posted on October 21, 2004 07:03:39 PM new
It's not all about the google search, Linda_K. Why do you find it so much fun to bastardize Teresa's name?
Fenix said it well.
Come on Linda - you don't think it being just a little bit childish and honestly a little disrespectful to make fun of the pronunciation of a foreign born persons name? If your child had done that at as five year old on the playground, isn't that the type of behavior you would have corrected?
posted on October 21, 2004 07:13:33 PM new
Kiara, let's face it....linda's had just about every post of hers laughed at, ridiculed, shown to be wrong, trounced, trashed.
So here she is , vainly and pathetically trying to prove a point about Theresa Kerry's name.
Let's just pat her on the head and agree....let her win this stupendously important point.
Maybe if we agree, she'll implode.
posted on October 21, 2004 07:15:32 PM new
All I can say is that it would be very embarrassing to have a friend or relative that acted as uncouth as linda_k does.
posted on October 21, 2004 07:17:10 PM new
Ah...the proven liar continues on her crazy postings about Linda....it's all about linda....it's a sickness he/she [crowfarm] appears to have.
----------------
And to the petty and childish kiara:
Write kerry and tell HIM how you feel....I could care less.
[i]New party, same views
Less than a year after lacerating Republican Senate candidate Rick Santorum and supporting Democrat Harris Wofford, the man Casey appointed to succeed John Heinz, Teresa Heinz became Teresa Heinz Kerry[/i].
[i]A throng of guests jetted, then rode a bumpy propeller shuttle, to Nantucket, where aides constructed a long tent outside the grey-and-white Heinz family vacation home. The guest list was suitably eclectic: Katharine Graham, publisher of The Washington Post; David Garth, John Heinz's longtime media consultant; Peter Yarrow of Peter, Paul and Mary, who brought his guitar.
Kerry raised a champagne glass "To the lovely teh-RAY-zah." He had won her over by speaking Portuguese to her during a conference in Brazil a few years earlier. Her office announced she would be keeping two things: the Heinz name and her Republican voter registration.
[the above can be found on the CommonDreams website]
I have a list too long to itemize, crowfarm. To summarize, linda said,"I go out of my way to not be rude to others and to work at only addressing the topic...helen is my exception."
posted on October 21, 2004 08:40:57 PM new
Crowfarm said; Helen, fill us in, what are you?
Helen then replied; I have a list too long to itemize, crowfarm.
HA...HAHA...HAHAHA...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...talk about sticking ones foot in ones own mouth. I can think of a few items that should be on your list of what you are.
posted on October 21, 2004 08:47:20 PM new
Take your foot out of yours then Yellowstone. You missed the drift of Helen's post altogether. HA! HAHAHA! HAHAHAHA!!!... HAHAHAHAHA!
posted on October 21, 2004 09:14:17 PM new
Helen, you are such a poor sport. Why can't you just take you're licks like a big girl and move on?? You can certainly dish it out quite well enough but you can't take it. Here's one for your list; Pathetic.
What exactly is a "dork", is that what you call a man when it just doesn't seem right to call him a c*nt??
posted on October 21, 2004 09:25:43 PM new
Well Helen, I certainly did get your ire up though didn't I, so there is something happening there and you do seem miffed about it all.
posted on October 22, 2004 05:23:27 AM new
Linda - Sometimes, well most of the time, you are the most one-sided person here. You only see and hear what you want to. No one here is going to change that and I think most people here have very little sympathy for that kind of thinking.
There is mud slinging on both sides; more on yours. The republican commercials are so full of lies and half-truths they make me ill. Only the niave and ill-informed believe them.
I no longer pay attention to the ads on TV, in the newspapers or anywhere else for that matter. However, I sometimes wish Kerry would get into attack mode - fight fire with fire. But, that's this administration's style.
Maybe women as strong as Teresa frighten you and well they should. I don't have anything against Laura Bush, but she's a wall flower. She puts women back about 50 years with the way she stands in her husband's shadow never really speaking her mind. She was a democrat before she married into the Bush family. I wonder what she REALLY thinks. Oh, I forgot, if she dares to really say what she thinks, she may be charged with treason.
Keep on living in fear. That's how this administration has gotten a foot hold. People who live in fear are weak and easily manipulated. Just look at Cuba. Castro has his people living in fear and that's why they've never done anything to get rid of the man. Look at your own children. The threat of punishment is used to keep them in line. They're afraid of the punishment and it weakens them. Well, I for one, am not afraid and nothing this administration says will make me feel afraid. If I die tomorrow either by disease, natural causes or by one of Bush's threats of terrorist attack, I will die knowing that I made the right decision in NOT backing this administration.
And with that, I'm off. I have a full day of POSITIVE things to do and nothing could make me happier.
On a lighter note. Here's the newest addition to our family:
No, not the child. The dog. Her name is Summer and she's an 8 years old AKC registered Golden Retriever in need of a diet.
Cheryl
. . .if you still try to defend the infamies and horrors perpetrated by that Antichrist- I really believe he is Antichrist- I will have nothing more to do with you and you are no longer my friend.. . - War and Peace, Tolstoy
posted on October 22, 2004 06:10:53 AM newMaybe women as strong as Teresa frighten you and well they should.
