Click THE SANDBOX number to go to that issue.
Use your browser's back button to return here.
THE SANDBOX Archive ~ 1999 (part 1 of 2)
JAN, 1999 ~ #19, #20, #21, #22, #23, #24, #25, #26, #27
FEB, 1999 ~ #28, #29, #30, #31, #32
********************************************
********************************************
THERE'LL BE SOME CHANGES IN THE WEATHER
AND SOME CHANGES IN YOU.
THIS COULD BE THE START
OF SOMETHING NEW!
WELCOME TO 1999 AND ISSUE #19 OF THE SANDBOX!
January 1, 1999
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Arthur Roberts (??), Ray Wells, (54),
Tony Sharpe (63), cami Riddell (85),
Jim Doyle (49), Barb Barron (50),
Robert McCullough (65), Vince Bartram (62)
Norma Loescher (53)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To share your Ideas, Your Opinions, Your Inspirations,
And Your Retorts with other Richland Bombers Around The
World: ReplyTo: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
SEND US YOUR PREDICTIONS FOR 1999!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Regarding the (non binding) poll indicating whether you
favor a constitutional amendment to require the
castration of future United States Presidents prior to
taking the Oath of Office: The survey results at the
moment are running at just about a 70% approval rating
in favor of future Presidents retaining their virility.
(Quite similar to the current approval rating of the
President's performance now.)
Is this synchronicity, or what? No further reports are
planned regarding this survey unless significant changes
occur in current trends. The margin for error in this
survey is calculated at plus or minus 99%.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Arthur Roberts, fluffdry@hotmail.com, writes:
I predict the following headline will appear in 1999:
HILLARY PUSHES CLINTON INTO OCEAN NEAR HILTON HEAD.
On the following day, Clinton will call a press
conference and proclaim: "SHE WAS TRYING TO SAVE ME
FROM A SWARM OF KILLER BEES."
75% Of the country will believe him.
-Arthur Roberts
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Snappy Answers to Stupid Democrat Sound-Bytes
From: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells) (54)
Are you tired of the lame answers offered by your
favorite Republican when Democrats make impassioned
pleas for Bill Clinton's right to harass women and break
laws? Here is a handy guide of snappy answers to use
when the Democrats bring up those twisted sound bytes
that are supposed to persuade us to let Bill Clinton off
the hook.
(1) This is just about a president having a private
affair.
This is about the right of a president to molest
innocent American women, attack her with taxpayer-paid
attorneys if she dares to complain, and lie under oath
when she finally gets her day in court. Those are the
rights Democrats are fighting for.
(2) This is just about sex.
Rape is just about sex, robbery is just about money,
murder is just a misunderstanding.
(3) Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski testified that they
didn't have sex and nobody told her to lie.
So, if they both lie, that makes it the truth?
(4) According to his personal definition of sex, he
doesn't think he lied. So therefore, he didn't lie.
You mean a criminal now has the right to re-define his
crime? What a novel legal concept! "I didn't steal the
money, I borrowed it. I didn't rape her, I borrowed
her. I didn't kill him, your honor, his head hit my
baseball bat."
(5) He may have committed perjury, but he shouldn't be
impeached.
Tell me, what crime can a president commit?
(6) Does this rise to the level of impeachment?
Gee, let's see, perjury, obstruction of justice, witness
tampering, abuse of power. Impeachment? This rises to
the level of jail.
(7) The economy is doing great.
So, the better the economy, the more crimes he can
commit? If we get 5% growth, do we allow a president to
knock off a liquor store?
(8) We need his leadership.
It's impossible to lead the country when you can't
follow the laws of the land.
(9) A panel of historians say he should stay in office.
A panel of liberal historians from liberal colleges who
love liberal presidents.
(10) Distinguished professors say he shouldn't be
impeached.
The only thing distinguishable about them is their blind
love of the Democratic party...and Karl Marx.
(11) We should forgive Clinton...
I can forgive the bus driver who goes over the cliff
with a busload of kids. But I'll take away his license.
(12) This will put the country through hell.
When a president breaks the law, the country goes
through hell.
(13) This will damage the nation.
Oh, so just let the president keep breaking the law.
That's better?
(14) The Republicans caused this.
Bill Clinton caused this.
(15) Republicans are just being partisan.
Democrats are defending a law-breaking president from
their own party. Who is being partisan?
(16) This is part of a Great Right-Wing Conspiracy.
The Republicans couldn't organize a barbecue.
(17) The Rodino hearings were fair.
Rodino was canned because he was blatantly partisan.
Fortunately, the 1970's Republicans were willing to
punish a law-breaking president from their own party.
The 1990's Democrats are defending a law-breaking
president from their own party.
(18) Hillary has shown what a strong woman she is.
If Hillary were a strong woman, she'd have left him.
She is a horrible role model for young women.
(19) Other nations are laughing at us.
Other nations don't take baths. Other nations let their
leaders rape women. Other nations kill citizens who
dissent. Other nations suck. America is the greatest
nation on earth because we all obey the same laws.
(20) The polls show most of the nation wants him to stay
in office.
The polls didn't support the civil rights laws, either.
Should we revoke them?
(21) Last election, the people spoke and told us they
don't want impeachment.
Bill Clinton wasn't running in the last election. And
if anyone paid attention, there was a 13% swing of women
voting towards Republicans.
(22) Republicans shouldn't impeach while our troops are
in harms way.
Bow Wow Wow.
(23) Instead of impeachment, we should censure.
Censure? For Bill Clinton, that's a checkered flag!
Censuring a president isn't even in the Constitution.
But since when does a Democrat read the Constitution?
(24) Maybe something a little tougher than censure...
A little tougher than censure? OK. We'll make him
stand in the corner during recess. That's tougher than
censure.
(25) A president shouldn't be above the law, but he
shouldn't be below the law.
OK. Then give him the same punishment all Americans get
when they commit perjury, sixteen months in jail.
(26) 40 million dollars and all we have is this?
If Clinton told the truth, this investigation would have
cost a couple hundred bucks and box of pizza. Besides,
that 40 million dollars also got 16 indictments and 5
convictions for Whitewater.
(27) He's sorry.
He's sorry he got caught.
(28) He apologized.
He hasn't admitted his crime.
(29) He is a popularly elected president.
So was Nixon.
There are your snappy answers to stupid liberal
soundbytes. Use them well. Use them often. But above
all, use them.
--Ray Wells
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Reason and Logic vs Emotion
From: tonys@citylinq.com (Tony Sharpe)
To: Ron Richards ('63) and Marc Franco ('66)
Nice comments Ron, I just wanted to know that you were
reading these wonderful editorials. I like it when my
team is up 2-0. Guess that makes me a Republican, not
quite the same son of a Hanford Construction, blue
collar, Democrat family of the 1960's. Of course the
Democratic Party of today sadly bears no resemblance to
what the party stood for then.
Marc, please excuse me for implying that you were a
"closet Demo" since you seemed to be defending Mr.
Clinton by pointing the finger at other Republicans. I
guess what I fail to understand is what Ollie North,
Fawn Hall and Iran-Contra have to do with the
Impeachment of Wm Clinton for lying under oath and
obstruction of justice. Did I misunderstand your
independent analysis of the facts regarding our
President's misconduct, and after looking at those facts
with reason and logic, you agree that he should have
been impeached?
With regard to whether a Republican President would have
resigned under similar circumstances, the record is
clear. Richard Nixon resigned just before the articles
of impeachment were voted by a Democrat majority on the
Judiciary Committee, and at the urging of many of his
fellow
Republicans.
If Republicans were hypocrites, Bob Livingston would
still be speaker of the house I suppose. If I were a
Democrat, I wouldn't be proud to have Larry Flint as the
poster boy of my party offering a MIL to anyone who
could dig up dirt on any Republican Congressman. Maybe
Steve Forbes, a magazine publisher and Republican,
should offer 2 MIL to see how many more Ted Kennedys
there are on the Demo side of the aisle.
