
> sickeningly uber-religious, well educated, well spoken, and is comfortable
> in front of cameras. That's called a "home run" in politics, and McCain
> showed (for at least this moment) a true stroke of leadership genius when he
> took this very risky step.

my first impression of her was "a man in the body of a woman".
at least here photos firing a machine gun at a shooting ranch is a good
way to stop your political carreer.

> Also, despite what you say about her politics being different than
> Hillary's, I think she may sway a lot of women voters, for two reasons:
>
> 1. There *are* a lot of single-issue voters, and being a woman is a big
> reason they will vote for her.

OK, I have to give in ... the election is in the USA.

> 2. A lot of women HATED Hillary. There was no "middle ground" with
> Hillary -- you either loved her, or hated her, and I know just as many women
> who despised her as loved her. Palin, on the other hand, seems to be
> well-liked by all women, at least so far.

hmm.

> That, of course, can turn on a dime in our country. All it will take is one
> compromising photograph, or one sniff of a shady deal, and POOF -- her
> candidacy will be gone. It's funny how our system can be so full of
> corruption on the one hand, and yet the candidates themselves must be
> personally beyond reproach or the media will crucify them.

hihi. funny people, funny country. oh well ...

> Either way, whatever happens, this presidential race just went from being a
> real yawner to a lot of fun!

it already is ... boring.

#m

BTW: haven't you said that you're in Europe this time of year?

john smith

August 31st 08, 03:24 PM

Obama/Biden did their dog and pony show here in Dublin OH yesterday
evening. It is amazing how truely stupid the average American is. Less
than 30% of all eligible voters are registerd, yet they will go stand in
line for six or more hours to listen to a pair of politicians talk for
one hour about things they have absolutely no intention of doing.

I wonder how many of the attendees failed to realize that the cards they
were REQUIRED to fill out to gain admission were solely for the purpose
of monetizing a mailing list?

Then there was the yellow-card/pink-card thing.
If you contributed significant AMU's (note necessary aviation content),
you receive a yellow-card, didn't have to wait in line and were give a
seat adjacent to the stage set up in the middle of the field.

If you were given a pink-card, after you fill out the requisite
information card, you still had to stand in line and find a place to
stand once you passed the metal detector and TSA (the only local
organization with sufficient equipment that could be set up on-site on
short notice) screening.

Much ado about nothing.

Ramsey

August 31st 08, 03:33 PM

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
ouse.com...

Damn Rich Bich, looks like you and Mikey Mouth have both been taking hat
dancing lessons from Buttlipps.

I would think supposed grown men and pilots would have higher goals than
running the Usenet playing suckup for some troll wannabe like Buttlipps,
but I guess not.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 31st 08, 06:32 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:dCwuk.321869$yE1.134098@attbi_s21:

>> well, you're easy to convince. A wife and a plane, THAT's the way to
>> go. hmmm.
>
> And, don't forget, McCain's wife owns a beer distribution company...
>
>:-)
>
> Seriously, however, all of Obama's talk about "Hope & Change"
> (whatever that means)

here's an online dictionary.

dictionary.reference.com

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 31st 08, 06:35 PM

John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-D2286B.10241331082008
@nntp.aioe.org:

> Obama/Biden did their dog and pony show here in Dublin OH yesterday
> evening. It is amazing how truely stupid the average American is. Less
> than 30% of all eligible voters are registerd, yet they will go stand in
> line for six or more hours to listen to a pair of politicians talk for
> one hour about things they have absolutely no intention of doing.

Really?
How many of the people who stood in line are not registered?

Did you take a straw poll?

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 31st 08, 06:36 PM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
> ouse.com...
>
> Damn Rich Bich, looks like you and Mikey Mouth have both been taking hat
> dancing lessons from Buttlipps.
>
> I would think supposed grown men and pilots would have higher goals than
> running the Usenet playing suckup for some troll wannabe like Buttlipps,
> but I guess not.

Snort!

Oh sweet irony.

Bertie

Shirl

August 31st 08, 08:18 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> She's fiscally conservative (thank goodness), pro-family without being
> sickeningly uber-religious, well educated, well spoken, and is comfortable
> in front of cameras. That's called a "home run" in politics, and McCain
> showed (for at least this moment) a true stroke of leadership genius
> when he took this very risky step.

I couldn't disagree more that it was "genius," but I do agree it was
risky. I had been on the fence, and it's a deal breaker for me.

There are plenty of fiscally conservative, pro-family, well-educated,
well-spoken, comfortable-in-front-of-cameras people who aren't any more
QUALIFIED to *possibly* be our next President than Ms. Palin. Of all the
people McCain knows from his lengthy career in politics, Ms. Palin is
the most qualified person he can come up with to be our Commander in
Chief in his absence? We're supposed to be happy about that? Tells me
all I need to know about his decision-making as far as who he, as
President, would appoint to various position ON OUR BEHALF ... i.e.,
someone he's known for 6 months and met with *twice*. That's not exactly
confidence-inspiring!

Genius? I have a different word for it.

> Also, despite what you say about her politics being different than
> Hillary's, I think she may sway a lot of women voters, for two reasons:
>
> 1. There *are* a lot of single-issue voters, and being a woman is a big
> reason they will vote for her.

I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I want
someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience to take over if something
should happen to him. Less than a handful of years in Alaska and an
activist in the PTA aren't what I consider qualified to be POTUS, and
that *is* what people consider when a 72-year-old presidential candidate
with prior health issues picks a running mate.

And I'm a pilot, too, but the fact that she owns a Cub on floats isn't a
relevant reason for me to automatically vote for her, either!

> 2. A lot of women HATED Hillary. There was no "middle ground" with
> Hillary -- you either loved her, or hated her, and I know just as many women
> who despised her as loved her. Palin, on the other hand, seems to be
> well-liked by all women, at least so far.

She's not "well-liked" by me and several other women I know, at least
not in the context of possibly being our next President! She may be a
great person and a good mom, but again, those qualities alone don't make
a person qualified to be President.

> That, of course, can turn on a dime in our country. All it will take is one
> compromising photograph, or one sniff of a shady deal, and POOF -- her
> candidacy will be gone.

How about QUALIFICATIONS?
I personally couldn't care less about compromising photos or if the baby
is hers or her daughter's ... I want someone who is QUALIFIED.

Shirl

Shirl

August 31st 08, 08:21 PM

Martin Hotze > wrote:
> IBTD. If she is really as she was presented on several news channels
> here, well, than the picture we have here (stereotypes) is well served.
>
> from these news:
> - former modell (2nd place)
> - pro guns
> - pro death penalty
> - pro drilling in oekological sensitive areas
> - 'anti-green'
> - very conservative
>
> these points - IMHO - do not serve Hillary fans. It is not enought to
> share the same chromosome setup. :-)

The suggestion (and I do realize that's the idea) that many women who
supported Hillary will support Palin *just because she is also a woman*,
regardless of her politics or her lack of qualifications, is downright
insulting.

john smith

August 31st 08, 08:45 PM

In article >,
Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

> John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-D2286B.10241331082008
> @nntp.aioe.org:
>
> > Obama/Biden did their dog and pony show here in Dublin OH yesterday
> > evening. It is amazing how truely stupid the average American is. Less
> > than 30% of all eligible voters are registerd, yet they will go stand in
> > line for six or more hours to listen to a pair of politicians talk for
> > one hour about things they have absolutely no intention of doing.
>
> Really?
> How many of the people who stood in line are not registered?
> Did you take a straw poll?

Curiously, that wasn't a question on the Obama/Biden admission
registration card. That would certainly have provided some useful
information, wouldn't it? Of course, some people lie about everything on
those cards so it is difficult to determine an accurate number.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

August 31st 08, 08:55 PM

John Smith > wrote in
:

> In article >,
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>> John Smith > wrote in
>> news:jsmith-D2286B.10241331082008 @nntp.aioe.org:
>>
>> > Obama/Biden did their dog and pony show here in Dublin OH yesterday
>> > evening. It is amazing how truely stupid the average American is.
>> > Less than 30% of all eligible voters are registerd, yet they will
>> > go stand in line for six or more hours to listen to a pair of
>> > politicians talk for one hour about things they have absolutely no
>> > intention of doing.
>>
>> Really?
>> How many of the people who stood in line are not registered?
>> Did you take a straw poll?
>
> Curiously, that wasn't a question on the Obama/Biden admission
> registration card. That would certainly have provided some useful
> information, wouldn't it? Of course, some people lie about everything
> on those cards so it is difficult to determine an accurate number.

So, what percentage do you reckon would have lied as well as not being
registered?

