Georgie goes to school ***ROFLMAO*** : LUSENET : Unk's Troll-free Private Saloon : One Thread

Georgie goes to school

Tuesday, April 16, 2002

By Inday Espina-Varona
Georgie goes to school

The word from Washington is, that Georgie, the Texan princeling who so badly yearns to be the man Dad wants him to be, is finally hitting the books and doing his homework.

About time. Half a dozen chiefs of states have just told Colin Powell the world is not behooved to behave like patriotic Americans. Ariel Sharon and Yasser Arafat, not to mention rich Saudis and Bahrainis, have just shown how little Georgie knows about Abrahamís children. Even the Northern Alliance warlords have taken to killing each other again, in full view yet of their blonde peacekeepers.

But friends will tell you Georgie was a late bloomer. So perhaps we should just say a prayer of thanks that Georgie is slowly learning, that hi-tech war toys and chiseled patrician features are not enough to earn genuine respect.

No, change that. Let us give thanks that Georgie is finally realizing that respect from equals may be more rewarding than the groveling that merely masks smirks and dirty fingers, or the condescending prattle dished out by shifty-eyed father figures like Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney, the latter well on his way to becoming a caricature of a simpering, vanishing Alfred Hitchcock.

Maybe one day soon a liíl ol steel magnolia will march up the White House steps, brush aside those Secret Service hunks, sweep into the Oval Office, dump tomes on that glistening desk, and lecture Georgie on the dangers of being such a pompous dunce.

Hopefully, one of those books will be a copy of the US Constitution, now under siege by both terrorists and the protectors of the people. Maybe Georgie, now that heís in between sophomoric speeches, could be stirred into studying the real things that make his country great ó like the belief that all men (and nations) are created equal, despite differences in color, creed, facial hair, or per capita incomes.

He just has to look in his own backyard. While heís at it, Georgie could pull Ali Flietcher from the White House Press Room for a review of simple English.

Spell coup, boys. Never mind the Frenchy appendage. The simple verb says, ďoverturn, upset.Ē The longer noun means ďa sudden decisive exercise of force in politics; esp: the violent overthrow or altercation of an existing government by a small group.Ē

Now spell Venezuela. Spell Chavez. You remember Chavez, Georgie? PRESIDENT Hugo Chavez, chief of state of an independent republic, and one elected in a democratic manner, was arrested last week by a small cabal of generals and taken to an island. While all that was underway, the same cabal installed Pedro Carmona, the leader of a band of oligarchs, as president, and started a manhunt for Chavezís aides and supporters. A move presumably made to quell violence snowballed into something Latin Americans thought lay buried in their collective nightmare Ė dissolution of the National Assembly and the Supreme Court amid a vague promise of elections a year hence.

Spell commitment. Oops. Your turn, Ali. Figures. If you canít spell, you probably canít define. A commitment, gentlemen, is an agreement or pledge.

In case your advisers havenít told you yet, Georgie, the US signed last year the new Democracy Charter of the Organization of American States. It says, among other things, that all members of the group would act strongly against military coups.

All OAS members condemned the Venezuelan coup and refused to recognize the new government ó all but one Ė the US, whose president (thatís you, Georgie) loves to declaim on moral rectitude (no, Ali, rectum is a different word).

Do you remember what you said, Georgie?

It ainít a coup. It ainít a coup because he deserves it. He deserves it because I, Georgie, donít like his mug and his pals. And because Uncle Otto Reich says heís bad and you donít argue with a man who saved Nicaragua from the Sandinistas. And because Dadís amigos arenít too fond of ex-parachutists who threaten to close a third of our oil taps. And because I know how to spell hegemony, and it means you can be an SOB but you have to be our SOB!

Spell Venezuela again. Remember that word, Georgie. Ten years down the road, unless youíve succeeded in redefining archives, that word is going to be an embarrassment.

Ah, that one you got right. I told you, practice makes perfect.

-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), April 17, 2002


I didn't think I'd ever write this to you but Cherri, you're sick. You truly need some help. Get over it already!

-- Maria (, April 17, 2002.

Maria, I suspect you have really hit the nail on the head here. Cherri is a classic example of Ďlosers lamentí and should not be taken seriously on any subject. That being said, she has taken her anger-laden self-loathing and packaged it towards the President, Republicans, and others who donít subscribe to her twisted logic.

It is useless to debate or reason with her. Just be thankful you are not she.

-- Send (mo@money.please), April 17, 2002.

Excellent piece Cherri, keep up the good work!

LOL! I see that Maria and Send Money are going into their whining routine again, having a hard time facing the truth about their hero traitor Georgie!

This piece hit the nail on the head, EXACTLY!

-- bwaahahahaa! (the@truth.hurts), April 17, 2002.

Hey Maria, pass the popcorn! It's great entertainment watching you pout and whimper!!

-- hee haaaw!! (my@morning.chuckle), April 17, 2002.

I know Send but I didn't think it could go any further as it has.

Troll, you are just beyond hope. You actually believe that this is "pout and whimper". No, the conservatives are still in office. Nothing for me to "pout and whimper" about.

-- Maria (, April 17, 2002.

Cherri, the problem with your postings as I see it is that you regard any criticism of Bush as valid. It could be from a Nobel Prize winning economist, or from some website like, it all seems to be the same to you.