By the way, there is absolutely no evidence that Ronald
Reagan was "guilty" in the Iran-Contra affair. Oliver
North was hailed as a hero because he refused to allow
the Democrats who were driving the inquiry to implicate
the President in that affair and thus smear his
presidency.
Marc, I sincerely hope you are an Independent who votes
for both Democrats and Republicans in equal numbers,
since neither party truly represents your ideals and you
find "equal' fault with both sides. My problem is that,
on balance, there is no one in the Democratic party that
reflects my Ideals for our Republic, and therefore I
call myself a Republican
Tony Sharpe ('63)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Different Views OK. - Demeaning Not.
From: Cami Riddell Addkisson (85)
I have been reading many of the opinions here on the
President. I would like to tell Mike Cook that I
completely agree with what he said. I think about all
the money and time that has been spent on this and then
I think about the homeless children and those at
Christmas dinner who had nothing to eat..... To John
Northover I would like to say that I have written to my
Senator and Congress Representative. By the way John, I
have a Master's degree and do happen to read quite a lot
thank you. You are welcome to your opinions, but please
do not demean others who happen to have a different view
than you. Is this the type of example you were talking
about setting for our children and grandchildren?
Cami
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Some people may be turned off...
From: Jim Doyle (49) and Barb Barron Doyle (50)
Mail: Elyodmij@aol.com
Some people may be turned off by the political
discussions. I wonder how many of them are in the 70%
Clinton approval group. I'd like to see you take that
poll. We keep up on everything going on. We read all
the East Coast newspapers and magazines on the net.
Those that are canceling The Sandbox because of the
"boring" political discussions probably fall within the
70% national poll of Clinton supporters. I find these
polls questionable. New York City and Los Angeles
doesn't represent the nation and I'm convinced these are
the only places polled.
--Jim & Barb Doyle
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Robert McCullough (65)
Mail To: rlmccull@bentonrea.com
Subject: Business of the Nation
A lurker here coming out into the open.. Have enjoyed
reading the thoughts and opinions on here. Now I have
got something to say.
There has been talk about putting this Clinton thing
behind us and moving on to the business of the nation..
Ummmmm..... I was under the opinion that following the
constitution was the business of the nation. If I am
not mistaken, the business of impeachment is a part of
the constitution. Thus, beings the full House has
passed two Articles of Impeachment on to the Senate, it
is the business of the Country being taken care of. I
am of the feeling that what is taking place is very
important business (of our Country). This is what is
known as checks and balances of our three parts of
government. This is the system that was wisely set up
by the framers of the constitution. It is in the
constitution to keep all branches of the government in
check. What foresight the had when writing this.
The other thought I keep having running threw my mind is
why would a person that claims that he did not do
something wrong that is impeachable ask for a censure?
Why would he have all his people out asking for a
censure? Wouldn't you think that if you knew you were
right and that you felt that there was not enough votes
to convict you by the jury (Senate) that you would
demand that the trial take place. Seems a little weird
to me that if one felt innocent that you would ask for
some sort lesser punishment if you could not be
convicted.
Well there are my rambling thoughts.
Rob McCullough
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: What Is Being Missed?
From: "Vince Bartram" vlewisb@email.msn.com>
To those that wonder what they are missing.
How about objective evidence (sometimes known as the
facts)?
--Vince Bartram 62
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subject: Susan McDougal
From: Norma Boswell (53)
Reply to: boswelln@owt.com
Regarding #9 on Ray Well's list against President
Clinton: I watched Susan McDougal as she was interviewed
by Geraldo Rivera a few days ago after she was released
from prison. Her attitude toward Ken Starr was hostile,
but for President Clinton she declared steadfast loyalty
and support. That lady looks like she fears NO ONE! If
I understood her correctly, she said she was offered
everything short of a trip to Hawaii to testify against
President Clinton. When she refused, she was given
solitary confinement in a 5 x 7 jail cell.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Makes Monica Look Like Small Potatoes
Date: 12/30/98 5:06:17 PM PST
From: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells)
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
FYI, from Ray Wells (54)
In an Article written by Will Lester © Copyright 1998
The Associated Press Wednesday, December 30, 1998; 2:08
p.m. EST
House Says China Deal Harmed U.S
To quote the article in part:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- United States technology deals with
China, including some with military significance, harmed
national security, a House committee concluded
unanimously today.
"These transfers are not limited to missile satellite
technology, but cover militarily significant
technology," said Rep. Christopher Cox, chairman of a
special House committee investigating military and
commercial deals with China."
[Note: Because this is a copyrighted article we will not
be able to quote the entire article here, but the
article did go on to reveal that this committee's
investigation was conducted in a bipartisan manner to
find whether national security was compromised, and
whether decisions to transfer technology were influenced
by campaign contributions. Further, this copyrighted
Associate Press Article stated that the congressional
committee is making 38 recommendations for legislation
and executive action to remedy a situation that it found
has hurt national security. It is planned that more
details and unclassified portions of the report should
be made public as soon as possible.]
[The article discusses the concerns of many that
valuable military technology allegedly flowed to China
as part of commercial satellite deals in which U.S.-
built communications satellites were put into orbit on
low-cost Chinese rockets.]
All quotes and references are from article referred to:
© Copyright 1998 The Associated Press
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's it for this issue of THE SANDBOX, folks. Share
your opinions, Your Feelings, Your Ideas and News About
YOU with all of us! Please include your class year in
all contributions.
Thanks!
-19-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX
Issue #20 ~ January 3 1999
If We Aren't Talkin' About What YOU Wanna Talk About
Who Are YOU Gonna Blame?
IF YOUR POINT OF VIEW IS NOT DISPLAYED
Who Are YOU Going To Fault?
T H I S IS Y O U R F O R U M
Y O U R O P P O R T U N I T Y
T O S P E A K O U T !
ABOUT THE THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO YOU
Everything Said Here (Or Not Said) Depends On YOU
So WHO Is Holding YOU Back?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TODAY'S CONTRIBUTORS:
Paula Beardsley (62), Patty de la Bretonne (65),
Ron Richards (63), Steve Carson (58),
Patty Stordahl (72), Marc Franco (66),
Mike Franco (70), Willard Ule (73).
Express and Share YOUR Ideas, YOUR Opinions, YOUR
Inspirations, YOUR Adventures, YOUR Retorts with other
Richland Bombers All Around The World!
ReplyTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WE STILL WANT YOUR PREDICTIONS FOR 1999!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Bmbr70@aol.com (Mike Franco) (70)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Discussions With Bombers More Meaningful?
Happy New Year and thanks for this forum....I do seem to
have some of the same debates here as elsewhere but it
seems more meaningful to be discussing with fellow
BOMBERS than the less significant populous (tongue in
cheek) !!!!!!
--Mike Franco (70)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: BECAUSE HE IS THE PRESIDENT?
From: Paula Beardsley Glenn (62)
Reply To: VkngBluMom@aol.com
Re: President Clinton:
If I swore an oath not to lie in my testimony before any
legally seated jury in the United States and then
proceeded to do just that and was convicted of perjury,
there is no question in my mind what would happen to
me. Why is citizen William Jefferson Clinton any better
than I? Because he is the President- I DON'T THINK SO.
--Paula Beardsley Glenn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: DZIGNRITE@aol.com (Patty Stordahl) (72)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: WE WERE A GREAT COUNTRY ONCE
Regarding the comments of Tony Sharpe,
Today's democrats do not resemble the 60s demos.>>
Hello- Where is your memory?
Kennedy's were all womanizers, murderer's & charming.