Bertie

[email protected]

August 31st 08, 09:01 PM

On Aug 30, 1:41 pm, "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote:
> "Bich Ahrens" > wrote in message
>
> ouse.com...
>
> > on 8/30/2008 9:02 AM Ramsey said the following:
> >> You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to terms
> >> with your own personal issues. And if by accident you really are a pilot,
> >> I pity anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to work with you. I
> >> know your type very well, I grew up next door neighbor just like you.
>
> > And did he warn you to never tell your mommy about the little games you
> > played together? That would explain a lot about you, Maxie...
>
> Ah, but that sounds like the voice of experience Bich.
>
> Did we strike a nerve?
>
> Is that the connection between Bertie and Bich?
>
> That would explain a lot about you too Bich. Why a grown man, and supposed
> pilot, would waste his time running around on the Usenet defending some
> lamer that wastes his time haunting the troll groups and websites. Lost in
> some fascination that he is some kind of world class celebrity, for his
> cowardly personal attacks on anyone that disagrees with him, or resists his
> control of their forum.

And what, geni-ass boi, does your reply to a so called 'troll' say
about you?

Not so grown and not so manly perhaps?

[email protected]

August 31st 08, 09:04 PM

On Aug 31, 9:33 am, "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote:
> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
>
> ouse.com...
>
> Damn Rich Bich, looks like you and Mikey Mouth have both been taking hat
> dancing lessons from Buttlipps.
>
> I would think supposed grown men and pilots would have higher goals than
> running the Usenet playing suckup for some troll wannabe like Buttlipps,
> but I guess not.

Hell no; you're proof of that. Unless of course you don't fall into
either 'grown' or 'man'.
Netkopp. Hows your blood pressure? I'll bet you're a bunch of laffs
when you get cut off in traffic, all spluttery and spittle flying
about the handlebars of your tricycle.

[email protected]

August 31st 08, 09:08 PM

On Aug 31, 8:00 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > well, you're easy to convince. A wife and a plane, THAT's the way to go.
> > hmmm.
>
> And, don't forget, McCain's wife owns a beer distribution company...
>
> :-)
>
> Seriously, however, all of Obama's talk about "Hope & Change" (whatever that
> means) seemed to go out the window when he selected "More of the Same" Biden
> as his running mate. Until then, he seemed like the real maverick in the
> race.
>
> McCain's selection of Governor Palin, on the other hand, represents a bold
> new direction, while also harkening back to the "pre-RINO days" (RINO=
> "Republican In Name Only" -- the idiots who were elected as Republicans, and
> then abandoned all of their principles the moment they hit Washington) of
> the Republican party.
>
> She's fiscally conservative (thank goodness), pro-family without being
> sickeningly uber-religious, well educated, well spoken, and is comfortable
> in front of cameras. That's called a "home run" in politics, and McCain
> showed (for at least this moment) a true stroke of leadership genius when he
> took this very risky step.
>
> Also, despite what you say about her politics being different than
> Hillary's, I think she may sway a lot of women voters, for two reasons:
>
> 1. There *are* a lot of single-issue voters, and being a woman is a big
> reason they will vote for her.
>
> 2. A lot of women HATED Hillary. There was no "middle ground" with
> Hillary -- you either loved her, or hated her, and I know just as many women
> who despised her as loved her. Palin, on the other hand, seems to be
> well-liked by all women, at least so far.
>

That was my thinking too, until it turned out she was a Buchnan
supporter and seriously anti-abortion.

Now I don't know any Hillary-ites but I doubt that many of them would
shoot themselves in the gender foot by voting for a woman whose views
are so divergent from those represented by Hillary.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

August 31st 08, 09:13 PM

wrote in
:

> On Aug 30, 1:41 pm, "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote:
>> "Bich Ahrens" > wrote in message
>>
>> ouse.com...
>>
>> > on 8/30/2008 9:02 AM Ramsey said the following:
>> >> You are truly twisted, and will always suffer, until you come to
>> >> terms with your own personal issues. And if by accident you really
>> >> are a pilot, I pity anyone that flies on your aircraft, or has to
>> >> work with you. I know your type very well, I grew up next door
>> >> neighbor just like you.
>>
>> > And did he warn you to never tell your mommy about the little games
>> > you played together? That would explain a lot about you, Maxie...
>>
>> Ah, but that sounds like the voice of experience Bich.
>>
>> Did we strike a nerve?
>>
>> Is that the connection between Bertie and Bich?
>>
>> That would explain a lot about you too Bich. Why a grown man, and
>> supposed pilot, would waste his time running around on the Usenet
>> defending some lamer that wastes his time haunting the troll groups
>> and websites. Lost in some fascination that he is some kind of world
>> class celebrity, for his cowardly personal attacks on anyone that
>> disagrees with him, or resists his control of their forum.
>
> And what, geni-ass boi, does your reply to a so called 'troll' say
> about you?
>
> Not so grown and not so manly perhaps?
>
Why he's the caped crusader,fighting evil where e'er he may find it!

Bertie

Bob Noel

August 31st 08, 09:21 PM

In article >,
Shirl > wrote:

> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I want
> someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience to take over if something
> should happen to him. Less than a handful of years in Alaska and an
> activist in the PTA aren't what I consider qualified to be POTUS, and
> that *is* what people consider when a 72-year-old presidential candidate
> with prior health issues picks a running mate.

Somehow I have difficulty putting much emphasis on the complaint that
the GOP VP nominee isn't qualified to assume the responsibilities of
the president given the Dem's presidental nominee's qualifications.

I think there are more fundamental reasons to vote for Obama or
vote for McCain.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Shirl

August 31st 08, 09:38 PM

Bob Noel wrote:
> I think there are more fundamental reasons to
> vote for Obama or vote for McCain.

What's "fundamental" to one voter may not be viewed the same by another.
Clearly, a presidential candidate's choice for a running mate *is*
fundamental to many voters or there wouldn't be such a huge reaction to
this choice.

john smith

August 31st 08, 09:51 PM

In article >,
Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

> So, what percentage do you reckon would have lied as well as not being
> registered?

Statistically, only 30% of the population is registered to vote.
Maybe 5% lied about everything they wrote on the card.
The estimated crowd was 19,000.
Round numbers, 6300 were registered, 12,700 were not registered.
Say 1000 lied.

Jim Logajan

August 31st 08, 10:13 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> She's fiscally conservative (thank goodness)

Um, she promoted $500 million in Alaskan grants and benefits to a private
Canadian company, TransCanada. Promoted increases on taxes on oil
companies, which in turn allowed an increase of state payments to Alaskans
to $1200/year.

Neither of these is a sign of fiscal conservativism.

> pro-family without being sickeningly uber-religious,

She's a proponent of Intelligent Design and has proposed it be taught in
school alongside evolution.

> well educated,

I don't consider a BS in Communications - Journalism as an indicator of
being "well educated." Merely that the person is capable of being studious
and modestly disciplined.

Ramsey

August 31st 08, 10:14 PM

"John Smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>> So, what percentage do you reckon would have lied as well as not being
>> registered?
>
> Statistically, only 30% of the population is registered to vote.
> Maybe 5% lied about everything they wrote on the card.
> The estimated crowd was 19,000.
> Round numbers, 6300 were registered, 12,700 were not registered.
> Say 1000 lied.

Well, you just lost Bertie. You're talking fact and figures, he just wants
to bitch.

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

August 31st 08, 11:11 PM

on 8/31/2008 10:36 AM Bertie the Bunyip said the following:
> "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :
>
>> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
>> ouse.com...
>>
>> Damn Rich Bich, looks like you and Mikey Mouth have both been taking hat
>> dancing lessons from Buttlipps.
>>
>> I would think supposed grown men and pilots would have higher goals than
>> running the Usenet playing suckup for some troll wannabe like Buttlipps,
>> but I guess not.
>
> Snort!
>
> Oh sweet irony.

You have a real winner there, Bertie. He may keep you entertained for years!

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

August 31st 08, 11:38 PM

on 8/31/2008 6:00 AM Jay Honeck said the following:
> She's fiscally conservative (thank goodness), pro-family without being
> sickeningly uber-religious, well educated, well spoken, and is
> comfortable in front of cameras.

Only an idiot like you could consider her well-educated. A semester at
Hawaii Pacific College, followed by a transfer to North Idaho College,
and finally getting a degree in communications and journalism from the
University of Idaho. Not one of the powerhouses of journalism. Or higher
education in general, although the U did give us Larry Craig...

Kenton Bird, director of the University of Idaho's School of Journalism
and Mass Media, said Palin didn't write for the independent college
newspaper, The Argonaut, and didn't do any work for the university
television station KIUI while she was there.

