Posts by presidio9

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • If he runs for president, don't expect political correctness from Ben Carson

    02/18/2015 12:43:00 PM PST · 13 of 13
    presidio9 to 2nd Amendment

    The question, I think, should be “Would Dr. Carson accept a position as either Secretary of Commerce or (more likely) Surgeon General. My guess is that he would feel like he could be more influential on FOX or with his own nationally syndicated radio show. I don’t think that he would be successful in large doses. He is interesting in small doses because he is brilliant, conservative, and black (in that order), but he is otherwise far too laid-back a personality.

  • Where do Warren voters go? Clinton (Marist Poll)

    02/18/2015 11:05:28 AM PST · 17 of 31
    presidio9 to Lakeshark; lee martell; cripplecreek
    What a lot of people forget about from the 2007-2008 DNC primary process is the debate that took place in October in Philadelphia. Prior to that Ms. Rodham-Clinton was in pretty much the same position that she is today. She had some minor fumbles in earlier debates, but the other candidates pretty much left her alone, for fear of alienating her enormous group of supporters.

    Prior to the October debate, Senators Obama and Edwards said they planned to "go after her." At that point, neither had much to lose. In the preceding weeks, The National Enquirer had begun reporting on Edwards' extramarital affair with Rielle Hunter. The national media (Fox in particular, of course) was just beginning to take notice. Senator Obama was a year into his first term, and still relatively unknown on a national level.

    Ms. Rodham-Clinton had a disasterous performance. She failed to answer several questions, and attempted to take both sides on others.

    I have always believed that this performance (and Edwards' subsequent implosion) opened the door for voters to begin taking Senator Obama seriously. This October, Ms. Rodham-Clinton will be 68 years old. She has shown no signs of learning from any of this. I am looking forward to seeing what happens if she is again kept afloat by a sympathetic media. Sooner or later she will have to answer the tough questions convincingly. I see no evidence that she will ever be up to this.

    If you happen to have an hour to kill, the CSPAN video of Ms Rodham-Clinton's collapse is available HERE

  • If he runs for president, don't expect political correctness from Ben Carson

    02/18/2015 10:28:25 AM PST · 5 of 13
    presidio9 to BlueStateRightist
    However, that doesn’t add up to presidential.

    Agreed. I read his book, and was extremely disappointed.

  • If he runs for president, don't expect political correctness from Ben Carson

    02/18/2015 10:27:15 AM PST · 4 of 13
    presidio9 to SoConPubbie

    It begins...

  • Where do Warren voters go? Clinton (Marist Poll)

    02/18/2015 10:25:51 AM PST · 1 of 31
    presidio9
  • If he runs for president, don't expect political correctness from Ben Carson

    02/18/2015 10:22:11 AM PST · 1 of 13
    presidio9
  • Bill Clinton ‘burst a gasket’ over pro-Hillary group’s comments

    02/17/2015 4:42:22 PM PST · 9 of 14
    presidio9 to Boogieman
    Most of the Presidential elections since the rise of television have gone to the candidate who looks more “presidential” on the tube,

    Challenge.

  • Hillary Clinton rebrands Obama’s frat house as her own

    02/17/2015 4:27:15 PM PST · 1 of 14
    presidio9
  • Bill Clinton ‘burst a gasket’ over pro-Hillary group’s comments

    02/17/2015 3:31:59 PM PST · 1 of 14
    presidio9
  • Secure the Border! Saudi Arabia Building 600-Mile ‘Great Wall’ to Keep Out ISIS

    02/17/2015 3:26:07 PM PST · 20 of 21
    presidio9 to Kaslin

    This begs the question of what the White House will do when these animals inevitably invade Kuwait.

  • Iraqi Bishop: 'We Are Hated Because We Persist in Wanting to Exist as Christians'

    02/17/2015 3:23:39 PM PST · 6 of 10
    presidio9 to kosciusko51; marshmallow; Travis McGee
  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/17/2015 12:05:17 PM PST · 248 of 253
    presidio9 to yefragetuwrabrumuy
    UK just defines itself as “white”, without intentionally obfuscated ethnic groups.