Lied under all circumstances, Mafia tied, pig headed ego
maniacs who had daddy's boot legged illegal $$ to get
fat & sassy off of. When little AK back woods man had
feds crash his still. Kennedy's ran openly rampant
making $$ by the millions. Charming Clinton - Kennedy,
NO difference. All members of good old boy political
club demo or rep are all the same. Small potatoes who
first enter office may really want to change things. But if
the game is not played they are not re elected. Don't kid
your self Electoral votes are bogus. The American poll is
for appearance only & for anyone to stand for our
politicians is anti-American.
Legislation, House or Senate. All are overspenders at
our expense & the only way to really get what we want
is for all to stop paying taxes I mean, ALL for only 1 year.
We may just then get their attention. I am pro America
but want the government as it is set up now to be
disbanded. Start over. Pick up the 10 commandments
&try to live by those laws.
Any one who thinks that we are still the greatest is living
in a dream world. Our country is a joke to the rest of the
world. Our tax payer $$ are wasted on everything from
sex with interns to over-priced screw drivers. Our country
lost its integrity when men & women forgot God. God is
still the same, we as a country are not. I wish all over 50
white men would be kicked out of office. Place women &
minorities in power & let them have a go for a while.
The Good Old Boys Over 50 Club has really run our once
great nation into the mud. Let fresh blood try for a while.
I for one am tired of all the BS that people are saying.
No excuses right or wrong. America, don't vote for any
existing candidate & watch them win any way. Rep or
Demo the days are gone of America's greatness.
Somewhere the little guys who support their phat A _ _'_.
need to rise up & not support the gov as it exists today.
United we stand Divided we fall. We are a country totally
torn from within. We, my friends, are going to fall & it
will
be great. We have done it to ourselves. No country is
going to bomb us. We the people will destroy ourselves.
Read Daniel chapter 2 verses 31 - 45. Pay close
attention to verses 40-45. This is America. From
Nostradamous predictions to Daniel's dream
interpretations to the book of Revelation, even the words
of Lenin & Marx. The Eagle will destroy herself from
within. Infiltrate the schools get away from prayer &
morality & intermingle the races & it will fall. I am not a
racist. I believe now that meant there are so many
nationalities represented in our country. English,
German, Norwegian, Russian, Icelandic, African,
Hispanic, Ethiopian, British, Asian ... that there is no
real integral pride of where are we from as a unit. This
has nothing to do with inter racial marriages. Every one
has their own holidays every religion is divided.
We are a country with clay & quicksand for a
foundation. Someday whether we as a nation or state
or individual believe it or not, something big is going to
happen & we will fall hard. I believe that we need to
either stand as one voice or fall as many. Impeaching
Clinton would be standing as one voice. Censorship
would be compromise Forgiveness would be fatal. Yes,
it is my soapbox day. I love my country & I love what
we used to stand for but as of this date I despise what
our government has come to be. Prayer, rosary,
chants, what ever it takes can't we all agree there is
only One God. Call on him/her to purge our land & trust
again in God, as we individually picture God, to open our
leaders eyes & slow the ticking hands of time &
destruction of our once great country?
--Patty Stordahl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: SteveNitro@aol.com (Steve Carson( (58)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
For: Ray Wells
Ray Wells, Thanks for the relief. Great list and I'm sure
we will need more as this moves forward. We should get
some comments from the first OJ Jury, they had the
same mentality as the democrat party and it's lock
step partisan members.
--Steve Carson (58)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: SteveNitro@aol.com (Steve Carson) (58)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: $40 MILLION HERE, $4O MILLION THERE
For Cami Addkisson:
If we are going to look at the money we spend on (all of)
the Special Prosecutors (which is where the $40 Million
numbers come from) we should also look at the $40
Million Clinton spent on his China Trip. If you think
Clinton cares about hungry children, beyond using them
for personal advantage politically, you have one more think
coming.
The man is a disgrace to his party his office and to his
marriage. Hillary is a terrible example to family values.
--Steve Carson (58)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: BrassEar@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: HI, ROB!
Hey, Rob McCollough(sp) sorry.
Hi! Good to see you're still around. Still remember
those good old strange old Jr. Hi days.
--Patty de la Bretonne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: G1A1S1@aol.com (Ron Richards) (63)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: WHO ARE THEY?
For: Tony Sharpe
Yes, Tony, I'm still reading your wonderful editorials.
However, you didn't name the two Republicans who
are on the scoreboard. If you had named the two
Republicans, I'm not sure you would think your side
is winning. There is also a question of who is losing
(in addition to the side that you think is winning). That
might be the bigger issue.
--Ron Richards
P.S. I must admit that I am spending less and less
time reading Ray Wells' editorials.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: "Marc Franco" mfranco@uswest.net> (66)
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:Reason and Logic
For: Tony
Thanks for your reply, Tony. You did seem to
misunderstand in your earlier letter that you thought
that I was defending Clinton. I was not defending
Clinton at all, and I am still not. I don't see how
anybody can. I was simply replying to an earlier
letter from a writer who said that a Republican
president would have resigned by this time. I brought
in the Iran-Contra Affair and also Watergate as
examples of cases where Republican presidents did
NOT resign. Nixon finally did, obviously, but only
under extreme duress. These cases, however, have
absolutely nothing to do with Clinton, Monica, or
anything else. It was purely a response on my part to
show that Republican presidents do not resign any
faster than Clinton has. (This issue, incidentally,
has since been cleared up satisfactorily, and I am not
trying to reopen it.) I have NEVER claimed or thought
that the one justified the other, or had anything to do
with it in any way. Concerning "the record is clear" that
Republicans helped to push Nixon out- well, no, they
really didn't until the very end. Though it was always
clear that there was a very real problem there, and
many Republicans were genuinely horrified, there was
still a strong central core of Republicans that held out in
defense of Nixon until the very end- until the "smoking
gun" was found- then ALL the support for Nixon
evaporated. Wiggins of California comes to mind- there
was also some abrasive guy from New Jersey, whose
name I have forgotten, and there were several others.
Fully half of the Republicans on the Judiciary
committee were still defending Nixon until the smoking
gun was found- and this was in Watergate where by any
measure there was scads more evidence (the tapes are
the obvious starting point) and crimes than are present
here with Clinton. Clinton committed perjury-
his obstruction of justice does not begin to compare
with Nixon using the IRS, FBI, and other agencies to go
after his personal enemies. Please understand this time,
Tony- I am simply NOT defending Clinton. I am not
comparing Iran-Contra or Watergate to Clinton. I used
those examples only to indicate that Republican
presidents don't resign gracefully either. The record is
not as clear as you seem to indicate that Republicans
showed bipartisanship to oust Nixon- because they really
did not until they had to- some did, of course- but not a
majority.
In honesty, Tony- I really can't believe that you really
believe that Democrats are "proud" to have Larry Flint
as a "poster boy" as you put it. That sounds a little
hysterical to me, if you really believe that. Are you proud
of ALL Republicans? How about David Duke of
Louisiana- the KKK and neo-Nazi boy, who has been
repudiated thoroughly by the Republican party in
Louisiana, but still runs as a Republican, anyhow. Are
you proud of him, just because he's Republican?
Actually, I am sure you are not proud of him. The point is,
both parties have skeletons, both parties have strengths
and weaknesses, and that's why I vote independent. I
certainly have no quarrel with you or anybody else who
wants to vote straight ticket. But please do not make
statements like the one you made, that Democrats
might be proud to have Larry Flint.
Finally, you said that Oliver North was hailed as a hero
because he refused to allow the Democrats to smear
Reagan's presidency. Tony, you proved the point that
I was trying to make in my earlier letter. First off, if
Reagan had really done nothing wrong, then obviously
his presidency wouldn't have been smeared and there
would have been nothing to worry about. That
Democrats were snapping at his heels- well, that's
what opposition parties are for. Both sides do that, and
you know that perfectly well. However, what you said
very clearly is that North was considered a hero because
he protected Reagan. But he lied in so doing-
that part is pretty well proven and accepted. The point
that I had made in my earlier letter is that Republicans
are being hypocrites because they seemed to consider
lying under oath to be a crime only if they did not agree
with the reason for the lying. You basically confirmed my
statement. For me- who cares why he lied- a lie is a lie.
