"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message
...

well no, but what can you do in just 4 weeks? :-)

Sweet Fester Arbuckle, but they really have to do something PDQ when they
do sit again because it's now stretching out a bit too long.

hm, i tend to think that they are, somewhat. i don't know. everything
happens at a glacial pace anyway! i'm not sure how quickly things CAN
happen, never mind "should".

i do, however, think that symbolic actions are important (in terms of
getting us all moving on to where we are going) & there's been a lot of
that. actual sitting time isn't set by govts,

It is actually. I think it's the Gov't Whip who sets it but if not, then
at least someone in the Government.

but is there not a common sitting length over the year? & it's not 52 weeks,
we all know that!! they just don't sit that much - they're often just not
there, because (i assume) it's not practical to do so anyway. i don't know
the ins & outs of it, but i'd be frankly concerned if some new govt decided
to sit 40 weeks a year. while they're sitting, they're not thinking of what
they need to do & talking to people about it, they're debating (& whatnot)
stuff which has been decided while they _weren't_ sitting.

that's what i meant.

also, i am secretly shallow so keep that in mind when i say: i hate his
ties. he never wears a tie i like. his taste in ties is absolutely foul.
something should be done..!

:-)) and Therese needs a bit of fashion advice too :-))

well she does, but she's not the prime minister so i'm not about to start
criticising her. :-)

all i can really say on this subject (like i even CARE!) is that neither
of them (none of them!) could be worse than the incumbent.

Tut tut. I'm sure you do care as I can't imagine that you could possibly
approve of the invasion of Iraq based on falsified information.

i didn't, i don't.

but i don't give a flying **** who the president of the usa is, & that's the
truth!! :-D whether i care or not i can't do anything about it, so i
therefore don't invest any energy in caring about any of them.

honestly, all we are seeing is the bush effect - nobody in the world wants
to see anyone like that in power again, EVER. however, since none of us can
do anything about it, it's a mystery to me that anyone need pay attention
until it happens. truly, they WILL let us know once there's been an
election, i'm sure :-) no amount of fussing about it now is going to change
anything, even though such a person will always do their overweening best to
make it the problem of the rest of the world, kwim? bush is a problem for
all 6 billion people on earth, & nobody wants that to happen again. but
since the next one will be another american, s/he is still going to be our
problem (just hopefully a much lesser problem). :-)

As allies and the richest most powerful nation on earth, when dumb
decisions are made there by a very thick President, it impacts way beyond
their borders. Look at all the shit we were fed so we too would happily
(choke) send troops to Iraq too. The one thing I will give Howard is that
although he looked like he was always supporting Bush, he was very careful
about his commitment to Iraq in terms of troop location adn numbers, not
that we could send too many anyway given our other international
commitments.

i think even rabid ideologues like howard were (grudgingly) aware of how his
incessant arse-licking of such an unworthy person reflected badly upon
himself. so he's doomed to be always associated with words like mean,
tricky, and cunning. nobody ever said he was stupid - he's not. but that
doesn't mean he was not the sole instrument of his own downfall - he was.
the creepy little control freak. you get that when you're one-eyed.

charlie is noice. :-)

Shhhhh. Don't let him hear you say that or he'll get a swelled head!

he may not be able to fit his gardening hat on!!

having said that, any country probably has a majority of nice (in their
way) individuals. it's how they act collectively that matters, in many
ways.

Yes. I still have not forgiven most of our compatriots about the Tampa.
The majority seem to be a bunch of idiots given how often I heard the line
about 'queue jumping'.

oh dear. i think the truth is that most people worldwide are "a bunch of
idiots". truly. the modern world is ridiculously complicated & lots of
people simply can't keep up. that doesn't make them unlikeable, unkind or
unworthy - it's just something you need to keep in mind. i don't know that
there's any place left for people who just aren't smart or who are
unprepared to think. they're being left behind. tbh i'm not sure what (if
anything) could or should be done about it.

in the olden days, most people were chattel, peasants or serfs. these days,
they have the same rights as the ruling class & expect that things are
equal, but things aren't equal & won't ever be, because people aren't equal.
an un-thought-out opinion is not equal to a well-thought-out opinion, is it?
but modern democratic types expect everyone to have a say, based on the
assumption (i suppose) that if a person is required to make a decision,
they'll probably put some thought into it, since it is going to affect them.
thus we try to drag each other up through the primordial slime :-) it kind
of works, doesn't it?

that
seems to be the problem with the farcical olympic torch business - most
chinese people are lovely, but the govt there is appalling.

Yep, but so was ours till the end of last year :-))

to be fair to them, they weren't executing their own populace in droves, &
stuff like that.
i think obscurity is great. not to mention, necessary.

Yup! Long may we continue to have it (says she with a sore arm - I got my
Chloera and Typhoid shots today for our impending trip :-((()

ow!

but see, i'm a pretty smart person (mostly ;-) yet i find it inconceivable
that things like typhoid still exist!! it's hard for us to move outside our
own brain & own experience, isn't it?
kylie