    The UK does this primarily, not out of liberal sentiment, but because it is a conglomerate of four distinct nationalities (along with various other subgroups from throughout the former empire).

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/16/2015 2:31:43 PM PST · 219 of 253
    presidio9 to ansel12

    I’m done here. Best of luck to you Ansel.

  • The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

    02/16/2015 2:30:57 PM PST · 37 of 57
    presidio9 to Sawdring
    Again:

    I have no interest in Defending George W. Bush or the war in Iraq here.

    I am looking for verification that Saddam Hussein discussed plans to re-invade Kuwait during his FBI interrogation.

    For what it's worth, during that same interrogation he stated that he intentionally misled on WMDs because he was more worried about Iran than he was about the US.

  • The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

    02/16/2015 2:22:06 PM PST · 33 of 57
    presidio9 to noinfringers2

    Thank you for reinforcing my point.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/16/2015 2:19:28 PM PST · 217 of 253
    presidio9 to ansel12
    If you wish to converse with me, I will say the following:

    Your posting history indicates a person desperately in need of professional help.

    That is not an insult, it is my sincere wish for you.

    Until you resolve seek it, my main concern is that interacting with you will only contribute to your obvious personal problems.

  • The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

    02/16/2015 2:07:40 PM PST · 23 of 57
    presidio9 to MrB
    You can see why I was reluctant to post this article here. Threads like this one quickly devolved into Bush-bashing from the libertarians who have infected this formerly conservative website.

    The significant takeaway from this article is the comment about (Saddam) Hussien's supposed plans to re-invade. If this is true, we were eventually going to war again in Iraq, WMDs or not.

  • The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

    02/16/2015 2:00:32 PM PST · 15 of 57
    presidio9 to Hypo2; faithhopecharity; Gay State Conservative; ClearCase_guy
    verification of Hussein’s plans to re-invade Iraq

    Correction: Hussein’s plans to re-invade Kuwait.

  • The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

    02/16/2015 1:58:22 PM PST · 12 of 57
    presidio9 to Hypo2; faithhopecharity; Gay State Conservative

    What I am most interested in is verification of Hussein’s plans to re-invade Iraq. As far as I am concerned, that would change everything. But I have followed this dispute closely, and this is the first time that I’ve ever heard it. I tend to trust Silberman, but I read all of the comments from the article, and this subject was not discussed further.

  • The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

    02/16/2015 1:55:38 PM PST · 7 of 57
    presidio9 to faithhopecharity
    Strange that you can not access the article. I no longer subscribe to WSJ online, so I am aware that many of their articles are restricted. However, that does not appear to be the case with this one. As such, I will post it in its entirety here.

    Adminmod, please delete this post (with my apologies) if I am wrong about this.

    In recent weeks, I have heard former Associated Press reporter Ron Fournier on Fox News twice asserting, quite offhandedly, that President George W. Bush “lied us into war in Iraq.”

    I found this shocking. I took a leave of absence from the bench in 2004-05 to serve as co-chairman of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction—a bipartisan body, sometimes referred to as the Robb-Silberman Commission. It was directed in 2004 to evaluate the intelligence community’s determination that Saddam Hussein possessed WMD—I am, therefore, keenly aware of both the intelligence provided to President Bush and his reliance on that intelligence as his primary casus belli. It is astonishing to see the “Bush lied” allegation evolve from antiwar slogan to journalistic fact.

    The intelligence community’s 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) stated, in a formal presentation to President Bush and to Congress, its view that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction—a belief in which the NIE said it held a 90% level of confidence. That is about as certain as the intelligence community gets on any subject.