As far as whether I vote for both parties in equal numbers-
I have no idea. I never really cared to keep track. All I
can say is that I vote for both parties.
Hope this cleared up some misunderstandings.
--Marc (Not Mike) Franco (66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Bmbr70@aol.com (Mike Franco) (70)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: TRASHY BEHAVIOR NOT EXCLUSIVE
TO ONE POLITICAL PARTY
Happy New Year all....and I will preface my note with a
few FACTS:
1) I am MIKE (not Marc) Franco
2) I vote mostly but not ALL Democratic...which makes
me a flaming liberal, a moderate Dem or a mushy
middler depending on who YOU are and how you like to
compartmentalize millions of us citizens.
I continue to be absolutely amazed that so many of us
think all this trashy behavior in Washington DC can be
neatly defined as typical Dem or Republican activity. Do
you REALLY feel one "party" is moral while the other is
not? Is it possible that those that called Anita Hill a
liar
and an opportunist now call Clinton a harasser? Is it
possible that we ALL feel Clinton is splitting hairs with
legal wordsmithing in claiming guiltlessness while some
of us claim ..."Ollie North was never 'charged' with
perjury before Congress?"
Can someone in power today leading the charge against
Clinton dispel his own affairs as "youthful indiscretion?"
Can one of the leaders of the "moral revolution,"
(JC Watts) just wave off the fact that he, (like most of the
NBA), fathered a child out of wedlock?
I personally feel that the procedure needs to play itself
out, and it will. If the votes are there Clinton is gone.
Fine with me, I really couldn't care less. But don't ask
me to make a choice between following Clinton and
following many of the current Republican leadership.
I don't HAVE to respect any of them, I don't have to
consider ANY of these donkeys as role models or
"moral leaders".....and for the most part I don't. And
listen everyone....get over the approval ratings.....the
fact is most Americans approve of the current condition
of the country in terms of crime, economy and national
security...period. I don't think ANYONE approves of
Clinton's behavior. I don't, and I am one of those
Democratic Liberal bogeymen some of you fear so
much !!!!
Oh...on the poll regarding should all presidents be
castrated prior to taking office: my vote is that we
NOT castrate female presidents. (You GUYS really
think these things out well !)
HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL
--Mike (Not Marc) Franco (70)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: WULEMD@webtv.net (Willard Ule M.D.) (73)
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: IN THE FUTURE I SEE:
In the future I see our Nation healing from
the Social Retardation that We seem to be
suffering over the Clinton matter.
I also see the Day that we force the issue
of Welfare Reform and the Homeless will be
Employed.
I also see the day that Handicapped
will not have to fight for equal access,
and the Handicapped will be equal
to all People.
I also see the day that Prisons
will be come responsible
and make where they punish to the
point where People will not want
to return.
Then I realize that my dream is really my hope for
the Future. May 99 be the year our World begins
to change.
May GOD'S Speed keep you and bless
You and may his love forever shine upon You.
MayYou all have a happy 1999.
WILLARD ULE M.D. (73)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's it for this issue of The Sandbox, folks.
Share your opinions, Your Feelings, Your Ideas
and News About YOU with all of us!
Please include your class year in all contributions.
Thanks!
-20-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX Issue #21 ~ January 6, 1999
HISTORICAL MARKERS:
106th CONGRESS CONVENED 1/6/99
CLINTON TRIAL STARTS TODAY - 1/7/99
"'Tis one thing to be tempted, Escalus,
Another thing to fall. I not deny,
The jury, passing on the prisoner's life,
May in the sworn twelve have a thief or two
Guiltier than him they try."
--MEASURE FOR MEASURE / Shakespeare
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Express and Share YOUR Ideas, YOUR Opinions, YOUR
Inspirations, YOUR Adventures, YOUR Retorts with other
Richland Bombers All Around The World!
ReplyTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WE STILL WANT TO YOUR PREDICTIONS FOR 1999!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Today's guests:
Gene Trosper (84), Patty Stordahl (72),
Tony Sharpe (63), Steve Carson (58),
William Porter (68, Dick Epler (52),
John Northover (59), Ray Wells (54),
Kathy Hills (67), Mack Brand (64)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Gene Trosper (84)
Mail To: trosper@ez2.net
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: FIRST SANDBOX RECEIVED / Various stuff
I just received my first copy of the SANDBOX and I
want to give kudos to those who organize and distribute
it. I have two e-lists I operate myself and I can testify
it does take a little effort to pull everything together.
I have already noticed some strong opinions regarding
our nation and the state of the presidency. What a
leap from the strong opinions expressed in RHS that
concerned such things as math tests, proms, teachers
and what to wear for school!
I am personally torn on the Clinton issue. On one hand,
I do not appreciate the invasion of privacy that has
been ongoing in this matter, (bedroom matters shouldn't
be meant for public consumption), but I also believe he
should be taken out of office....not for his affair, but
for his constant violation of the Constitution. It
saddens me our elected representatives cannot see
the big picture and only focus upon the sordid filth
that attracts television ratings, increases their poll
numbers and sells headlines. Perhaps if Americans
became a bit more selective and rid themselves of
the Jerry Springer mentality, politicians and the
news media would drop this tabloidism we have
come to expect.
I haven't given up on America yet...I still hold some
hope that we can turn this mess around. But the only
way we can do so (in my opinion) is to:
1. Get our personal lives in order first.
2. Resist the urge to pry into other people's business
if what they are doing isn't hurting anyone else.
3. Quit trying to politicize everything under the sun.
We need to de-politicize and get local.
4. Teach our kids (and ourselves) the meaning of
self-responsibility.
5. Teach our kids (and ourselves) to respect the
property of others.
6. Quit looking for freebies in life and realize the
best things are those which are earned.
7. Realize it's okay to be different and NOT have to be
one of the crowd.
It's tough to live by these 7 rules...I struggle sometimes
myself. When I was growing up, the things my parents
tried to instill didn't always register, but then, most
kids can be like that. The examples were laid before
me as a child, but I didn't LEARN them until I made
mistakes.. trial and error. People want it easy (it sure
beats the 10 hour shifts I work 6 days a week!) and
that's why this nation has became the way it has,
(at least, I am convinced of it).
Oh well, I have begun to ramble on...but perhaps this
will fuel some thought. Just don't get me involved
in a political discussion though! : )
Take care, everyone.
-Gene Trosper (84)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: DZIGNRITE@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: WHAT ABOUT MARKETS & ECONOMY IN 1999?
Great reading but I am interested to know what people
think regarding the stock markets & predictions for
1999 in the economy. We all know Clinton will play it
out to the end. We will all have to write our congressmen
& promise NO Votes for any one who allows him to stay.
Get on with what is important for 1999.
Hey What do you guys think of Marc McGuire?
He was winning votes for the best American in 1998.
Great guy.
-Patty Stordahl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: DZIGNRITE@aol.com (Patty Stordahl) (72)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: TEA PARTY ANYONE?
For: Steve Carson.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Short and to
the point. I would like to here your points of view
on other issues. Clinton has won. I am sick of what
taxes are being spent but, to Hell with the hungry,
homeless, and deprived in our countries. UP with
the flag and bury our heads in the sand. Why can't
our leaders listen to U.S. the people if we have so
much CLOUT??? We don't have any power without
making a powerful statement as a unified nation.
TEA PARTY ANY ONE???
-Patty Stordahl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Tony Sharpe (63)
Mail To: tonys@citylinq.com
Subject: Who Are Dem Republicans?