"I wish I could say that I knew something about her, but I just don't,"
said Roy Atwood, the former director of the journalism program and the
faculty member who signed her application for graduation.

(source for quotes: Rebecca Boone, Associated Press)

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

August 31st 08, 11:41 PM

on 8/31/2008 12:21 PM Shirl said the following:
> The suggestion (and I do realize that's the idea) that many women who
> supported Hillary will support Palin *just because she is also a woman*,
> regardless of her politics or her lack of qualifications, is downright
> insulting.

But typical of Jay's level of intellectual analysis.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:07 AM

John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-AFAAAF.16514331082008
@nntp.aioe.org:

> In article >,
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>> So, what percentage do you reckon would have lied as well as not being
>> registered?
>
> Statistically, only 30% of the population is registered to vote.
> Maybe 5% lied about everything they wrote on the card.
> The estimated crowd was 19,000.
> Round numbers, 6300 were registered, 12,700 were not registered.
> Say 1000 lied.
>

Why would they do that?

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:08 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "John Smith" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article >,
>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>>> So, what percentage do you reckon would have lied as well as not
>>> being registered?
>>
>> Statistically, only 30% of the population is registered to vote.
>> Maybe 5% lied about everything they wrote on the card.
>> The estimated crowd was 19,000.
>> Round numbers, 6300 were registered, 12,700 were not registered.
>> Say 1000 lied.
>
> Well, you just lost Bertie. You're talking fact and figures, he just
> wants to bitch.

Facts?

He has facts?

Where?

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:09 AM

Rich Ahrens > wrote in
ouse.com:

> on 8/31/2008 10:36 AM Bertie the Bunyip said the following:
>> "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :
>>
>>> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
>>> ouse.com...
>>>
>>> Damn Rich Bich, looks like you and Mikey Mouth have both been taking
>>> hat dancing lessons from Buttlipps.
>>>
>>> I would think supposed grown men and pilots would have higher goals
>>> than running the Usenet playing suckup for some troll wannabe like
>>> Buttlipps, but I guess not.
>>
>> Snort!
>>
>> Oh sweet irony.
>
> You have a real winner there, Bertie. He may keep you entertained for
> years!
>

With luck!

Bertie

Ramsey

September 1st 08, 03:11 AM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> Rich Ahrens > wrote in
> ouse.com:
>
>> on 8/31/2008 10:36 AM Bertie the Bunyip said the following:
>>> "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :
>>>
>>>> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
>>>> ouse.com...
>>>>
>>>> Damn Rich Bich, looks like you and Mikey Mouth have both been taking
>>>> hat dancing lessons from Buttlipps.
>>>>
>>>> I would think supposed grown men and pilots would have higher goals
>>>> than running the Usenet playing suckup for some troll wannabe like
>>>> Buttlipps, but I guess not.
>>>
>>> Snort!
>>>
>>> Oh sweet irony.
>>
>> You have a real winner there, Bertie. He may keep you entertained for
>> years!
>>
>
> With luck!
>
>
> Bertie

You two certainly sound like a match made in heaven, by all means keep
dancing.

Ramsey

September 1st 08, 03:12 AM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :
>
>>
>> "John Smith" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article >,
>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>
>>>> So, what percentage do you reckon would have lied as well as not
>>>> being registered?
>>>
>>> Statistically, only 30% of the population is registered to vote.
>>> Maybe 5% lied about everything they wrote on the card.
>>> The estimated crowd was 19,000.
>>> Round numbers, 6300 were registered, 12,700 were not registered.
>>> Say 1000 lied.
>>
>> Well, you just lost Bertie. You're talking fact and figures, he just
>> wants to bitch.
>
>
> Facts?
>
> He has facts?
>
>
> Where?
>
>
>
> Bertie

Told ya..........

Ramsey

September 1st 08, 03:14 AM

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
ouse.com...

Who cares what you think, your a known dumb ass, just like MX.

Ramsey

September 1st 08, 03:14 AM

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
ouse.com...
>
> But typical of Jay's level of intellectual analysis.

Yeah buddy! Like a lamer like you had a clue about ANYONE'S intellect.

Morgans[_2_]

September 1st 08, 03:28 AM

"Martin Hotze" > wrote

> hihi. funny people, funny country. oh well ...
>
> it already is ... boring.

So Martin, since you live in what, Austria, and have no stake in the
election of a USA president, and you obviously think much less of the US,
why don't you....

STFU about OUR elections.

You really **** me off, sometimes. This is definitely one of them.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans[_2_]

September 1st 08, 03:35 AM

"Shirl" > wrote

> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I want
> someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience to take over if something
> should happen to him.

> And I'm a pilot, too, but the fact that she owns a Cub on floats isn't a
> relevant reason for me to automatically vote for her, either!

Yes, bud you might be an intelligent woman. Don't forget the fact that many
(most) people, women or men, are not very intelligent when it comes to
choosing a candidate, so being a woman is plenty qualifications for them.
--
Jim in NC

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 03:38 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :
>>
>>>
>>> "John Smith" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So, what percentage do you reckon would have lied as well as not
>>>>> being registered?
>>>>
>>>> Statistically, only 30% of the population is registered to vote.
>>>> Maybe 5% lied about everything they wrote on the card.
>>>> The estimated crowd was 19,000.
>>>> Round numbers, 6300 were registered, 12,700 were not registered.
>>>> Say 1000 lied.
>>>
>>> Well, you just lost Bertie. You're talking fact and figures, he just
>>> wants to bitch.
>>
>>
>> Facts?
>>
>> He has facts?
>>
>>
>> Where?
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Told ya..........
>
>
>

Ah, more sweet irony.

Who needs sugar for their tea?

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 03:39 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
> ouse.com...
>
> Who cares what you think, your a known dumb ass, just like MX.

You fgotta love this k00k.

He's just so damnned good!

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 03:39 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
> ouse.com...
>>
>> But typical of Jay's level of intellectual analysis.
>
> Yeah buddy! Like a lamer like you had a clue about ANYONE'S intellect.
>
>
>

Well, I think everyone has a very clear picture of your's.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 03:40 AM

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Martin Hotze" > wrote
>
>> hihi. funny people, funny country. oh well ...
>>
>> it already is ... boring.
>
> So Martin, since you live in what, Austria, and have no stake in the
> election of a USA president, and you obviously think much less of the
> US, why don't you....
>
> STFU about OUR elections.
>

That woulds be a fair comment if the US didn't poke it's nose into the
business of just about every country on earth.....

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 03:41 AM

"Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Rich Ahrens > wrote in
>> ouse.com:
>>
>>> on 8/31/2008 10:36 AM Bertie the Bunyip said the following:
>>>> "Ramsey" <@##@.^net> wrote in news:_Yxuk.25927$9u1.8886
@newsfe09.iad:
>>>>
>>>>> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
>>>>> ouse.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> Damn Rich Bich, looks like you and Mikey Mouth have both been
taking
>>>>> hat dancing lessons from Buttlipps.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would think supposed grown men and pilots would have higher
goals
>>>>> than running the Usenet playing suckup for some troll wannabe like
>>>>> Buttlipps, but I guess not.
>>>>
>>>> Snort!
>>>>
>>>> Oh sweet irony.
>>>
>>> You have a real winner there, Bertie. He may keep you entertained
for
>>> years!
>>>
>>
>> With luck!
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> You two certainly sound like a match made in heaven, by all means keep
> dancing.
>

OK

Bertie

Zebulon

September 1st 08, 03:51 AM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Morgans" > wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "Martin Hotze" > wrote
>>
>>> hihi. funny people, funny country. oh well ...
>>>
>>> it already is ... boring.
>>
>> So Martin, since you live in what, Austria, and have no stake in the
>> election of a USA president, and you obviously think much less of the
>> US, why don't you....
>>
>> STFU about OUR elections.
>>
>
> That woulds be a fair comment if the US didn't poke it's nose into the
> business of just about every country on earth.....
>
>
> Bertie

or if Bertie didn't poke his nose in everyone's conversation on the Usenet.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

September 1st 08, 04:41 AM

> Only an idiot like you could consider her well-educated.

Gosh, Rich, you really know how to forward a conversation.

I can only imagine that your father must've called you "stupid" every day of
your childhood. There is simply no other logical explanation for such a
bitter, surly, acidic disposition in an apparently sentient being.

Here's something your parents apparently forgot to teach you: Past the age
of five, it really doesn't make you look smarter to call other people dumb.
It only makes you look more pathetic.

I suggest counseling, although what you have is probably incurable.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

September 1st 08, 04:47 AM

>> The suggestion (and I do realize that's the idea) that many women who
>> supported Hillary will support Palin *just because she is also a woman*,
>> regardless of her politics or her lack of qualifications, is downright
>> insulting.