    Recall that the head of the intelligence community, Central Intelligence Agency Director George Tenet, famously told the president that the proposition that Iraq possessed WMD was “a slam dunk.” Our WMD commission carefully examined the interrelationships between the Bush administration and the intelligence community and found no indication that anyone in the administration sought to pressure the intelligence community into its findings. As our commission reported, presidential daily briefs from the CIA dating back to the Clinton administration were, if anything, more alarmist about Iraq’s WMD than the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate.

    Saddam had manifested sharp hostility toward America, including firing at U.S. planes patrolling the no-fly zone set up by the armistice agreement ending the first Iraq war. Saddam had also attempted to assassinate former President George H.W. Bush —a car-bombing plot was foiled—during Mr. Bush’s visit to Kuwait in 1993. But President George W. Bush based his decision to go to war on information about Saddam’s WMD. Accordingly, when Secretary of State Colin Powell formally presented the U.S. case to the United Nations, Mr. Powell relied entirely on that aspect of the threat from Iraq.

    Our WMD commission ultimately determined that the intelligence community was “dead wrong” about Saddam’s weapons. But as I recall, no one in Washington political circles offered significant disagreement with the intelligence community before the invasion. The National Intelligence Estimate was persuasive—to the president, to Congress and to the media.

    Granted, there were those who disagreed with waging war against Saddam even if he did possess WMD. Some in Congress joined Brent Scowcroft, a retired Air Force lieutenant general and former national security adviser, in publicly doubting the wisdom of invading Iraq. It is worth noting, however, that when Saddam was captured and interrogated, he told his interrogators that he had intended to seek revenge on Kuwait for its cooperation with the U.S. by invading again at a propitious time. This leads me to speculate that if the Bush administration had not gone to war in 2003 and Saddam had remained in power, the U.S. might have felt compelled to do so once Iraq again invaded Kuwait.

    In any event, it is one thing to assert, then or now, that the Iraq war was ill-advised. It is quite another to make the horrendous charge that President Bush lied to or deceived the American people about the threat from Saddam.

    I recently wrote to Ron Fournier protesting his accusation. His response, in an email, was to reiterate that “an objective reading of the events leads to only one conclusion: the administration . . . misinterpreted, distorted and in some cases lied about intelligence.” Although Mr. Fournier referred to “evidence” supporting his view, he did not cite any—and I do not believe there is any.

    He did say correctly that “intelligence is never dispositive; it requires analysis and judgment, with the final call and responsibility resting with the president.” It is thus certainly possible to criticize President Bush for having believed what the CIA told him, although it seems to me that any president would have credited such confident assertions by the intelligence community. But to accuse the president of lying us into war must be seen as not only false, but as dangerously defamatory.

    The charge is dangerous because it can take on the air of historical fact—with potentially dire consequences. I am reminded of a similarly baseless accusation that helped the Nazis come to power in Germany: that the German army had not really lost World War I, that the soldiers instead had been “stabbed in the back” by politicians.

    Sometime in the future, perhaps long after most of us are gone, an American president may need to rely publicly on intelligence reports to support military action. It would be tragic if, at such a critical moment, the president’s credibility were undermined by memories of a false charge peddled by the likes of Ron Fournier.

  • The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

    02/16/2015 1:45:27 PM PST · 1 of 57
    presidio9
    This article is from a week ago. I am posting it today because of the following quote:

    It is worth noting, however, that when Saddam was captured and interrogated, he told his interrogators that he had intended to seek revenge on Kuwait for its cooperation with the U.S. by invading again at a propitious time.

    I have spent considerable time in the last week looking for verification of this claim online, and have nothing. Can someone please help me out? Thanks.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/16/2015 1:38:29 PM PST · 213 of 253
    presidio9 to GeronL
    besides of FR is so irrelevant the Obamites would not have mentioned by name in at least one of their attacks on the internet.

    I appreciate the effort GeronL, but the story that you just posted was from 2001.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/16/2015 11:51:56 AM PST · 205 of 253
    presidio9 to arthurus
    I answered it sufficiently. You are apparently pushing for a particular answer so that you can use your already formulated reply that will show how ignorant I surely must be. Sorry. I didn’t get the script soon enough.