To: Ron Richards:
Were the 2 Republicans that you mentioned were
"on the board," Eppler and Wells, or were you
referring to Gingrich and Livingston? I know that
the business of our nation is possibly the looser at
this point, but I also believe that our constitution
is very important, and that no man is above the law,
not even and most especially, the chief law
enforcement officer of this land.
To: Mark (66) and Mike (70) Franco, I presume
you are brothers, and both are children of the
good Doctor? Didn't you live in the Richland Village
for a time in the late 50's on McMurray St. If so,
there was a time when I mowed your lawn, and
doing the back yard was the "pits" because of
all the toys I had to move to get the job done. If
I am correct, do your folks still live in Richland?
Tony Sharpe (63)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Steve Carson (58)
Mail To: SteveNitro@aol.com
For Patty Stordahl
Your contribution in today's' SANDBOX sounds like
a description of the human condition. As screwed up
as it gets our system of government is still the best in
the world. Unlike other systems of government, we
have the chance to correct our politicians every two
years and the chance for a real clean sweep will
come in November of 2000. As Americans we have
much to be proud of. We need to educate and
energize the younger generations who's money
our politicians are spending.
Have faith and work like Hell to influence your
representatives.
Steve Carson (58)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: William L Porter
E-mail: William.Porter2@PSS.Boeing.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Evidence and License
Tony Sharpe wrote: "By the way, there is absolutely
no evidence that Ronald Reagan was "guilty" in the
Iran-Contra affair." You should also be aware that
Clinton is not a perjurer, only an alleged perjurer.
The license you take to call Clinton a perjurer is
the same license others take to call Reagan guilty
in the Iran-Contra Affair.
William L. Porter
"The right to suffer is one of the joys of a free economy"
-Howard Pyle, aide to Pres. Eisenhower
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Richard Epler (52) (depler@pdx.oneworld.com)
Subj: IMAGE AND SUBSTANCE
For the Francos -- Marc (66) & Mike (70) ---
I don’t know if Marc and Mike are brothers or cousins,
but they both write with a great deal of sincerity and
I often find myself agreeing with them – until they
introduce the personal aspects of the men they use to
illustrate their points (Clinton, Nixon, Reagan, and
North). Where we might agree on many things, our
respective liberal/conservative viewpoints, so embodied
by Clinton, etc., seems to demand a response based
more on personalities than substance.
The Franco’s seem to consider themselves moderates
with a liberal bent, which means they don’t have to be
concerned with the ideology of either party. While
they may deplore bad behavior, (lying and such).
They see little difference in the behavior of the
members of either party. Nevertheless, they feel
compelled to support the policies of the Democratic
Party, which they feel are more compassionate than
those of the Republican Party. I can’t really disagree
with these sentiments as far as they go. The problems
begin, however, when we bring personalities like
Clinton and Nixon into the picture. This leads to
arguments no one can win, since in each case,
compassionate liberals are thinking image while
unfeeling conservatives are thinking substance.
Liberals defend image, while conservatives
defend substance.
Alternately, liberals attack policy, while conservatives
attack character. As “cool hand Luke said: “what
we have here is a failure to communicate.” On a
fundamental level, most prominent Republicans DO
have strong character, but often have image problems
(but not always -- Reagan and North made for good PR).
In contrast, most prominent Democrats have good image,
but often have poor character (but not always -- Jimmy
Carter’s character was OK).
When Republicans identify the Democratic Party with
Larry Flint, they’re associating Flint’s character with
that of Clinton, both with respect to a penchant for
weird sex and with their common interest in destroying
the Republican Party. Clinton’s official defenders
don’t dispute the association. Instead, core demos,
like Carville, Dershowitz, Baldwin, and Jesse Jackson
develop emotional themes to attack the Republican
Party (“they’re gonna kill your babies”). We might call
this demagogy without substance, but the sad fact is –
in TV land – it’s quite effective.
By the way, NO prominent Republicans are identified
with Louisiana’s David Duke. Of course, politics in
the South are a little different and party affiliations
are not the same as in the rest of the country. In the
deep South, there are many more Democrats than
Republicans who identify with Duke’s policies. I’m
afraid the old-time politics of George C. Wallace
(prominent Alabama Democrat) still resonate with
many Southerners.
While I understand Marc’s assertion that Republicans
are no more likely to resign than Democrats, I stand
by my original statement that ***given the same
circumstances as Clinton*** prominent Republicans
must resign (like Livingston). The American people
wouldn't' allow an immoral Republican to use the Clinton
defense. However, when policy is the issue, Marc is
right, no Republican would resign. Not Reagan and
certainly not a Marine like Oliver North.
A couple of other things. First, there IS a difference
both in the nature of lies and in the manner of lying.
Marc is right when he says Oliver North lied to
congress, but he is wrong when he says there is no
difference between North’s lie and Clinton’s lie.
Much later, after North was given immunity, he
admitted lying to a congress that was embroiled
in a policy dispute with Reagan. North says he
lied to protect the lives of field operatives, who
would likely have been killed had the details of
the operation been revealed. That’s a lot different
from Clinton lying to protect his personal image.
(No one believes Clinton lied to protect his marriage
to Hillary, do they?). And when North lied, he didn’t
embellish it; he tended to use simple yes or no answers.
None of Clinton’s aggressive, wag-your-finger, type of
lying. That story, incidentally, has Hollywood producer,
Harry Thompson, coaching Bill on how to “sell the lie” in
hopes of discouraging further inquiry … can anyone
disagree that this type of lying is a blatant attempt to
obstruct justice? Whereas North’s lie was to protect
American lives!
Second, although John Kennedy and Bill Clinton have
similar sexual appetites, I suspect John would have had
the good grace to resign if outed. As I recall, John was
not overly enamored with himself to the exclusion of
the Nation’s interests. Understand, the world was very
different when John governed and he had every right to
expect the press would respect his privacy and so the
risks he took seemed acceptable. Bill, on the other
hand, knew well the lesson of Gary Hart and still
decided to chance what he knew to be an
unacceptable risk. Most agree, that was incredibly
stupid. Clinton jeopardized not only his Presidency
but also his Party – all for a few moments of sexual
gratification (no personal feelings for the lady(s)).
Clinton may yet get away with it but only at great cost
to the Nation … not just now but far into the future.
Who cannot sympathize with the Democrats assertion
that the cost of bringing justice to the Clinton affair is
obscene – all because the man has no character or
judgment.
The Franco’s main argument seems to be that there’s
no difference between the two political parties. They
argue that both promote lying, the obstruction of
justice, and the abuse of power. The Franco’s have
a point. Surely, there’s never been a politician who
couldn’t be accused of such things, some fairly, some
not. Further, Marc has it half right when he asserts “…
Republicans are being hypocrites because they seemed
to consider lying under oath to be a crime only if they
did not agree with the reason for the lying.“ Yet, I
would argue that there IS a difference in the two
parties and it is precisely that difference that
resolves the apparent hypocrisy.
While core Republicans believe all perjury, abuse of
power, etc., are crimes, the circumstances and manner
of the crime is nevertheless important. Committing a
crime to protect your personal image is worse than that
committed to protect lives. One is impeachable; the
other is not. Core Democrats, on the other hand, are
primarily concerned about public policy, and so use
similar logic to argue that Clinton’s crimes are not
impeachable because his policy is more correct than
that of the Republicans (who are gonna kill your
babies)! This is an important difference. When Marc
implies it is the job of both parties to attack each other,
he’s right, but only to the extent it’s done within the
framework of the Constitution. Policy differences must
be settled at the ballot box. The Democrats attempt to
reprogram the electorate to fit the characteristics of
their President is irresponsible.
The Democratic Party today has a serious problem.
