On Mon, 3 Sep 2007 08:48:24 -0500, "TMOliver"
<tmoliverjrFIX@hot.rr.comFIX> wrote:

>I no less enjoy spending money on those pursuits dear 
>to me, yet have gathered and preserved assets to carry my spouse and I 
>through our remaining lives with occasional forays to foreign climes and 
>semi-luxurious hostels.
So be it, my only forays to foreign climes are to save money not spend
it I embark on another foray at noon tomorrow returning here at 20.13
Wednesday night Virgin trains willing .
>  Yesterday, I paid $2.55 a gallon for gas
I wish I could pay that amount here for gas in fact I would be willing
to pay more £ 2.55p even which begs the question why are people in the
US always winging about the price of gas ?what you lot going to do
when you reach the price threshold we have to pay kill yourselves
perhaps .
> and a good 
>hamburger can be found in the $2.50 - $3.00 range, amazing parallels of 
>inflation, more closely tracking than other items.  I first went to the UK 
>and Europe in the 50s, and spent much of 1962-1965 there, and it takes a 
>special sort of fool to claim that life was "better" then than now. 
But it was for me you just cannot say what you have said regarding
others you just do not know what my life was like or what I had back
then the US didn't have a president that was always seeking out
someone to wage war with and doing his best to drag us into his 
arguments with other countries . Where it not for that bastard Bush
many UK and US servicemen would still be alive today may he rot in
hell that man isn't fit to clean his Fathers shoes .




 On the 
>other hand, yesterday is always better to the embittered, the lonely and the 
>left behind, criteria into which you seem easily to fit.
>
>TMO 
>

On 9/3/2007 9:40 AM mymail@hotmail.co.uk didn't have much to say, yet wrote:

> But it was for me you just cannot say what you have said regarding
> others you just do not know what my life was like or what I had back
> then the US didn't have a president that was always seeking out
> someone to wage war with and doing his best to drag us into his 
> arguments with other countries . Where it not for that bastard Bush
> many UK and US servicemen would still be alive today may he rot in
> hell that man isn't fit to clean his Fathers shoes .

Your life must have been *really* tough.  You can't even afford a
comma.  Didn't teach punctuation back in your day?
-- 
dgs

wrote ...
> "TMOliver"  <tmoliverjrFIX@hot.rr.comFIX> wrote:
>
> But it was for me you just cannot say what you have said regarding
> others you just do not know what my life was like or what I had back
> then .....

Life in the interim must have treated you badly, then.  Did you piss away 
your prosperity ofn strong drink, bad drugs and fast women?



> ....the US didn't have a president that was always seeking out
> someone to wage war with and doing his best to drag us into his
> arguments with other countries . Where it not for that bastard Bush
> many UK and US servicemen would still be alive today may he rot in
> hell that man isn't fit to clean his Fathers shoes .
>
I do notice come every morning that the British contingent has been in Iraq 
since Day 1, and I'm not quite sure how we could have lured the UK there. 
Obviously, it can't be oil, tea or opium.

Yours is the same quaint response I've read from all too many UK posters, 
the "diminished responsibility defense",  "We're gonna blame Bush and the 
'Merkins, 'cuz we certainly must have been tricked, trapped, cozened, conned 
and otherwise immorally induced to go to war."  You could collectively plead 
temporary insanity, I suppose....(and after all, Iraq remains a locale in 
which the current situation reflects a series of spectatcular fuckups by the 
UK dating from 1919 or so, compounded on several occasions post WWII.  It 
was once one of the pink places on the globe, but maybe not as badly run as 
Zimbabwe....).

>
>
>
> On the
>>other hand, yesterday is always better to the embittered, the lonely and 
>>the
>>left behind, criteria into which you seem easily to fit.
>>


There's nothing that appeals less than drinking warm canned Coke on a train, 
especially one which costs more and takes longer than travel by air (where, 
except on BA, they'll give me a can of Coke and 2 cups of ice if I ask 
nicely).  Amusingly, my little "baggie" contains no toiletries, simply 4 or 
5 "miniatures" of  whiskey.  I am a cheapskate.  There are several 
expenditures I consider foolish, "renting" movies  or using "mini-bars" in 
hotel rooms and paying $5 for a shot of booze from a US airline.  I still 
eschew the first two, but the $5 for a drink has gotten to be less than 
saloon prices....

TMO