I'll wager that there are just as many women who will vote for McCain/Palin
because Palin is a woman, as there are blacks who will vote for Obama/Biden
because Obama is half-black.

Truth is, the average American is fairly politically unsophisticated, and
I'll bet we're talking about these types of single-issue voters numbering in
the millions -- which *could* be enough to swing a tight presidential
election.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Stella Starr

September 1st 08, 05:14 AM

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> She's fiscally conservative (thank goodness), pro-family without being
> sickeningly uber-religious,
Except for the part about wanting to teach creationism in public
schools, and how she'd make her teenage daughter bear a rapist's child
rather than consider letting her have an abortion. Ish.

Palin, on the other hand, seems to
> be well-liked by all women, at least so far.

Count again, dear. I've talked with a bunch just today who've said some
variation on "How stupid do they think we are?"
Not counting the McCain donors who've been pretending to be converted
Hilary supporters, the real former Hilary supporters don't plan to vote
against Obama, a man, by casting their vote for McCain, another man
whose politics are all the opposite of the party they support. Even if
he trots out a woman whose foreign policy expertise consists of being
located somewhere right across the ocean from Russia.

As a top government official, she'd be likely to do one thing: make the
former FEMA director's response to Katrina look good by comparison.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 05:17 AM

"Zebulon" <@###@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Morgans" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> "Martin Hotze" > wrote
>>>
>>>> hihi. funny people, funny country. oh well ...
>>>>
>>>> it already is ... boring.
>>>
>>> So Martin, since you live in what, Austria, and have no stake in the
>>> election of a USA president, and you obviously think much less of
>>> the US, why don't you....
>>>
>>> STFU about OUR elections.
>>>
>>
>> That woulds be a fair comment if the US didn't poke it's nose into
>> the business of just about every country on earth.....
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> or if Bertie didn't poke his nose in everyone's conversation on the
> Usenet.

Conversation?

You think this is a chatroom, clueless boi?

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 05:18 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:%vJuk.322749$yE1.16285@attbi_s21:

>> Only an idiot like you could consider her well-educated.
>
> Gosh, Rich, you really know how to forward a conversation.
>
> I can only imagine that your father must've called you "stupid" every
> day of your childhood. There is simply no other logical explanation
> for such a bitter, surly, acidic disposition in an apparently sentient
> being.
>
> Here's something your parents apparently forgot to teach you: Past
> the age of five, it really doesn't make you look smarter to call other
> people dumb. It only makes you look more pathetic.

Unless, of course, they are dumb.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 05:19 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:VAJuk.267783$TT4.15126@attbi_s22:

>>> The suggestion (and I do realize that's the idea) that many women
>>> who supported Hillary will support Palin *just because she is also a
>>> woman*, regardless of her politics or her lack of qualifications, is
>>> downright insulting.
>
> I'll wager that there are just as many women who will vote for
> McCain/Palin because Palin is a woman, as there are blacks who will
> vote for Obama/Biden because Obama is half-black.
>
> Truth is, the average American is fairly politically unsophisticated,

Good lord.

Bertie

Stella Starr

September 1st 08, 05:42 AM

Shirl wrote:

>
> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I want
> someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience

(waving hand frantically in air)

Me too!
What she said!

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 05:53 AM

Stella Starr > wrote in
:

> Shirl wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I want
>> someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>
> (waving hand frantically in air)
>
> Me too!
> What she said!
>

Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's policies,
but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a change.

But the real question is, "What does her mother look like?"

Also,"Any cellulite?"

These are the questions we need to be asking, people.

Bertie

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 06:06 AM

Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of vanity
comes this way, ye needled:

> Stella Starr > wrote in
> :
>
>> Shirl wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I want
>>> someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>
>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>
>> Me too!
>> What she said!
>>
>
> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's policies,
> but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a change.

**** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be classed as
being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or do you just see a
pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed spectacles?

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 06:15 AM

"Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of
> vanity comes this way, ye needled:
>
>> Stella Starr > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Shirl wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I
>>>> want someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>>
>>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>>
>>> Me too!
>>> What she said!
>>>
>>
>> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's
>> policies, but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a
>> change.
>
> **** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be classed
> as being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or do you
> just see a pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed
> spectacles?
>

That can be attractive in a kitsch kind of way...

She's definitely more attractive than Cheney, you have to admit.

Bertie

Zebulon

September 1st 08, 06:23 AM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> That can be attractive in a kitsch kind of way...
>
>
> She's definitely more attractive than Cheney, you have to admit.
>
> Bertie

Good job Bertie, ya the kooks running with ya again.

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 06:23 AM

Bertie the Bunyip, ye horn-mad traitorous rout, you talk greasily, your
lips grow foul, ye perorated:

> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of
>> vanity comes this way, ye needled:
>>
>>> Stella Starr > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Shirl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I
>>>>> want someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>>>
>>>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>>>
>>>> Me too!
>>>> What she said!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's
>>> policies, but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a
>>> change.
>>
>> **** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be classed
>> as being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or do you
>> just see a pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed
>> spectacles?
>>
>
> That can be attractive in a kitsch kind of way...

If not mind-boggling.

>
>
> She's definitely more attractive than Cheney, you have to admit.

Point conceded.

> Bertie
>

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 06:29 AM

"Zebulon" <@###@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> That can be attractive in a kitsch kind of way...
>>
>>
>> She's definitely more attractive than Cheney, you have to admit.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Good job Bertie, ya the kooks running with ya again.
>
>
>
>

Thnanknks,.s

It's good to be appreciated in one's own lifetime.

Couldn't have done it without you, of course.

You do realise that they're not k00ks. They're just k00k afficiandos,
right, Maxie?

Bertie

The God of Odd Statements, Henry Schmidt

September 1st 08, 07:12 AM

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 05:29:46 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip did most oddly
state:
> "Zebulon" wrote:
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" wrote...
>>> That can be attractive in a kitsch kind of way...
>>>
>>> She's definitely more attractive than Cheney, you have to admit.
>>
>> Good job Bertie, ya the kooks running with ya again.
>
> Thnanknks,.s
>
> It's good to be appreciated in one's own lifetime.
>
> Couldn't have done it without you, of course.
>
> You do realise that they're not k00ks. They're just k00k afficiandos,
> right, Maxie?

I don't believe Max grasps that he's a k00k...

--
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5; Chung Convict #28; Usenet Ruiner #5
Demon Lord of Confusion; Official Chung Demon; Top Asshole #3
Superfaggot; Wingnut's #1 World Class Coward (next to the French)
COOSN-029-06-71069; Most Hated Usenetizen of All Time #13; Lits Slut #16
Gutter Chix0r #17; BowTie's Spuriously Accused Pedo Photographer #4
AUK Psycho & Felon #21; Parrot & Zombie #2; AUK Hate Machine Cog #19
Anonymous Psycho Criminal #18
The posting nym is best removed from my posting address if your goal is
to speak with me in private.
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
"Atheists are people who have no invisible means of support"
Join my RuneScape clan!
http://z11.invisionfree.com/Holy_Pretzel_Cabal/index.php
Full name of clan: Cabal of the Holy International Discordian Internet
And Usenet Terrorist Pretzel

"A dog in the video I watched ****ed a human woman. The dog consented to
it and the woman consented to it. That is like one gay man consenting to
having sex with another. Do you approve of it?" -- Agamemnon watches
bestiality porn and compares it to gay sex. Message-ID:
>

"I know how you special busboys are.
You're crazy." -- John "special busboy" Wentzky, in Message-ID:
>

"Roe V Wade has zero bearing on my existence other than it affects it
adversely."
-- Johnny Wentzky never had much truck with "logic". Message-ID:
>

"F!ck moderation, free speech is a masculinist proverb and that's what
feminist manvagina's like yourself." -- posted
before finishing a thought, in MID:
om>

"Fredbot == SameAsB4 == TGOOS

"You are stalking me, even after I thrashed ya." -- PorchMonkey4Life,
a veritable combination of Sherlock Holmes and Doc Savage for the 21st
Century. No, really. Would I lie? MID: <zaUqh.2972$E35.415@trnddc02>

"He unleashes a fecal explosion he time he posts. He uses so many nyms
because he gets beaten so easily and so convincingly in flame wars and
tries to hide behind nyms in the hopes of getting a fresh start. To bad
for him that his lameness keep shining through like a beacon for all
tards (e.g., SameAs$B4, Demon Spawn, Barbara's Pus$y, FredBot,
TGOOS, ......, etc)" -- Monkey-man identifies <jitter> as me, among
others, in broken English, in MID: <Z_Xqh.3167$E35.215@trnddc02>

Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
Trainer of the above k00k
http://www.screedbomb.info/porchie/

Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2008
Hammer of Thor, July 2008

"Q: What do you call someone in the White House who is honest, caring,
and well-read?
A: A tourist." -- Anonymous

"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
>
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken

"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'

"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt

"It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American
people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration; with the
president's polls at an historic low, growing resistance to the war Iraq,
and the Democrats likely to take back the Congress in mid-term elections,
the Bush administration is on the ropes. And so it is particularly
worrying that President Bush has seen fit, at this juncture to, in effect,
declare himself dictator." -- Frank Morales
http://www.uruknet.biz/?p=m27769&hd=0&size=1&l=e&fark

"Right you are correct. Someone hooked me. I do believe in building
relationships. That is what Christians are required to do. I am amoral.
I am sure you know what that means. So are Scorpios. I am being
'protected' by the Formosa Rule because of my 'mental illness'. I am not
targeting 'teh Mop Jockey'. You are and you are using me as a bait.
Please stop. I have my own fish to reel in. Leave me alone. It is my hope
that I will be able to catch a fish and reel it in for you. Once my
retired bishop thought I was fishing for him and he took the bait, alas
it wasn't me and that spelled the demise of our relationship. Have a
little bit more faith in me. An Eastern Orthodox bishop thought I was
fishing for him and willingly, proudly and defiantly took the bait on
public record, and it wasn't even me. Give me a break." -- Atlanta
Olympiada "Erica" Kane yammered in
Message-ID: >

"It does to a certain extant physically and theoretically
it holds even into the quantum but there observational confirmation is
limited or non existent. That's the problem and the major stumbling
block to field unification. For Dr. Einstein held out that a physical
based field theory should be sought out and not left to quantum
uncertainty of how the universe primly base works. Man made coordinate
systems are fine without knowing from where or what is the base essence
of what the space as deduced field is composed of, but not totally
satisfactory. Anomalies keep space cropping up and scientists have to
keep adjusting for these unexpected events. It's like a blind man that
has memorized his physical surroundings to a point he feels very
comfortable until that one new or unexpected event pops up and he's lost
and fumbling." -- nightbat, in one of his more lucid moments.
Message-ID: >

The God of Odd Statements, Henry Schmidt

September 1st 08, 07:16 AM

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:06:09 -1200, Kadaitcha Man did most oddly state:
> Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of vanity
> comes this way, ye needled:
>> Stella Starr wrote...
>>> Shirl wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I want
>>>> someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>>
>>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>>
>>> Me too!
>>> What she said!
>>
>> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's policies,
>> but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a change.
>
> **** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be classed as
> being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or do you just see
> a pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed spectacles?

Oh, c'mon, she's attractive enough. She's just a typical Repug, is all.
Nice tits + nice face != nice person/good person/good leader. She'd use
her power for /her/ special interests.

--
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5; Chung Convict #28; Usenet Ruiner #5
Demon Lord of Confusion; Official Chung Demon; Top Asshole #3
Superfaggot; Wingnut's #1 World Class Coward (next to the French)
COOSN-029-06-71069; Most Hated Usenetizen of All Time #13; Lits Slut #16
Gutter Chix0r #17; BowTie's Spuriously Accused Pedo Photographer #4
AUK Psycho & Felon #21; Parrot & Zombie #2; AUK Hate Machine Cog #19
Anonymous Psycho Criminal #18
The posting nym is best removed from my posting address if your goal is
to speak with me in private.
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
"Atheists are people who have no invisible means of support"
Join my RuneScape clan!
http://z11.invisionfree.com/Holy_Pretzel_Cabal/index.php
Full name of clan: Cabal of the Holy International Discordian Internet
And Usenet Terrorist Pretzel

"A dog in the video I watched ****ed a human woman. The dog consented to
it and the woman consented to it. That is like one gay man consenting to
having sex with another. Do you approve of it?" -- Agamemnon watches
bestiality porn and compares it to gay sex. Message-ID:
>

"I know how you special busboys are.
You're crazy." -- John "special busboy" Wentzky, in Message-ID:
>

"Roe V Wade has zero bearing on my existence other than it affects it
adversely."
-- Johnny Wentzky never had much truck with "logic". Message-ID:
>

"F!ck moderation, free speech is a masculinist proverb and that's what
feminist manvagina's like yourself." -- posted
before finishing a thought, in MID:
om>

"Fredbot == SameAsB4 == TGOOS

"You are stalking me, even after I thrashed ya." -- PorchMonkey4Life,
a veritable combination of Sherlock Holmes and Doc Savage for the 21st
Century. No, really. Would I lie? MID: <zaUqh.2972$E35.415@trnddc02>

"He unleashes a fecal explosion he time he posts. He uses so many nyms
because he gets beaten so easily and so convincingly in flame wars and
tries to hide behind nyms in the hopes of getting a fresh start. To bad
for him that his lameness keep shining through like a beacon for all
tards (e.g., SameAs$B4, Demon Spawn, Barbara's Pus$y, FredBot,
TGOOS, ......, etc)" -- Monkey-man identifies <jitter> as me, among
others, in broken English, in MID: <Z_Xqh.3167$E35.215@trnddc02>

Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
Trainer of the above k00k
http://www.screedbomb.info/porchie/

Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2008
Hammer of Thor, July 2008

"Q: What do you call someone in the White House who is honest, caring,
and well-read?
A: A tourist." -- Anonymous

"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
>
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken

"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'

"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt

"It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American
people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration; with the
president's polls at an historic low, growing resistance to the war Iraq,
and the Democrats likely to take back the Congress in mid-term elections,
the Bush administration is on the ropes. And so it is particularly
worrying that President Bush has seen fit, at this juncture to, in effect,
declare himself dictator." -- Frank Morales
http://www.uruknet.biz/?p=m27769&hd=0&size=1&l=e&fark

"Right you are correct. Someone hooked me. I do believe in building
relationships. That is what Christians are required to do. I am amoral.
I am sure you know what that means. So are Scorpios. I am being
'protected' by the Formosa Rule because of my 'mental illness'. I am not
targeting 'teh Mop Jockey'. You are and you are using me as a bait.
Please stop. I have my own fish to reel in. Leave me alone. It is my hope
that I will be able to catch a fish and reel it in for you. Once my
retired bishop thought I was fishing for him and he took the bait, alas
it wasn't me and that spelled the demise of our relationship. Have a
little bit more faith in me. An Eastern Orthodox bishop thought I was
fishing for him and willingly, proudly and defiantly took the bait on
public record, and it wasn't even me. Give me a break." -- Atlanta
Olympiada "Erica" Kane yammered in
Message-ID: >

"It does to a certain extant physically and theoretically
it holds even into the quantum but there observational confirmation is
limited or non existent. That's the problem and the major stumbling
block to field unification. For Dr. Einstein held out that a physical
based field theory should be sought out and not left to quantum
uncertainty of how the universe primly base works. Man made coordinate
systems are fine without knowing from where or what is the base essence
of what the space as deduced field is composed of, but not totally
satisfactory. Anomalies keep space cropping up and scientists have to
keep adjusting for these unexpected events. It's like a blind man that
has memorized his physical surroundings to a point he feels very
comfortable until that one new or unexpected event pops up and he's lost
and fumbling." -- nightbat, in one of his more lucid moments.
Message-ID: >

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 07:21 AM

"The God of Odd Statements, Henry Schmidt"
ta.org> wrote in
. me.with.their.every.post:

> On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 05:29:46 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip did most oddly
> state:
>> "Zebulon" wrote:
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" wrote...
>>>> That can be attractive in a kitsch kind of way...
>>>>
>>>> She's definitely more attractive than Cheney, you have to admit.
>>>
>>> Good job Bertie, ya the kooks running with ya again.
>>
>> Thnanknks,.s
>>
>> It's good to be appreciated in one's own lifetime.
>>
>> Couldn't have done it without you, of course.
>>
>> You do realise that they're not k00ks. They're just k00k afficiandos,
>> right, Maxie?
>
> I don't believe Max grasps that he's a k00k...
>

The best ones never do.

Bertie

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 08:02 AM

The God of Odd Statements, Henry Schmidt, ye boozy earth, be packing,
Sir Knob, ye mumbled:

> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:06:09 -1200, Kadaitcha Man did most oddly state:
>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of vanity
>> comes this way, ye needled:
>>> Stella Starr wrote...
>>>> Shirl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I want
>>>>> someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>>>
>>>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>>>
>>>> Me too!
>>>> What she said!
>>>
>>> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's policies,
>>> but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a change.
>>
>> **** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be classed as
>> being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or do you just
>> see
>> a pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed spectacles?
>
> Oh, c'mon, she's attractive enough.