    No doubt the answer will depend on the idiotic premise that FR is just chock-filled with people who have nothing better to do with their time than to hang out on this increasingly irrelevant website and canvass for Vladimir Putin.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/16/2015 11:45:02 AM PST · 204 of 253
    presidio9 to SkyPilot
    My post is exactly relevant.

    The tarbaby that you are engaged with is ignoring the fact that military hardware has a definite lifespan. In other words, past expenditures are often irrelevant if tanks and planes and ships can not be replaced when they become obsolete or are used in ongoing conflicts. Additionally, cutbacks have led to the forced retirement of many of our most promising officers. A friend of mine (who graduated from West Point) was an artillery commander until last year. He had three tours, and the intention of making a career in the military. He was downsized last year, and is now making about five times as much money on Wall Street. Short of all-out war, he will never return. And there are thousands more just like him.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/16/2015 11:34:55 AM PST · 202 of 253
    presidio9 to Axenolith
    Remember Ralph Peters old fiction work “Red Army”? I read it recently, the Russians win because W. Germany won’t sign off on the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons in the conflict and there is a cease fire right when the American forces are in the process of kicking off an offensive.

    Kinda like what your saying...

    Never heard of it, but I generally respect what I read from Peters. I haven't read fiction in years, but I'll keep my eye out for it. Thanks.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/16/2015 11:32:01 AM PST · 201 of 253
    presidio9 to Vermont Lt

    Why are you such a douche? Can you ever engage in a conversation without sounding like a world class asshat?

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/15/2015 7:16:33 PM PST · 41 of 253
    presidio9 to GeronL

    Well, there is no shortage of reasons to make fun of the Germans, but I’m pretty sure tank-building isn’t one of them -sort of like making fun of the Scots when it comes to creating alcoholic beverages(and who gives a good God damn what the label looks like). Am I right?

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/15/2015 7:01:15 PM PST · 31 of 253
    presidio9 to GeronL
    Actually, due to its advanced fire control system many weapons analysts consider the German Leopard 2-A7 the top main battle tank in the world today -ahead of the Abrams.
  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/15/2015 6:55:19 PM PST · 27 of 253
    presidio9 to ansel12
    Russia is no match for NATO.

    The bad news is that NATO would most likely disband over war with Russia. The good news is that the US and the UK would honor the commitment they made. FWIW, I believe France would as well.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/15/2015 6:51:18 PM PST · 22 of 253
    presidio9 to ansel12
    Believe me, Romney did not think of that, his handlers did.

    I thought of it as well, as I'm sure you did. The point wasn't that Romney said something profound.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/15/2015 6:48:50 PM PST · 21 of 253
    presidio9 to TADSLOS
  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/15/2015 6:43:38 PM PST · 12 of 253
    presidio9 to ModelBreaker
    It is interesting to note that, following the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1992, the Russian Federation is been involved as a combatant in ten different wars -perhaps three of which you've ever heard of.

    I wonder how many Americans are aware of any of this. For that matter, I wonder if the president is.

  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/15/2015 6:24:07 PM PST · 2 of 253
    presidio9
    Also discussed in yesterday's JOURNAL EDITORIAL REPORT.
  • Commander of US Army in Europe Sees Russia Mobilizing for War

    02/15/2015 6:22:35 PM PST · 1 of 253
    presidio9
  • The Deficits Republicans Don't Want to Talk About

    01/27/2015 6:59:51 PM PST · 11 of 25
    presidio9 to ilgipper

    US debt was $10.6 trillion when Obama took office. It currently stands at $18 trillion, or $154,000 for every tax paying citizen in this country. Over the 8 years of George Bush’s presidency, he added $4.9 trillion.

