OT CHENEY PRAISES WIFE'S 'SLAPDOWN' OF CNN'S WOLF BLITZER

Jeff Strickland, 10/30/2006,8:55:03 PM, wrote:
[color=blue]
> The guy that knows politics is Dick Morris.[/color]

Dick Morris and George Stepahnopoulis were both Clinton advisors. I
wonder why they turned against him? I do remember Dick Morris having
toe-sucking problems, but why did George have bad things to say about
Clinton for quite a long time after employment?

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0et7nd023b3l9000@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> Jeff Strickland, 10/30/2006,8:55:03 PM, wrote:
>[color=green]
>> The guy that knows politics is Dick Morris.[/color]
>
> Dick Morris and George Stepahnopoulis were both Clinton advisors. I
> wonder why they turned against him? I do remember Dick Morris having
> toe-sucking problems, but why did George have bad things to say about
> Clinton for quite a long time after employment?[/color]

Have you noticed what Powell's said since leaving Bush?

JoeSpareBedroom, 11/1/2006,9:12:14 PM, wrote:
[color=blue]
> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:xn0et7nd023b3l9000@news.readfreenews.net...[color=green]
> > Jeff Strickland, 10/30/2006,8:55:03 PM, wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> > > The guy that knows politics is Dick Morris.[/color]
> >
> > Dick Morris and George Stepahnopoulis were both Clinton advisors. I
> > wonder why they turned against him? I do remember Dick Morris
> > having toe-sucking problems, but why did George have bad things to
> > say about Clinton for quite a long time after employment?[/color]
>
> Have you noticed what Powell's said since leaving Bush?[/color]

What did he say about Dick Morris and George Stephanopoulis since that
is what I'm asking about? You are such an obfuscator. Answering a
question with another question is a lame tactic in diverting attention
from the point.

On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 06:33:51 -0500, "badgolferman"
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>JoeSpareBedroom, 11/1/2006,9:12:14 PM, wrote:
>[color=green]
>> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:xn0et7nd023b3l9000@news.readfreenews.net...[color=darkred]
>> > Jeff Strickland, 10/30/2006,8:55:03 PM, wrote:
>> >
>> > > The guy that knows politics is Dick Morris.
>> >
>> > Dick Morris and George Stepahnopoulis were both Clinton advisors. I
>> > wonder why they turned against him? I do remember Dick Morris
>> > having toe-sucking problems, but why did George have bad things to
>> > say about Clinton for quite a long time after employment?[/color]
>>
>> Have you noticed what Powell's said since leaving Bush?[/color]
>
>What did he say about Dick Morris and George Stephanopoulis since that
>is what I'm asking about? You are such an obfuscator. Answering a
>question with another question is a lame tactic in diverting attention
>from the point.[/color]

He ran out of gas a long time ago....

Not surprising for a liberal.


--

Scott in Florida

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0et8f952nxyup000@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> JoeSpareBedroom, 11/1/2006,9:12:14 PM, wrote:
>[color=green]
>> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:xn0et7nd023b3l9000@news.readfreenews.net...[color=darkred]
>> > Jeff Strickland, 10/30/2006,8:55:03 PM, wrote:
>> >
>> > > The guy that knows politics is Dick Morris.
>> >
>> > Dick Morris and George Stepahnopoulis were both Clinton advisors. I
>> > wonder why they turned against him? I do remember Dick Morris
>> > having toe-sucking problems, but why did George have bad things to
>> > say about Clinton for quite a long time after employment?[/color]
>>
>> Have you noticed what Powell's said since leaving Bush?[/color]
>
> What did he say about Dick Morris and George Stephanopoulis since that
> is what I'm asking about? You are such an obfuscator. Answering a
> question with another question is a lame tactic in diverting attention
> from the point.[/color]

The point is that ALL members of the inner circle have differences of
opinion. The truly excellent people often find ways of expressing these
differences while still within the circle. Some can't do this until they
leave. Never mind.