*BLERCH*

Now this *is* attractive:

http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mondeo003.jpg
http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mondeo001.jpg

A brand new, fully optioned, shiny, metallic-black Ford Mondeo XR5 Turbo
with my name on it was loaded onto a container ship in Zeebrugge early
yesterday morning.

You can have Palin. I'll just sit here for three or four weeks hoping to all
**** the ship doesn't sink.

VVVVVVVVVRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM MMMMMMMMMM!!!!

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 09:28 AM

"Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:n59ihb$6ml
:

> Bertie the Bunyip, ye horn-mad traitorous rout, you talk greasily,
your
> lips grow foul, ye perorated:
>
>> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of
>>> vanity comes this way, ye needled:
>>>
>>>> Stella Starr > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Shirl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I
>>>>>> want someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>>>>
>>>>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>>>>
>>>>> Me too!
>>>>> What she said!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's
>>>> policies, but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a
>>>> change.
>>>
>>> **** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be
classed
>>> as being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or do you
>>> just see a pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed
>>> spectacles?
>>>
>>
>> That can be attractive in a kitsch kind of way...
>
> If not mind-boggling.

I can pretend it's one of those chicks form the B-52s

>
>>
>>
>> She's definitely more attractive than Cheney, you have to admit.
>
> Point conceded.

Of course, there are those who would not agre with the last sentiment...

Bertie

Snarky

September 1st 08, 10:00 AM

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:02:41 -1200, Kadaitcha Man wrote these lies,
denials, arrogant assertions, erroneous presuppositions, and/or
obfuscations:
> The God of Odd Statements, Henry Schmidt, ye boozy earth, be packing, Sir
> Knob, ye mumbled:
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:06:09 -1200, Kadaitcha Man did most oddly state:
>>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of vanity
>>> comes this way, ye needled:
>>>> Stella Starr wrote...
>>>>> Shirl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I
>>>>>> want someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>>>>
>>>>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>>>>
>>>>> Me too!
>>>>> What she said!
>>>>
>>>> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's
>>>> policies, but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a
>>>> change.
>>>
>>> **** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be classed
>>> as being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or do you
>>> just see
>>> a pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed spectacles?
>>
>> Oh, c'mon, she's attractive enough.
>
> *BLERCH*
>
> Now this *is* attractive:
>
> http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mondeo003.jpg
> http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mondeo001.jpg
>
> A brand new, fully optioned, shiny, metallic-black Ford Mondeo XR5 Turbo
> with my name on it was loaded onto a container ship in Zeebrugge early
> yesterday morning.
>
> You can have Palin. I'll just sit here for three or four weeks hoping to
> all **** the ship doesn't sink.

I'd only want her for sex.

> VVVVVVVVVRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM MMMMMMMMMM!!!!

You know, do her once, or maybe all night, then enough is enough.

--
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5; Anonymous Psycho Criminal #18
TEH USENETS BULLIE
http://www.runescape.com/
Join my RuneScape clan!
http://z11.invisionfree.com/Holy_Pretzel_Cabal/index.php
Full name of clan: Cabal of the Holy International Discordian Internet
And Usenet Terrorist Pretzel

Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
Trainer of PorchMonkey4Life
http://www.screedbomb.info/porchie/

Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2008
Hammer of Thor, July 2008

"Not supporting me is equivalent to forfeiting your own rights." --
John D. Wentzky: Warrior For Your Freedumb! Message-ID:
>

"You cognatatively challenged fool!" -- According to Agamemnon, Stephen
Wilson is, apparently, highly ignorant about cognates, and so is anyone
who dares to disagree with him, in Message-ID:
>

"Is it still necrophilia if I'm conscious?" -- Owen Harper, "Dead Man
Walking", Torchwood (20/207)

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 10:10 AM

Snarky, ye bloodshot carbuncle, thou odoriferous stench, sound
rottenness, ye sent forth:

> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:02:41 -1200, Kadaitcha Man wrote these lies,
> denials, arrogant assertions, erroneous presuppositions, and/or
> obfuscations:
>> The God of Odd Statements, Henry Schmidt, ye boozy earth, be packing, Sir
>> Knob, ye mumbled:
>>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:06:09 -1200, Kadaitcha Man did most oddly state:
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of vanity
>>>> comes this way, ye needled:
>>>>> Stella Starr wrote...
>>>>>> Shirl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I
>>>>>>> want someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Me too!
>>>>>> What she said!
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's
>>>>> policies, but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a
>>>>> change.
>>>>
>>>> **** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be classed
>>>> as being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or do you
>>>> just see
>>>> a pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed spectacles?
>>>
>>> Oh, c'mon, she's attractive enough.
>>
>> *BLERCH*
>>
>> Now this *is* attractive:
>>
>> http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mondeo003.jpg
>> http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mondeo001.jpg
>>
>> A brand new, fully optioned, shiny, metallic-black Ford Mondeo XR5 Turbo
>> with my name on it was loaded onto a container ship in Zeebrugge early
>> yesterday morning.
>>
>> You can have Palin. I'll just sit here for three or four weeks hoping to
>> all **** the ship doesn't sink.
>
> I'd only want her for sex.

Yeah, but you're sick.

>> VVVVVVVVVRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM MMMMMMMMMM!!!!
>
> You know, do her once, or maybe all night, then enough is enough.

<aside>
Ok, who hid the brain bleach?

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

Bob Noel

September 1st 08, 12:04 PM

In article <VAJuk.267783$TT4.15126@attbi_s22>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> I'll wager that there are just as many women who will vote for McCain/Palin
> because Palin is a woman, as there are blacks who will vote for Obama/Biden
> because Obama is half-black.

I'll take that bet (even given the disparity in populations).

> Truth is, the average American is fairly politically unsophisticated, and
> I'll bet we're talking about these types of single-issue voters numbering in
> the millions -- which *could* be enough to swing a tight presidential
> election.

it'll only take a few in the swing states.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 12:56 PM

Lola Stonewall Riot, ye bowlegged jaded groom, four of thy five wits
went halting off, and now is the whole man governed with one, ye oozed:

> Hail Eris! On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:10:20 -1200, Kadaitcha Man ranted and
> raved:
>> Snarky, ye bloodshot carbuncle, thou odoriferous stench, sound
>> rottenness,
>> ye sent forth:
>>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:02:41 -1200, Kadaitcha Man wrote these lies,
>>> denials, arrogant assertions, erroneous presuppositions, and/or
>>> obfuscations:
>>>> The God of Odd Statements, Henry Schmidt, ye boozy earth, be packing,
>>>> Sir Knob, ye mumbled:
>>>>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:06:09 -1200, Kadaitcha Man did most oddly
>>>>> state:
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye mud-soaked dunce, hoy doy, what a sweep of
>>>>>> vanity comes this way, ye needled:
>>>>>>> Stella Starr wrote...
>>>>>>>> Shirl wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm a woman voter. I couldn't care less that Palin is a woman. I
>>>>>>>>> want someone with the QUALIFICATIONS and experience
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (waving hand frantically in air)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Me too!
>>>>>>>> What she said!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, I'm not inclined to vote to continue the current admin's
>>>>>>> policies, but it would be nice to have a VP with a nice rack for a
>>>>>>> change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **** me dead. Are you seriously suggesting that Palin might be
>>>>>> classed as being somewhere in the vicinity of remotely attractive? Or
>>>>>> do you just see
>>>>>> a pair of tits with a beehive hairdo and thick-rimmed spectacles?
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, c'mon, she's attractive enough.
>>>>
>>>> *BLERCH*
>>>>
>>>> Now this *is* attractive:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mondeo003.jpg
>>>> http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mondeo001.jpg
>>>>
>>>> A brand new, fully optioned, shiny, metallic-black Ford Mondeo XR5
>>>> Turbo with my name on it was loaded onto a container ship in Zeebrugge
>>>> early yesterday morning.
>>>>
>>>> You can have Palin. I'll just sit here for three or four weeks hoping
>>>> to all **** the ship doesn't sink.
>>>
>>> I'd only want her for sex.
>>
>> Yeah, but you're sick.
>
> No, only a little nauseous. Not even enough for vomit.
>
>>>> VVVVVVVVVRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM MMMMMMMMMM!!!!
>>>
>>> You know, do her once, or maybe all night, then enough is enough.
>>
>> <aside>
>> Ok, who hid the brain bleach?
>
> Uh-oh. I think Maxipad drank it.

Bugger. That's what I was going to do.