  • The Deficits Republicans Don't Want to Talk About

    01/27/2015 6:18:02 PM PST · 1 of 25
    presidio9
    This article was intended to include the following subheading (too many characters): "Bernie Sanders Disciple Exposes Inability To Differentia 'Debt' From 'Deficit'"
  • Abortion Vote Shows How Much Democrats' World Has Changed

    01/27/2015 5:59:17 PM PST · 1 of 3
    presidio9
  • Michelle Obama forgoes a headscarf and sparks a backlash in Saudi Arabia

    01/27/2015 5:53:25 PM PST · 47 of 63
    presidio9 to Libloather

    Criticize the president for bowing to King Abdulla in 2009, or criticize the first lady for not wearing the najib, but pick one. Can't have it both ways.

  • Hillary Clinton Has Been M.I.A. Lately -- and Here's Why

    01/27/2015 9:20:51 AM PST · 1 of 114
    presidio9
  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 8:40:27 PM PST · 298 of 498
    presidio9 to july4thfreedomfoundation
    I’m voting for Ted Cruz.

    Ted Cruz would make an excellent president. But the GOP has fixed the primary schedule in such a way that it will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for him to win the nomination if he does not win two of three out of Iowa, New Hampshire and Utah. Along with NY, CO and MI these are the first six primaries.

    Why the GOP would permit states that it can't win in the general election to move to such prominent positions, I can't say. But it will be a major concern for candidates like Cruz. He has no chance in NY or Minnesota, and very little chance in Colorado.

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 8:24:39 PM PST · 289 of 498
    presidio9 to Windflier
    I need to correct something from this post:

    People in my position have to be satisfied with small victories, but perhaps that RINO president (they are never truly principled) will be instrumental in getting a Supreme Court nominee approved.

    It should have said:

    "People in my position have to be satisfied with small victories, but perhaps that RINO senator(they are never truly principled) will be instrumental in getting a Supreme Court nominee approved.

    Small difference there, but it is a significant contextual change.

    I don't believe that electing RINO presidents (or RINO I the classic sense, anyway) does much good for the country. But I do believe that it valuable, for opposition votes to be counted in this very liberal state.

    And, for that same reason, I always vote straight Conservative Party line on all my ballots. I used to vote Right TO Life Party, but then a few years ago, that party did not get enough votes in an election and it was permanently removed from the ballot.

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 8:17:13 PM PST · 281 of 498
    presidio9 to ansel12; Windflier
    presidio, at some point you need to realize that many people on this thread have been confused by your posts, and especially since your pal flaglady left.

    I'm not surprised that you're misreading the conversation that I'm having with windflier, but it turns out that we actually agree on the substantial points. We disagree on the use of a term. Because I am a diplomatic person, I asked him to suggest an alternative.

    I won't put words in his mouth, but I believe that if you asked him, he would acknowledge the sad fact that candidate Ronald Reagan would have a difficult time winning a republican primary in 2016.

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 8:11:55 PM PST · 278 of 498
    presidio9 to OneWingedShark
    (IOW, McCain, Romney, Boehner, et al — they are the true Republicans. It is conservatives, constitutionalists, and libertarians that are the RINOs.)

    I haven't spent much time on FR in a while, but this is the best line that I've heard in moths.

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 8:10:21 PM PST · 277 of 498
    presidio9 to Windflier
    OK, I'll explain why empathy is as far as I go. I live in NYC, where people like me are an endangered species.

    I also believe that nutjobs like Bill De Blasio, as distasteful as they may be, are in some ways doing this city a service by helping it hit rock bottom.

    No, I don't believe that it likely that New York will become a red state any time soon.

    But I also believe in herd mentality. I think that it will ultimately help some New Yorkers to make the break from liberal insanity if they believe that they are not alone.

    So I cast my vote for whatever "R" is on the ticket. That candidate virtually always loses, but I am comforted by the fact that I am helping to document that a few of us do exist behind the lines. So, while my vote for president will probably never count in my lifetime, it is entirely possible that it will one day contribute to NY electing another RINO senator. People in my position have to be satisfied with small victories, but perhaps that RINO president (they are never truly principled) will be instrumental in getting a Supreme Court nominee approved.