-- Peter Errington (, April 17, 2002.

What exactly is not "valid" about this criticism, Errorton? Is it not true that the hypocrite Dubya violated his own agreement?

-- (let', April 17, 2002.

Maria, I have some suspicions regarding the Ďtrollí as you call him/her. This person is clever and possessing of above normal intelligence. I think itís all about Ďbaitingí and I seriously doubt that this person has any real strong political convictions. Also, I believe this poster to be someone who also posts under a very well known handle and just likes to stir the pot, so to speak. I donít answer his/her posts and that is the best revenge against this agitator.

However, Cherri is a horse of a different color. She is simply a lonely woman that hates herself and blames others for her failed existence.

-- Free (head@case.analysis), April 17, 2002.

Free, you have just described the troll to a T, IMHO. That description applies to LL (and that's who I think the troll is) also to a T.

-- Peter Errington (, April 17, 2002.

Peter, I've seen past threads where you and the troll have a few words. I'm not as sure as you that it's actually LL only because I don't think Unk would give her the keys to this place for all the 'trouble' she caused before. (But it's all a guessing game at this point.) I'm inclined to believe that it's someone else, like Doc Paulie. Didn't you have 'disagreements' with him in the past. Just a suggestion. I really don't know and really don't care. Funny thing is this troll actually believes he can press my buttons. LOL

Free, I don't think I've ever seen the troll support Bush therefore I'm inclined to believe that he is a Bush-hater always. He seems to only stir the pot on Cherri's threads. Again that's why I think he's DP. Oh well, I guess it will remain a mystery, do-do, do-do.

-- Maria (, April 18, 2002.

Maria, I think LL likes to adopt a number of different personalities/identities, and one of them slipped by Unk. I don't think Unk would have deliberately given her the keys, considering the dust-up the two of them had on the previous forum.

Anyway, rightly or wrongly, I think from a style standpoint we aren't looking at DP at all, but rather at LL.

-- Peter Errington (, April 18, 2002.

"What exactly is not "valid" about this criticism, Errorton? Is it not true that the hypocrite Dubya violated his own agreement?"


We're still waiting for an answer to this question. Are you going to respond with an honest answer, or are you, Maria, and Send simply going to make insulting remarks toward Cherri without even responding to the subject of her post? Hmmm, that kind of behavior is beginning to look suspiciously "trollish"!

-- look in the mirror (who's the @ troll. now?), April 18, 2002.

LL, the subject at hand right now is your infernal trolldom, and I see (no surprise at all) that you are dodging and weaving to beat the band.

-- Peter Errington (, April 18, 2002.

OK, Ďlook in the mirrorí, Iíll address your issues regarding the validity of this trash piece from Manila.

Here we have some left-wing Filipino woman who writes for the Manila Times. She most likely was bored writing about the daily human carnage taking place throughout her country and decided to take a shot at comedy tomes, with our President the brunt of her silly style.

Why would anyone, for one second, take this woman seriously? Cherri I can understand. She must have an Internet search subscription that feeds her every obscure slam piece on Bush so she can cut-n-paste it to this forum. She has been gracious enough to inform us what a pathetic life she is livingÖÖ.her vitriol is understandable.

While you appear to be a Bush hater yourself, I suspect you just like to spar a little with the folks here at Unkís. Thatí cool, I enjoy that myself from time to time.

But if you consider Ms. Inday Espina-Varona to be anything but a long- range dart thrower, then perhaps Iíve overestimated your intelligence.

-- Free (head@case.analysis), April 18, 2002.

"I see (no surprise at all) that you are dodging and weaving to beat the band."

LOL, you're projecting Errorton. It seems to be YOU who is doing the "dodging and weaving". Errorton the troll, instead of even attempting to debate the validity of this article, he resorts to attacking the messenger.

-- (takes one @ to. know one), April 18, 2002.

Actually, I wondered at the time why the U.S. wasn't in there defending the democratically elected president of a nation in our own hemisphere. But then I thought maybe we were too busy trying to clamp a lid on Israel for doing the same thing we did to Afganistan. Luckily for the people of Venezuala, they were able to force their military to abide by their wishes. Unlike another industrialized first-world nation...

-- helen (politics@irritates.goats), April 18, 2002.

I think Doc Paulie and LL are both here, LL sounding the saner of the two. Sary huh

-- (what@me.thinks.), April 18, 2002.

"I wondered at the time why the U.S. wasn't in there defending the democratically elected president of a nation in our own hemisphere."

You're forgetting Helen, the Bush Administration conveniently switches to their double-standard operating procedure whenever there is oil involved, or an opportunity for Dumbya's clan to gain more wealth and power.

-- (Dumbya@the.traitor), April 18, 2002.

Nice try. Steer the subject away from the excellent article posted by Cherri. The fact is many of us are angry because dumbya stole the election, in fact many of us lost our minds, welfare entitlements, and even our sense of humor.

-- (disgruntled@voter.florida), April 19, 2002.


About W. "stealing the election", are you unaware of the fact that the newspaper consortium (N.Y. Times et al) concluded that if the vote count had been allowed to continue, Bush would still have won?

-- Peter Errington (, April 19, 2002.

Errorton, this just proves the right-wing bias in the media.

-- (sheesh@get.Aclue), April 20, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