While no responsible Democrat wants such a reckless
man to continue in the most powerful office on earth,
at the same time, they can’t afford the prospect of the
Republicans gaining enough power to screw up their
voting base. What if the Republicans got enough
power to implement policies that would eliminate the
welfare class? Policies where parents and children
could decide on schools that teach in terms of a child’s
individual strengths? Where all people, young and old,
could take responsibility for their own health and
retirement? In such a world, character and policy
substance would matter more than image … and the
Hollywood inspired Democratic Party would be at a
disadvantage … but hopefully only temporarily.
Most of our political discussions in the SANDBOX
have focused on image and personalities to the
exclusion of character and policy. By now, it should
be obvious these kinds of arguments can’t be won.
If I have the time, my next contribution to the
SANDBOX will attempt to change that by providing
a different framework for addressing several
political issues, such as Education, Social Security,
Medical Care, Welfare, and the Military. Of course,
they’ll all be highly controversial (;-).
Thought for the day: Be careful what you reward,
because you’re sure to get more of it.
-Dick Epler
depler@pdx.oneworld.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: John Northover (59)
E-mail: jnorthov@spawar.navy.mil
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subj: WHAT IS DA MEANING OF DEMEANING?
IN response to: Cami Riddell Addkisson (85)
First: I simply stated a fact. MOST PEOPLE IN THIS
COUNTRY ARE IGNORANT!!!! That is the result of not
reading. Not reading causes cultural illiteracy. It does
not matter whether you have a degree in cell-see-ous or
faren-height ... ignorance knows nothing. That is not
demeaning ... it is a very sad fact. AS a result of that,
most of the people in this country do not understand or
can not understand the harm this country will suffer if
Clinton is allowed to continue in office.
Second: I did not say any thing about having any kind
of degree being related to ignorance. So, do not try to
wrap you self in a 'masters degree.' That particular piece
of paper will only get you through a better employment
door ... just try and take it to some coffee shop and see
how many cups of coffee you can get. I would be willing
to bet that you know people that have degrees in
something or another and you have wondered ... 'How did
they ever .... ???' And since you have wondered, I would
be willing to bet another fiver, that there are people out
there wondering how a person named 'Cami' could ever
get a masters degree...which both you and I know is
stoo-pid. Getting a degree, intelligence and ignorance
are separated by a very thin line and in many cases
blend quite naturally.
Third: All those people I speak of are pointing their
fingers at themselves, saying "NOT ME, I ARE
INFOMATED!!" ... and one of them might be ME! ...
oooOOOOHHH No, Mister BILL the fly is calling!!!!
Fourth: I am not quite sure how I 'demeaned' anyone.
You can only demean someone that has standing, rank,
position that is above some low point. Those individuals
that I spoke of are at the lowest point and cannot be
demeaned. Demeaning someone means, degrading
them, demoting them, to debase someone, to deprive
of standing or rank or position. I did not do that. They
have done that to themselves.
Fifth: A difference in 'view' has never been a concern
for me. As long as that 'view' is based upon learned fact.
In fact, when the facts bear out a differing position I
am as wishi-washa as any one and will change views in
the blink of an eye. However, with my bi-focal viewing
frames I can be very bi-perperlexious.
Fifth: Some of my very best friends are ignorant ... and
yes, I can be arrogant, which is only a few mis-typed
letters away from ignorant ... and that may well be where
the twain met.
Sixth: If 'Ignorance is bliss' ... let me be b-lighted!!
Seventh: Ignorant people do not recognize themselves!!!
Yours in perpetual confusion,
-John Northover
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Ray Wells (54) ray@transcribing.com
Subj: RESPONSE TO A REQUEST FOR OBJECTIVE
EVIDENCE & A SUSAN MACDOUGAL NOTE
For Vince Bartram's request for objective (factual)
evidence: Not even leading democrats are denying that
Clinton lied to the Grand Jury (Perjury), nor are they
denying that Clinton tried to conceal evidence
(Obstruction Of Justice). In this country, people are
in jail for having done this for the same reasons as the
president. Where in the Constitution does it say the
President Of The United States is above the law -- and
if there is something wrong with the law, shouldn't the
law be changed, and all those jailed people be pardoned,
along with the president?
For Norma Boswell's assessment of Susan MacDougal's
interview: If Susan has no damaging truth to withhold,
then why did she refuse to testify -- what could her
personal consequences possibly be? Ergo, if it
waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably
a duck. Or maybe she just wanted to enjoy the
experience of being in jail
--Ray Wells
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
IF YOU CAN'T SAY SOMETHING NICE....
Kathy Hills Krafft (67)
Reply To: From: KRAFFT@ix.netcom.com>
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Take me OFF the list!
Take me off the "Sandbox" list. It's full of Hillary
Clinton-haters, (insecure "old" white guys afraid of
intelligent women), who need to "get a life." Don't want
to waste my e-mail space with such useless paranoid
#?!#! Thanks for nothing.
~~~ ~~~ ~~~
Subj: BS
From: brandr@eburg.com (Mack Brand) (64)
Just a comment on all the hot air being passed through
the self-righteous conservative sphincters on this forum:
pretty revealing, eh? Now, take me off the list, please.
I had enough of this kind of petty BS growing up there;
sure don't need it smelling up my In Box.
Sincerely,
Mack Brand
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TABLE TOPICS:
ON THE TABLE AWAITING YOUR COMMENTS:
1. Should we "disembargo" Cuba?
2. Does The Executive Order process give to much
"legistlative" power to the president?
3. Should professional football reinstate Instant Replay?
LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TOMORROW THE TRIAL OF A CENTURY BEGINS:
"We must not make a scarecrow of the law,
Setting it up to fear the birds of prey,
And let it keep one shape, till custom make it
Their perch and not their terror."
--MEASURE FOR MEASURE \ Shakespeare
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's it for this issue of The Sandbox, folks.
My personal thanks to everyone who has contributed
to this issue of THE SANDBOX. And a word of advice
to all our readers: "If we aren't talkin' about what
YOU wanna talk about, WHO are YOU going to blame?"
See ya next time!
--Al Parker
Sandbox Coordinator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-21-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX Issue #22 ~ January 10, 1999
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He gave man speech,
and speech created thought,
Which is the measure of the universe.
>From "TO BE"
-Percy Bysshe Shelley 1792-1822
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Express and Share YOUR Thoughts, YOUR Opinions,
YOUR Measures of the Universe with other Richland
Bombers All Around The World!
MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GIVE US YOUR PREDICTIONS FOR 1999!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bombers Sharing Thoughts and Opinions and
Measuring the Universe Today:
Barbara Chandler (59), David McAdie (79),
Sherry Nugent Dupuy (62), William L Porter (68),
John Allen, (66), Bob Rector (62),
Mark Woodward (81), Tony_Tellier (57),
Steve Carson (58), Dick Epler (58) Ray Wells (54),
Bob Mattson (64), Becky Tonning Downey (73),
Norma Loescher Boswell (53)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Barbara Chandler (59) (BCHANBCJR@aol.com)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Your Opinons - That's The Key!
To Al Parker, thank you for promoting and giving your
input to the Sandbox. I for one, am enjoying the
insightful, heartfelt/gutfelt comments from those who
take the time to express their opinions--THEIR
OPINIONS. This is key folks.
Your Measure for Measure quotes are soooooo
thought-provoking, especially the last in the
1/6/99 SB...........won't quote it, but will give my
interpretation. "If we let the law be whittled away,
lessened in any way, we are diminished, our way of
life, our very existence will be no more."
Thank you again, Al, and all of you who routinely take
that precious time to inform, sway, piss-off and, in
general, get all of us thinking. Bless you fellow
Bombers. The most thought-provoking new year to all.
--Barbara
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Norma Loescher Boswell (53)
Boswellboswelln@oneworld.owt.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: THE SANDBOX Issue#21 1/6/99
Your Shakespeare quote prefacing the BOX is
exquisitely appropriate!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: David McAdie (79) dmcadie@televar.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: A LITTLE SCARE FOR YA :)
All this talk of Mr. Clinton and his shenanigans has
prodded me into responding. Three words should
scare the hell out of all of us --- President Al Gore!!!!