Here in Ohio wrote:[color=blue]
>
> I'd choose [Linux] over FreeBSD for almost any use.[/color]
<snip>[color=blue]
> On the real servers I use UFS.[/color]
=====

Umm, I'm not sure I understand. You're saying
you run linux servers on UFS partions, instead of
the ext3 and Reiser partions usually used for
linux? Thanks.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

I realize UFS is often used with BSD, but didn't
know that linux users use UFS too?


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0et7nd023b3l9000@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> Jeff Strickland, 10/30/2006,8:55:03 PM, wrote:
>[color=green]
>> The guy that knows politics is Dick Morris.[/color]
>
> Dick Morris and George Stepahnopoulis were both Clinton advisors. I
> wonder why they turned against him? I do remember Dick Morris having
> toe-sucking problems, but why did George have bad things to say about
> Clinton for quite a long time after employment?[/color]

I don't watch George very much, but I thought he was still a died in the
wool Democrat. Dick was caught in a hotel room with a hooker and some White
House documents, that didn't go over very well.

I don't recall why George left the Administration, but I do not recall there
was a problem. I thought his time just ran out.

Having said that, if George AND Dick both say that Hillary is stark raving
mad, there must be some sort of character flaw with her.

You're too kind, Michael.




"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:356dnYWKzdBoI9XYUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=blue]
> This from our good friend dizzy, AKA Moron, Idiot, Troll, Dumbass,
> Bumbshit, Twit, Bigot, Engineer and proven pathological liar etc" the NGs
> resident comically pathetic puffed-up pretender LOL
>
>
> mike
>
>
> "dizzy AKA Moron, Idiot, Troll, Dumbass, Bumbshit, Twit, Bigot, Engineer
> and proven pathological liar etc" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:iesfk2he98lhhrgqgj95psa6slkt0hvojc@4ax.com...[color=green]
>> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> dbu. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's "their" politics. Not they're.
>>>>>
>>>>>you can't teach these pea-brains anything.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't catching a typo a lame excuse for a right-wing circle-jerk?
>>>
>>>A typo is rite when you mean write, or miss the t in the.
>>>
>>>Typing they're (they are) instead of their (possessive) is not a typo.[/color]
>>
>> Yes, it is still considered a typo, you dumbshit. It's not like he
>> didn't know the correct spelling.
>>[color=darkred]
>>>Maybe this is part of why you are so stupid. No, probably not.[/color]
>>
>> You are correct - I'm probably not stupid. You, on the other hand,
>> are a dumbshit too stupid to know when you're in over your head. It's
>> always comically pathetic to see you puffed-up pretenders. LOL
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

Here_in_Ohio wrote:[color=blue]
>
> UFS is not normally used with BSD. BSD has FFS.[/color]
=====

Here_in_Ohio, thanks for the information. Umm, you are
Stuart Krivis, right? Stuart knows his stuff.

Back when I used FreeBSD 2.7 long ago on a home desktop, I
could have sworn it used UFS, not FFS. If so, FreeBSD switched
from UFS to FFS shortly after that, but I could be mistaken.

I'll tell you one thing for sure: the Microsoft world is
horrible. After I put a new motherboard in my home box a few
years ago, the Windoze 2000 partition would no longer boot! It was
claiming "Inaccessible Boot Device," which probably just meant
Ballmer and Bill could have started up the OS, but didn't want
to. Instead they wanted me to reinstall Win2000 from the CD.

Personally, I don't think Windows 2000 should have given
me an ounce of trouble since the hard disk or partitions
had not changed--only the mobo was new.

Redhat 9 didn't give me an ounce of stubborness. It welcomed
the new motherboard immediately and booted up fine. It even brought
up an automated hardware configuration screen.

Microsoft should not be so paranoid when the only thing
someone does is switch out motherboards. [laughter] :-)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:29:49 -0600, "Built_Well"
<Built_Well_Toyota@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Here in Ohio wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> I'd choose [Linux] over FreeBSD for almost any use.[/color]
><snip>[color=green]
>> On the real servers I use UFS.[/color]
>=====
>
> Umm, I'm not sure I understand. You're saying
>you run linux servers on UFS partions, instead of
>the ext3 and Reiser partions usually used for
>linux? Thanks.[/color]

I should have put a smiley there.

Solaris's default fs is UFS.