LOL Frighten me?? Not one tiny bit. Even the thought of her mouth running as our First Lady embarasses me for our Nation. Imus, a kerry supporter thinks she's crazy as do others. She lacks self-control of herself. The only thing she has going for her is her wealth....and I don't like the two groups she supports. I personally believe she supports anti-American groups. She and kerry both are more worried about what the 'world' thinks than they are about how the American people want things done. ie: UN making decisions for our Nation...etc.
Her calling people bastards, scumbags, idiots, lying about what she's quoted as saying...attacking our First Lady for absolutely NO reason...Laura Bush gave her no reason to start her mouth flapping about her...etc. [the list goes on] is definately NOT what I'd like to see represent this Nation as our First Lady.
posted on October 22, 2004 06:28:07 AM new
And then there's the fact that she refuses to disclose her finances....like you all DEMAND of the right.
taken from NRO
October 19, 2004, 8:40 a.m.
The Curious Discretion of Teresa Heinz Kerry
From the campaign that cries Halliburton...
If there's one thing that we have learned about Teresa Heinz Kerry it is that she is a woman who is not shy, as she repeatedly likes to remind us, about speaking her mind. Over the last few months, this splendidly bizarre, undeniably batty, figure has entertained, appalled, and enthralled Americans with her opinions — and her ignorance — on a startling range of issues. No wars for oil! Bin Laden will be the October surprise! Gin and white raisins cure arthritis!
When it comes to talking about her taxes, however, the voluble — and supposedly fearless — Mrs. Heinz Kerry has been uncharacteristically tongue-tied, preferring instead to hide behind her children. Citing their privacy (thanks to the Heinz trusts, her finances are deeply intertwined with those of her sons) she has held out against full disclosure of her 2003 tax records. As she explained back in April, "What I have and what I receive is not just mine, it is also my children's, and I don't know that I have the right to make public what is theirs...If I could separate it, I would have no problem."
Well, we are unlikely ever to know what attempts were made to separate these interests out for disclosure purposes, but, after a release discreetly timed for last Friday afternoon, we have now discovered how much of her 2003 returns Teresa Heinz Kerry is prepared to share with the rest of us: Two pages. That's about a page for every $2,500,000 in income. Gee, thanks.
As always with such paperwork, what's left out is far, far more interesting than what's left in. Those old, or jaundiced, enough to remember the Clintons' generosity with their used underwear will be disappointed that no details were given of Mrs. Kerry's charitable donations, or even of how much they were. Could it be, who knows, that Teresa was a little stingy last year, or could it be, perhaps, that she gave to some charities that might prove a little embarrassing in an election year?
Baseless innuendo? Very possibly. But there's an easy way to show that these suggestions are completely unfair. Disclose the full form, Teresa. Privacy? Oh, come off it. How can disclosure of any part of Mrs. Kerry's personal 1040 relate to her children, all of whom are now in their thirties?
But then there are the pesky, yet handy, family trusts (widely believed to be worth about around one billion dollars) that must mean so much to Teresa and her boys.
As the New York Times noted with, incredibly, a hint of disapproval, nothing, nothing, was disclosed about them: "If the trusts are as large as reported — and the Kerry campaign has not challenged the billion dollar estimate — then even a modest 5 percent return would have generated $50 million of income, 10 times what was on the two pages released by Ms. Heinz Kerry."
Trusts and income this large, even if only partly controlled by a potential future First Lady, matter. We've already seen how Teresa effectively helped finance her husband's campaign, at least in its bleaker moments. How her money is generated is, therefore, of some interest as is its potential, particularly in the context of a campaign that has made so much out of "Halliburton," for conflicts (or the perception of conflicts) of interest.
Teresa, of course, continues to use her family's "privacy" as a justification for this billion-dollar omission. It would be easier to have sympathy for that argument had not John Kerry's campaign manager only recently described Mary Cheney's sexual orientation as "fair game." And then there's Mrs. Edwards. She attributed Lynne Cheney's aversion to political point scoring over her daughter's private life to "a certain degree of shame." Charming.
To follow the sleazy logic of Elizabeth Edwards (oh, why not?) is there something about the Heinz trusts which Teresa finds "shameful"? Are some of their investments insufficiently PC? Could it be that the trusts are embarrassingly tax efficient? Are there any of those dreaded "conflicts"? Maybe the trusts are simply too large for their riches to be spelled out by a populist campaign already burdened with a candidate whose blue collar comes tailored by Turnbull & Asser. We don't know, of course, because they are not before our eyes.
And that privacy defense? Well, it was Mary Cheney's participation in her father's bid for reelection that, apparently, made her "fair game." While a comparison of the two cases cannot be stretched too far (no one is suggesting that Mary Cheney's finances be disclosed), it is worth remembering that two out of Teresa's three sons have been prominent in their stepfather's campaign. Given the exceptional circumstances, couldn't they, and their third brother, have agreed to, at least, some disclosure about the income generated by the trusts in which they and their mother are beneficiaries: It's not as if their wealth will come as a surprise to anyone.
But all this is to play Teresa's game. There is plenty that she could disclose without overly compromising her children's privacy, and, if only to avoid the suspicions that will otherwise inevitably arise, plenty that she should disclose. The reality, however, is that, for whatever reason, she simply isn't prepared to do so.
Teresa Heinz Kerry has, instead, a different message for the electorate. "Shove it."