I am actually more disturbed by his "suspiciously"
silent wife Tipper. You realize that if Clinton is
removed from office (either voluntarily or otherwise)
before about Jan 20th, or so, he could only serve one
additional term, but if it is after that date, he could
finish Slick-Willie's term and serve 2 of his own!!
Partisanship aside, if Bill Clinton was more of a
man, he would have - with much humility - truthfully
acknowledged his relationship with Monica
Lewinsky, begged for forgiveness, and gone about
business as President and taken his beatings as
they came. Instead, he has continued his lying
ways, ("I did not inhale" started it all), in defiance
and in the face of all of us. He does not deserve to
be called "President" and I have carefully not used it
in reference to him. Has anyone noticed his nose
has become redder these days - like Boris Yeltsin
?!?!?!?!? The bottle will kill ya - if the cigars don't :)
Best wishes for 1999 to you all!
Dave McAdie
dmcadie@televar.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Sherry Nugent Dupuy (62)
Write to: Granshery@aol.com)
Subject: Re- TEA PARTY
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 11:24:40 EST
For Patty Stordahl-
You write: "...To Hell with the hungry, homeless, &
deprived in our countries..." [Referring to perceived
attitude of government subsidizing other countries
before caring for our own homeless and deprived.]
And what about to Hell with the average Joe
who follows the rules and pays the taxes that the fat
cats in DC play with? Never mind the $40 mil spent on
THE investigation....if Clinton had just had the testicles
to come clean a year ago..may have been only $30 mil
(g). His recent China trip costing millions to take along
his entourage just gives me such a warm fuzzy feeling
I could spit. YES to the TEA PARTY!!! One lump
or two??
Sherry Dupuy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: William L Porter (68)
Mail To: William.Porter2@PSS.Boeing.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: A FEW COMMENTS ON EVERYTHING
In this digest format it is hard for me to try to respond
to each thought presented. Has anyone considered a
message board attached to the Bomber site? Probably
not economically feasable. Anyway, I enjoy reading
the varying opinions. The only posts that concern me
are the one's from people who want off because the
Sandbox is left or right leaning. Maybe concern is too
strong a word. Do what you want, but to leave because
one viewpoint seems to dominate, means the viewpoint
you don't like will dominate more. If people leave
because they just dont care about the topics is a more
legitimate excuse. I think its important to try to
understand other viewpoints. In Northern Ireland, people
would probably use the excuse to leave this board
because there are too many Catholics or Protestants.
In the 50's the excuse would be too many Communists.
...I'll refrain from any other analogies.
I still dont buy that Clinton's actions or the 'Republican'
impeachment is doing harm to our nation. This is still
an ongoing experiment in democracy. If we look at our
lives, our family's, our neighbor's, or our community's,
I dont see any catastrophic changes happening. And
at the conclusion of this Federal government 'event', I
still dont forsee any major changes. The question to
me is, with the division of opinion that abounds, how
many people, who find this an emotionally charged
issue, will be able to accept the result of this
'democratic process' if it doesnt turn out the way they
think it should? In the end it will be our own bitterness
and feelings about lack of 'justice' served that will bring
harm and breed diviseness far into the future. What we
have here is a discussion that will have very little affect
on the process in Washington D.C., as that process
has little affect on our day to day lives, unless we let it.
When each of us thinks how this will affect our children,
think first how the children observe your behavior, for
that is the most profound example, not the behaviour of
a politician clear across the country. Will you be
providing children an example of uncompromising
bitterness long after the event has ended? I was
reacquaintted the other day with the Chinese symbol
of the word 'crisis', which is made up of the symbols of
'danger' and 'opportunity'. We have an opportunity to
be an example of how people of diverse points of view
can work through issues at hand and become better
people and a stronger democracy.
William L. Porter
"The right to suffer is one of the joys of a free economy"
-Howard Pyle, aide to Pres. Eisenhower
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: John M. ALLEN (66) miles2go@cheerful.com
To:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: TRULY Intelligent Women
I have been eagerly awaiting the next knee-jerk,
bleeding-heart, emotion-blinded, feminist to complain
about "Insecure, Old White Guys" who are "afraid of
intelligent women" and Kathy Hills Krafft (67) just
couldn't help walking right through that door in issue
#21 of the SANDBOX. Arizona is very probably the
second most conservative state in the Union, (Utah
being #1), and on Monday of this week, REPUBLICAN
(read that "Conservative") women were sworn in to
FOUR of the five highest offices in that state's
government (specifically Governor, Secretary of State,
State Treasurer, and Superintendent of Public
Education). These Republican women won while
garnering between 58.2% and 97.5% of the vote,
depending on the individual race. The lone Democrat
woman who won the Attorney General's race, won with
a 2.9% margin of victory. Of course, I suppose that if
you're a conservative woman, you don't really count as
a woman, or at least not as an INTELLIGENT woman.
By the way, approximately 1/3 of Arizona's legislators
are also women. That is the highest in the nation. So
much for your insupportable, Democrat Party
regurgitation about insecure, old white guys.
And if Elizabeth Dole happens to get the Republican
nomination for president in the year 2000, don't count
on any fall-off in male conservative voters. I'm not
predicting Dole in 2000, but I'll have no problem
whatever voting for her if she gets the nod. You
women's libbers better start figuring out how to
explain that phenomenon if it happens to be the
Republican Party which becomes the first in history
to nominate a woman for the top job. It could easily
happen and would be a striking example of what the
Dems need more of (substance over style) instead
of what they have in too great abundance (style over
substance).
As for Hillary's intelligence, if you actually bother to
read the history of the Clinton's investment in White
Water, there is absolutely nothing intelligent about
how Hillary handled that mess. (I recommend Blood
Sport, written by a Pulitzer Prize winning LIBERAL,
James Stewart, to educate yourself on the
intricacies of White Water.) She made money
on the cattle futures because she WASN'T handling
the guts of that investment. Finally, if you know her
history in general, you also know that she has
accomplished next to nothing except on the coattails
of her husband. Let her run for something on her own
hook and we'll see how far she gets with her
condescending, "first grade teacher" oratory.
Go back to your drawing board, Kathy, and see if you
can come up with a few of your own arguments
instead of the swill you hear airheads like Barbara
Boxer and Patty Murray saying on TV.
John Allen ('66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Mark Woodward (81) markw@ema-nw.com
TO: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subj: Y2K WILL RENDER FERBIES SPEECHLESS
[Mark sends us a copy of this correspondence,
ostensibly written by a Hasbro Employee.]
QUOTE:
"From: henrymil@hasbrotoys.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 3:50 PM
To: My Friends Reflector
Subject: Ferbie and Y2K!!
"Just because I work for Hasbro doesn't mean I made
this up. This has been the laugh of the plant since we
found out about it earlier today."
"Lo and behold, of all the hype surrounding the Y2K
problem -- the threat of downed banks, electric
service, emergency government services, etc. -- the one
thing that has been 100% confirmed to not work come
1/1/2000 is last Christmas' toy craze - the Ferbie! This
is not a joke!"
"The Ferbie contains a voice chip manufactured by an
Asian company (a vendor of Tiger's - Tiger
manufactures the Ferbie) that apparently was less
concerned with the Y2K problem than with a quick fix
for their economic woes. A former Consumer Reports
Engineer/Tester discovered the problem. "lesser" (aka
"cheap") chips were utilized, and because of a small
component of the voice chip associated with the
Ferbie's "Happy Birthday" routine, the little fur balls
won't work come 2000. I guess Greed breeds Greed
as this year's holiday hit only has a shelf life of 1 year!