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

john smith

September 1st 08, 01:49 PM

In article >,
Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

> Why would they do that?

Why would who do what?

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:04 PM

John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-B9FB33.08492901092008
@nntp.aioe.org:

> In article >,
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>> Why would they do that?
>
> Why would who do what?
>

Exactly.

Bertie

Jay Honeck[_2_]

September 1st 08, 02:05 PM

> Not counting the McCain donors who've been pretending to be converted
> Hilary supporters, the real former Hilary supporters don't plan to vote
> against Obama, a man, by casting their vote for McCain, another man whose
> politics are all the opposite of the party they support. Even if he trots
> out a woman whose foreign policy expertise consists of being located
> somewhere right across the ocean from Russia.

Another interesting aspect of Palin's choice as Veep is that the Obama
people *can't* criticize Palin's lack of experience without the spotlight
reflecting right back on their candidate's woeful lack of testing.

Bottom line: Palin has more experience (and, more importantly, more
*executive* experience running a state government) than Obama has in the
Senate.

BTW: Your choice of language -- and bias -- is telling, Stella. Imagine, a
man "trotting out" a woman, like this is some sort of equestrian event?
Wow, if I had used that turn of phrase, you'd have crucified me. Given
your known political stance, however, (somewhere to the left of Hugo Chavez)
it adds up -- but it's still somewhat shocking to see such a partisan
technique used by a woman against a woman candidate.

Ah, well -- no matter. It's going to be a historic election, one way or
another, and it's finally become worth paying attention to...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:17 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:kMRuk.323286$yE1.15549@attbi_s21:

>> Not counting the McCain donors who've been pretending to be converted
>> Hilary supporters, the real former Hilary supporters don't plan to
>> vote against Obama, a man, by casting their vote for McCain, another
>> man whose politics are all the opposite of the party they support.
>> Even if he trots out a woman whose foreign policy expertise consists
>> of being located somewhere right across the ocean from Russia.
>
> Another interesting aspect of Palin's choice as Veep is that the Obama
> people *can't* criticize Palin's lack of experience without the
> spotlight reflecting right back on their candidate's woeful lack of
> testing.
>
> Bottom line: Palin has more experience (and, more importantly, more
> *executive* experience running a state government) than Obama has in
> the Senate.
>
> BTW: Your choice of language -- and bias -- is telling, Stella.
> Imagine, a man "trotting out" a woman, like this is some sort of
> equestrian event? Wow, if I had used that turn of phrase, you'd have
> crucified me.

So, no wyou have a messiah complex?

Bertie

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 02:24 PM

Bertie the Bunyip, ye cockered very weak monster, your bum is the
greatest thing about you, so that, in the beastliest sense, you are
Pomey the Great, ye averred:

> John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-B9FB33.08492901092008
> @nntp.aioe.org:
>
>> In article >,
>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>>> Why would they do that?
>>
>> Why would who do what?
>>
>
> Exactly.

Exactly who would do what?

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:31 PM

"Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:7w5fi0$jg8
:

> Bertie the Bunyip, ye cockered very weak monster, your bum is the
> greatest thing about you, so that, in the beastliest sense, you are
> Pomey the Great, ye averred:
>
>> John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-B9FB33.08492901092008
>> @nntp.aioe.org:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why would they do that?
>>>
>>> Why would who do what?
>>>
>>
>> Exactly.
>
>
> Exactly who would do what?
>

Of course.

Bertie

Zebulon

September 1st 08, 02:32 PM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...

>
> So, no wyou have a messiah complex?
>
>
> Bertie

No, you have clearly cornered the market on that one.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:35 PM

"Zebulon" <@###@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>> So, no wyou have a messiah complex?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> No, you have clearly cornered the market on that one.
>

I have returned to set my k00ks free.

Free to run wild and make IKYABWAI lames.

Bertie

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 02:37 PM

Bertie the Bunyip, ye pot-bellied thin-skin, sit there, the lyingest
knave in Christendom, ye scrawled:

> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:7w5fi0$jg8
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye cockered very weak monster, your bum is the
>> greatest thing about you, so that, in the beastliest sense, you are
>> Pomey the Great, ye averred:
>>
>>> John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-B9FB33.08492901092008
>>> @nntp.aioe.org:
>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why would they do that?
>>>>
>>>> Why would who do what?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>
>>
>> Exactly who would do what?
>>
>
> Of course.

<indicates up>
Mister ****ing Ed.

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

September 1st 08, 02:40 PM

"Neil Gould" > wrote in
:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
> (presumably, Stella wrote, but Jay snipped the credit, so all bets are
> off)
>>> Not counting the McCain donors who've been pretending to be
>>> converted Hilary supporters, the real former Hilary supporters don't
>>> plan to vote against Obama, a man, by casting their vote for McCain,
>>> another man whose politics are all the opposite of the party they
>>> support. Even if he trots out a woman whose foreign policy expertise
>>> consists of being located somewhere right across the ocean from
>>> Russia.
>>
>> Another interesting aspect of Palin's choice as Veep is that the
>> Obama people *can't* criticize Palin's lack of experience without the
>> spotlight reflecting right back on their candidate's woeful lack of
>> testing.
>>
> That cuts both ways. Not only did McCain pull the rug out from under
> his own argument, but Palin is completely "untested" with no
> national-level experience at all.
>
>> Bottom line: Palin has more experience (and, more importantly, more
>> *executive* experience running a state government) than Obama has in
>> the Senate.
>>
> Well, only the shallow thinkers would conclude that without any
> details. There are many office holders that are "experienced" in ways
> that we would not want to suffer. I'll wait for the vetting process to
> decide about Palin.
>
>> BTW: Your choice of language -- and bias -- is telling, Stella.
>> Imagine, a man "trotting out" a woman, like this is some sort of
>> equestrian event?
>>
> It's better than McCain's attitude as reflected in his offering up
> Cindy as a porno contestant at Sturgis. Or, did you miss that one?
>

Well I sure did! They're sounding beter al the time!

Bertie

Zebulon

September 1st 08, 02:41 PM

"Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly who would do what?
>>>
>>
>> Of course.
>
>
> <indicates up>
> Mister ****ing Ed.
>

He always begins to babble when cornered, it's part of his illness.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:42 PM

"Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:d7m4yb$r36
:

> Bertie the Bunyip, ye pot-bellied thin-skin, sit there, the lyingest
> knave in Christendom, ye scrawled:
>
>> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:7w5fi0$jg8
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye cockered very weak monster, your bum is the
>>> greatest thing about you, so that, in the beastliest sense, you are
>>> Pomey the Great, ye averred:
>>>
>>>> John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-
B9FB33.08492901092008
>>>> @nntp.aioe.org:
>>>>
>>>>> In article >,
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why would they do that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would who do what?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly who would do what?
>>>
>>
>> Of course.
>
>
> <indicates up>
> Mister ****ing Ed.
>
That's the answer I'd endorse

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 02:43 PM

"Zebulon" <@###@.^net> wrote in :

>
> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly who would do what?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course.
>>
>>
>> <indicates up>
>> Mister ****ing Ed.
>>
>
> He always begins to babble when cornered, it's part of his illness.

Apparently so Maxie.

Bertie

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 02:46 PM

Bertie the Bunyip, ye obscene clownish fool, live in the rank sweat of
an enseamed bed, strewed in corruption, honeying and making love over a
nasty sty, ye pattered:

> "Zebulon" <@###@.^net> wrote in :
>
>>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>
>>> So, no wyou have a messiah complex?
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> No, you have clearly cornered the market on that one.
>>
>
> I have returned to set my k00ks free.

Hillary? Is that you?

> Free to run wild and make IKYABWAI lames.
>
>
>
> Bertie
>

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

Kadaitcha Man[_3_]

September 1st 08, 02:48 PM

Bertie the Bunyip, ye unmuzzled king-of-urinals, I desire that we be
better strangers, ye pecked:

> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:d7m4yb$r36
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye pot-bellied thin-skin, sit there, the lyingest
>> knave in Christendom, ye scrawled:
>>
>>> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:7w5fi0$jg8
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye cockered very weak monster, your bum is the
>>>> greatest thing about you, so that, in the beastliest sense, you are
>>>> Pomey the Great, ye averred:
>>>>
>>>>> John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-
> B9FB33.08492901092008
>>>>> @nntp.aioe.org:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article >,
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why would they do that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why would who do what?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly who would do what?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course.
>>
>>
>> <indicates up>
>> Mister ****ing Ed.
>>
> That's the answer I'd endorse

<one handed applause>

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

Shirl

September 1st 08, 03:17 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> BTW: Your choice of language -- and bias -- is telling, Stella. Imagine, a
> man "trotting out" a woman, like this is some sort of equestrian event?
> Wow, if I had used that turn of phrase, you'd have crucified me. Given
> your known political stance, however, (somewhere to the left of Hugo Chavez)
> it adds up -- but it's still somewhat shocking to see such a partisan
> technique used by a woman against a woman candidate.