We're currently only using Linux for peripheral tasks and most of the
business runs on Suns. That was true at my previous job too. (Sun
still offers things that you can't get or can't as easily get from
Linux or Windows.)

I imagine we will use Linux more when we move to Oracle RAC, but we're
still testing that and I've heard some people aren't happy with that
approach.

For my own personal Linux boxes, I have used ReiserFS for a long time.
In fact, I moved away from plain vanilla Debian to Libranet mainly
because Libranet provided an easy way to move to ReiserFS. My
workstation here is running SuSE 10 and it's all ResierFS.

I've also played with XFS and JFS. They both work quite well too. (If
I were streaming video or other large files I might well choose XFS
over Reiser.)

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 19:02:37 -0600, "Built_Well"
<Built_Well_Toyota@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
> I realize UFS is often used with BSD, but didn't
>know that linux users use UFS too?[/color]

UFS is not normally used with BSD. BSD has FFS.

Solaris uses UFS. Also, Apple added UFS to Mac OS X.

On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 13:11:32 +0000, Built_Well
<Built_Well_Toyota@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>Here_in_Ohio wrote:[color=green]
> >
> > UFS is not normally used with BSD. BSD has FFS.[/color]
>=====
>
> Here_in_Ohio, thanks for the information. Umm, you are
>Stuart Krivis, right? Stuart knows his stuff.[/color]

I just read a lot. :-)
[color=blue]
>
> Back when I used FreeBSD 2.7 long ago on a home desktop, I
>could have sworn it used UFS, not FFS. If so, FreeBSD switched
>from UFS to FFS shortly after that, but I could be mistaken.[/color]

I forgot to add a smiley there.

They're actually the same thing. UFS is another name for the Berkeley
FFS.

As far as I know, the *BSDs have always called it FFS. It's the
ATT-ish Unix camp that calls it UFS.

[color=blue]
>
> I'll tell you one thing for sure: the Microsoft world is
>horrible. After I put a new motherboard in my home box a few
>years ago, the Windoze 2000 partition would no longer boot! It was
>claiming "Inaccessible Boot Device," which probably just meant
>Ballmer and Bill could have started up the OS, but didn't want
>to. Instead they wanted me to reinstall Win2000 from the CD.[/color]

There are ways to fix that, but it evidently is not easy.
[color=blue]
>
> Personally, I don't think Windows 2000 should have given
>me an ounce of trouble since the hard disk or partitions
>had not changed--only the mobo was new.[/color]

I agree, although it may have something to do with NT/2K/XP using more
of a microkernel than Linux uses.
[color=blue]
>
> Redhat 9 didn't give me an ounce of stubborness. It welcomed
>the new motherboard immediately and booted up fine. It even brought
>up an automated hardware configuration screen.
>
> Microsoft should not be so paranoid when the only thing
>someone does is switch out motherboards. [laughter] :-)[/color]

MS concentrated their hardware detection and configuration or
reconfiguration in two places - installation and also right after
booting (that "New Hardware Detected" routine that will pop up after
the desktop itself comes up).

The "New Hardware" stuff is all GUI, so it has to wait until the
system has booted, and that's not very useful if you swap a
motherboard or something. :-)

The Windows NT installer figures out what you have and then crafts a
HAL to go between the kernel and the hardware itself. But this is only
when you're actually installing the OS.

During a normal boot of NT, there isn't any detection process while
the kernel is loading. In Linux, there _is_ hardware detection going
on. In fact, most of Linux's hardware detection is handled during each
boot as the kernel is coming up.

MS made some choices during the original design of NT and I'm sure
they were valid choices given what they wanted to do. They may not
have intended that people replace motherboards without re-installing
the OS, or maybe it was an oversight. It might not even be possible
with the way the rest of the OS was done. Furthermore, they might not
be able to change things at this point without breaking a lot of
stuff. Also don't forget that the original design was done a long time
ago and things were different then, as were MS's priorities.

So, NT/2K/XP is what it is and we just have to deal with that. It's
not the best of all worlds, but it's not the worst either. After all,
we could still be stuck with Windows 3.1 or 95. :-)