    That's about the best someone in my position can ever hope for with his vote.

    In the mean time, I put all of my energy trying to get conservatives I meet in places like this (I go days at a time without talking to a conservative in real life) to rally around the best conservative primary candidate who can knock off the Mitt Romneys and John McCains of this world.

    Perhaps I need to do a better job of explaining my motivations. Because if you react to that by saying that I support RINO candidates, then I'm definitely not making myself clear. I wasted a lot of time working on the Rob Astorino campaign this fall. Never thought he had a snowball's chance in help, but I did it anyway, because it was the right thing to do. These are the types of concessions you have to make when you are a conservative in a place that elects people like Bill De Blasio for its leaders.

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 7:53:55 PM PST · 268 of 498
    presidio9 to Windflier
    It's why we conservatives have to band together behind ONE candidate early on, and resist all efforts to divide us.

    I'm confused. I thought that's just what I've been saying all along. Either I haven't made myself clear enough, or you saw the term "ideological purity" and convinced yourself that I was saying something else.

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 7:49:55 PM PST · 265 of 498
    presidio9 to OneWingedShark
    I see you read The Tao of Republican Orthodoxy… you are aware that that was a parody, yes?

    Nope, first I'm hearing of it.

    Do you disagree that the Republican political climate was quite different in 1980 than it is today?

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 7:47:12 PM PST · 263 of 498
    presidio9 to Windflier

    I think I get your point that the term “ideological purity” is a red flag for you. Is there a different one that you prefer?

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 7:45:10 PM PST · 260 of 498
    presidio9 to ansel12
    Here's what I took from post 190, Ansell. It was JimRob's polite way of calling you a tar baby. It was good advice, but I really am trying to help. I have known Jim on this website for fifteen years. If he thought that I was attacking Ronald Reagan, I can assure you that he would not be so cryptic.

    You seem to be struggling with the concept of the different political circumstances that Reagan would face today. I will expand, and perhaps it will help you to understand:

    You do realize that Ronald Reagan is no long with us, right? And you also realize that even if he were still alive (but presumably not 103 years old), the 22nd Amendment would disqualify him from running, right?

    It should therefore be common sense that we are dealing with a hypothetical candidate with the same track record as Reagan had when he ran in 1980. Not the man himself.

    In 2016 it would be very difficult for an otherwise conservative candidate to win the Republican nomination for president if he had previously signed an abortion bill into law as a state governor. This is not a conclusion that should have an argument.

    That is not to say that a similar candidate could not run to the right and win the nomination anyway, as we have seen with Mitt Romney. But Romney is a very different politician. And Reagan was a very different type of man.

    Now, you can keep this up if you like, but as far as I'm concerned, you are embarrassing yourself. You stalked me onto this thread, and you are making yourself look bad without my help.

    It is not rational behavior, and that is why I worry about you.

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 7:28:07 PM PST · 246 of 498
    presidio9 to Norm Lenhart
    I would. Discuss conservatism with conservatives. Like we used to do before that fraud and her fellows took it upon themselves to turn these threads into Romney admiration societies.

    And I think Dark would agree.

    One of the nice things about this site is you don't get a lot of total wingnuts just trolling for a fight.

    But it's also nice to have a foil occasionally, to help clarify your own thinking. Personally, I don't mind having a few Romneybots and the like around here. I learn a few things hearing others make the case against their stupidity.

  • Romney Tells Donors He Is Considering 2016 White House Bid

    01/09/2015 7:21:35 PM PST · 241 of 498
    presidio9 to Norm Lenhart; Darksheare
    Again, why shouldn’t she. She does it, continues doing it and is still here.

    I'm a fan of each of you, but it's starting to sound a little bit like neither of you would know what to do with yourself if she wasn't here.