Oh, but describing McCain's choice as "genius" just because he picked a
FEMALE running mate -- nevermind the fact that he'd known her for 6
months and met with her TWICE before the announcement -- even so much as
stating that he'll pick up the former Hillary supporters now, regardless
of Palin's politics, **simply because she's a woman** is okay?

BTW, it was his wife, Cindy, who, when asked what foreign policy
experience her husband's VP pick has, answered by saying that Alaska is
the closest state to Russia! Is that the kind of confidence-inspiring
answer that's supposed to raise our comfort level about Palin? Wow.

Shirl

john smith

September 1st 08, 04:04 PM

In article >,
Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

> >>>> Why would they do that?

> >>> Why would who do what?

> >> Exactly.

> > Exactly who would do what?

> Of course.

Why, I don't know?

Neil Gould

September 1st 08, 05:30 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:
(presumably, Stella wrote, but Jay snipped the credit, so all bets are off)
>> Not counting the McCain donors who've been pretending to be converted
>> Hilary supporters, the real former Hilary supporters don't plan to
>> vote against Obama, a man, by casting their vote for McCain, another
>> man whose politics are all the opposite of the party they support.
>> Even if he trots out a woman whose foreign policy expertise consists
>> of being located somewhere right across the ocean from Russia.
>
> Another interesting aspect of Palin's choice as Veep is that the Obama
> people *can't* criticize Palin's lack of experience without the
> spotlight reflecting right back on their candidate's woeful lack of
> testing.
>
That cuts both ways. Not only did McCain pull the rug out from under his own
argument, but Palin is completely "untested" with no national-level
experience at all.

> Bottom line: Palin has more experience (and, more importantly, more
> *executive* experience running a state government) than Obama has in
> the Senate.
>
Well, only the shallow thinkers would conclude that without any details.
There are many office holders that are "experienced" in ways that we would
not want to suffer. I'll wait for the vetting process to decide about Palin.

> BTW: Your choice of language -- and bias -- is telling, Stella.
> Imagine, a man "trotting out" a woman, like this is some sort of
> equestrian event?
>
It's better than McCain's attitude as reflected in his offering up Cindy as
a porno contestant at Sturgis. Or, did you miss that one?

Neil

Neil Gould

September 1st 08, 07:46 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> "Neil Gould" > wrote in
>> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>
>>> BTW: Your choice of language -- and bias -- is telling, Stella.
>>> Imagine, a man "trotting out" a woman, like this is some sort of
>>> equestrian event?
>>>
>> It's better than McCain's attitude as reflected in his offering up
>> Cindy as a porno contestant at Sturgis. Or, did you miss that one?
>>
>
>
> Well I sure did! They're sounding beter al the time!
>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4X6XqNeF1o

Martin Hotze[_2_]

September 1st 08, 08:43 PM

Morgans schrieb:
>> it already is ... boring.
>
> So Martin, since you live in what, Austria, and have no stake in the
> election of a USA president, and you obviously think much less of the US,
> why don't you....

well, the outcome of the election has many effects on how the world
(economy, politics, etc.) will work for the next years. So IMHO it is
not the worst idea to be informed, even when living outside of your
country and not being allowed to vote (it is your election).

#m

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 10:04 PM

John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-64DB42.11042401092008
@nntp.aioe.org:

> In article >,
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>> >>>> Why would they do that?
>
>> >>> Why would who do what?
>
>> >> Exactly.
>
>> > Exactly who would do what?
>
>> Of course.
>
> Why, I don't know?
>
That's my point.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

September 1st 08, 10:06 PM

Shirl > wrote in
:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>> BTW: Your choice of language -- and bias -- is telling, Stella.
>> Imagine, a man "trotting out" a woman, like this is some sort of
>> equestrian event? Wow, if I had used that turn of phrase, you'd have
>> crucified me. Given your known political stance, however,
>> (somewhere to the left of Hugo Chavez) it adds up -- but it's still
>> somewhat shocking to see such a partisan technique used by a woman
>> against a woman candidate.
>
> Oh, but describing McCain's choice as "genius" just because he picked
> a FEMALE running mate -- nevermind the fact that he'd known her for 6
> months and met with her TWICE before the announcement -- even so much
> as stating that he'll pick up the former Hillary supporters now,
> regardless of Palin's politics, **simply because she's a woman** is
> okay

You're talking to someone who watches Fox news here.....
and not for it's comedic value..

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 10:08 PM

"Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:ijlh2y$otm$1
@alt.education.yeasty-viado.org.romania:

> Bertie the Bunyip, ye unmuzzled king-of-urinals, I desire that we be
> better strangers, ye pecked:
>
>> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:d7m4yb$r36
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye pot-bellied thin-skin, sit there, the lyingest
>>> knave in Christendom, ye scrawled:
>>>
>>>> "Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:7w5fi0$jg8
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip, ye cockered very weak monster, your bum is the
>>>>> greatest thing about you, so that, in the beastliest sense, you
are
>>>>> Pomey the Great, ye averred:
>>>>>
>>>>>> John Smith > wrote in news:jsmith-
>> B9FB33.08492901092008
>>>>>> @nntp.aioe.org:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article >,
>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why would they do that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why would who do what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly who would do what?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course.
>>>
>>>
>>> <indicates up>
>>> Mister ****ing Ed.
>>>
>> That's the answer I'd endorse
>
>
> <one handed applause>
>

The torch of doubt and chaos, this is how the sage navigates.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

September 1st 08, 10:09 PM

"Kadaitcha Man" > wrote in news:4kbs4q$d19
:

> Bertie the Bunyip, ye obscene clownish fool, live in the rank sweat of
> an enseamed bed, strewed in corruption, honeying and making love over a
> nasty sty, ye pattered:
>
>> "Zebulon" <@###@.^net> wrote in :
>>
>>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, no wyou have a messiah complex?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> No, you have clearly cornered the market on that one.
>>>
>>
>> I have returned to set my k00ks free.
>
> Hillary? Is that you?

Mrs clinton or George's labrador?

Bertie

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

September 2nd 08, 02:45 AM

on 8/31/2008 8:41 PM Jay Honeck said the following:
>> Only an idiot like you could consider her well-educated.
>
> Gosh, Rich, you really know how to forward a conversation.

And you really know how to duck and jive when presented with facts
contrary to your moronic, ill-informed views.

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

September 2nd 08, 02:45 AM

on 8/31/2008 7:14 PM Ramsey said the following:
> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
> ouse.com...
>
> Who cares what you think, your a known dumb ass, just like MX.

Isn't it about time you morphed again, Maxie?

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

September 2nd 08, 02:52 AM

on 9/1/2008 9:30 AM Neil Gould said the following:
> Jay Honeck wrote:
> (presumably, Stella wrote, but Jay snipped the credit, so all bets are off)
>>> Not counting the McCain donors who've been pretending to be converted
>>> Hilary supporters, the real former Hilary supporters don't plan to
>>> vote against Obama, a man, by casting their vote for McCain, another
>>> man whose politics are all the opposite of the party they support.
>>> Even if he trots out a woman whose foreign policy expertise consists
>>> of being located somewhere right across the ocean from Russia.
>> Another interesting aspect of Palin's choice as Veep is that the Obama
>> people *can't* criticize Palin's lack of experience without the
>> spotlight reflecting right back on their candidate's woeful lack of
>> testing.
>>
> That cuts both ways. Not only did McCain pull the rug out from under his own
> argument, but Palin is completely "untested" with no national-level
> experience at all.
>
>> Bottom line: Palin has more experience (and, more importantly, more
>> *executive* experience running a state government) than Obama has in
>> the Senate.
>>
> Well, only the shallow thinkers would conclude that without any details.
> There are many office holders that are "experienced" in ways that we would
> not want to suffer. I'll wait for the vetting process to decide about Palin.
>
>> BTW: Your choice of language -- and bias -- is telling, Stella.
>> Imagine, a man "trotting out" a woman, like this is some sort of
>> equestrian event?
>>
> It's better than McCain's attitude as reflected in his offering up Cindy as
> a porno contestant at Sturgis. Or, did you miss that one?

And don't forget his calling her Bertie's old term of endearment (starts
with a "c", ends with a "t", and has a "u" and an "n" in the middle) in
public on a campaign stop back in the 90s. How any woman could vote for
someone like that is stunning...