Despite my objectivity, please pass this along to
your friends." UNQUOTE
-sent by Mark Woodward
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Bob Rector (62) b_rector@owt.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: I stand with Vince Bartram '62
For Vince:
Howdy Vince! I remember how much fun you and Jerry
Liddell made our govt. class. I should have paid closer
attentiion....and read a whole lot more. Anyway, now
that we are adults, the truth can be "evaluated, argued,
accepted, rejected, etc." Along with "Facts, AKA
objective evidence" there are two very important
qualifiers that everyone adds to the mix. **Remember,
we are all adults here:
*Number One:
"Folks are individually convinced that they do act
"rationally," but in truth, we All act on emotion."
*Number Two:
"People Believe, (especially in religion) what they
Want to believe."
Vince, I remember how Jerry Liddell could rattle off all
of Elizabeth Taylor's last names. I have lots of other
fond memories in my "dept. of useless knowledge."
--Take Care. Bob Rector, '62
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Tony_Tellier@compuserve.com (57)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com>
Subj: DISEMBARGO CUBA, AND YOU WILL SAY:
"I FEEEEEEL GOOOOD!"
>1. Should we "disembargo" Cuba?
Absolutely: We will convert them with capitalism and
cash. Not to mention car collectors flocking to the
Commie-ridden island to gobble up those 50s and 60s
Chevies! The Domino Theory will work: look at the
Eastern Bloc ... East Germany. Bohemia, etc.
Havana goes back to the mob. Open a chain of
Kentucky Fried Chicken shops. Ain't life sweet.
I feel better now. I feel better than James Brown.
How do you feel?
Tony T, Yumaville, AZ USA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Steve Carson (58) (SteveNitro@aol.com)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: "GET LOCAL"
For Gene Tosper:
Well spoken. I particularly agree with your "Get Local"
statement. Education and Welfare are two issues that
should be driven to the lowest Levels of government.
There is no reasonable role for the Federal Government
in education. My Brother-in-law just retired as Supt. of
Schools for a large district in Michigan. The Federal
Regulations were so onerous that they always took the
course of least resistance. For example they just gave
everyone free school breakfast and lunches since that
was easier than setting up to qualify and administer
the program.
Steve Carson (58)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Richard Epler (52) (depler@pdx.oneworld.com)
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: NEW SUBJECTS
I think our SANDBOX moderator, Al Parker, may trying
to encourage us to expand our subject matter a bit. In
this spirit, I offer the following opinions:
1. Should we "disembargo" Cuba?
Yes. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see
where it's in anyone's National interests to continue
the embargo of Cuba. Communism is no longer a big
threat. Russia is no longer able to support Cuba. The
Cuban people are suffering big time. Castro seems
amenable to closer ties with the US, and it's really in
our best interests to do what we can to help all who
are as close to our shores as Cuba. Interestingly
enough, it seems it's mainly the "Cuban Americans"
who want the embargo to continue.
2. Does The Executive Order process give too much
"legislative" power to the president?
No. The EO process as it was initially conceived is
necessary. On the other hand, Clinton's
unconstitutional use of the EO process is bad for the
nation and needs to be challenged by the appropriate
branch of Congress or the Judicial branch. We
shouldn't get rid of a good law because an unprincipled
President chooses to corrupt it. To do that implies we
should get rid of the Constitution itself.
Here's something I find most people don't know or
understand very well. None of our laws are validated
until litigated ... and then the law is only validated in a
very limited context. This is not to say you or I should
ignore a law we believe (or know) is unconstitutional ...
it means only, that if we disagree, the proper recourse
is to litigate. On the other hand, we might simply take
our chances and ignore the law in the hopes no one
will press the point, which is what Clinton and many
others do.
Clinton knows that his use of EOs is often
unconstitutional. In a remarkable moment of candor,
Clinton essentially stated that he considers the law,
including the Constitution and his Oath of Office
optional, when he acknowledged that his permanent
appointment of Bill Lann Lee without Senate
confirmation in December 1997 was "... not entirely
constitutional." Unfortunately, that tactic wouldn't work
for you or I.
Here's another fine point: You generally can't challenge
a law unless you have "standing." In the matter of
EOs, only Congress or the Judicial Branch has
standing and can challenge Clinton's use of EOs.
Clinton knows this. He also knows that it is highly
unlikely that the AG (Reno), or anyone in Congress, is
going to challenge his use of EOs. To play the game,
you gotta know the rules!
But that's the "lawyer mentality" of core democrats
that I contend is so harmful to our Nation. This lawyer
mentality is, at its core, a sophisticated use of the old
dictum "The End Justifies the Means." *sigh> A
dictum embraced by revolutionaries and terrorists
throughout the world as justification for their unlawful
acts. It seems a complacent Congress won't protect
us against a corrupt Executive branch ... unless, as
John Northover would say, we elect NOT to be ignorant
any more.
3. Should professional football reinstate Instant
Replay?
Probably, but not in its previous form. I'm sure the
officials are no better or worse than they've ever been.
It's just that the technology used by the TV replay
crews is so much quicker and better. Nevertheless,
the officials must have the last say. This is not yet
like the Roman Games where a popular "thumbs up"
or "thumbs down" vote is requested. Ideally, the
officials get to view questionable plays before the
fans do, then make their decision and move on as
quickly as possible. No one liked the delays incurred
by the previous system.
Dick Epler (52)
depler@pdx.oneworld.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells) (Class of '54)
Since you asked, Al,
1. Should we "disembargo" Cuba? Only when they
are ready to convert to a democracy -- this probably
means not until Fidel Castro is dead.
2. Does The Executive Order process give to much
"legislative" power to the president? Yes, the
Executive Order process needs some limitations
attached to how it can be used.
3. Should professional football reinstate Instant
Replay? This is the easiest one to answer.
Absolutely, yes! However, the number of instant
replay requests should be limited to each team, like
timeouts, and the plays to be reviewed should be linked
to a first down or touchdown or significant penalty.
By the way, I'd like to see the Y2K bug and
Weather/Earth Changing events discussed in the
Sandbox.
-Ray Wells
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Bob Mattson (64) RMat683939@aol.com
Subj: What, Oh, Ha! Fans, Players, Cigars,
Executive Zipper Has Not Escaped Hilary's Grasp.
NBA Pay Per Dribble Plan Proposed, HMO's too
high.
Gosh gang, I've been pointed out in a crowd of two. A
Hillary hater? What, oh ha! Get a few drinks in her
then watch out huh? Hey Kathy 67, I'm on your side.
Those other knuckle draggers are the ones to watch
out for. They have been very bad, and should be
spanked for thinking Mrs. Bill is a poor excuse of
womanhood in the 90's. What fun, but she isn't even
reading this so...
#1. [Regarding NBA going back to work.} Being a
shop steward for the teamsters for 15 years I know
that the players folded like a six bounce inbound
pass, they bailed, and, they are back.
#2. [Should Cuba be Disembargoed?] Of course,
embrace Cuba. I have to go through hoops just to
get a few cigars [a very subtle suicide] not to mention
all those wonderful images of fruit hats and rum on a
sunset beach.
#3. [Executive Order- Too Much Power?] Excuse me,
but that's why they call it the Executive Order, better
that than a great swell of excitement and then an
agreement, who listens to the fans anyway huh?
#4. [Should Instant Replay Be Reinstated?] Only if
they can rewind to the phony touchdown that put the
Seahawks out of the playoff's.
Is Hillary really happy anyway? Has she been
putting up with this zipper indulgence for a while?
>From what I gather, she's not so dense that it has
escaped her grasp over the years. I'll play an NBA
basketball game for oh, a $100.00, no, $600.00 a
dribble, OK, how about $1500.00 and a piece of the
concessions. Yes, That's it, $15.00 beers and
$22.75 burgers. Does the public really care? Well,
What's the offer? Let them fall where they may,
bomber Tuna, 64. Lets start up on HMO's, 7%
increase this year alone. OK?
-Bob Mattson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Y2K Glitch
From: John M. Allen (66)
Reply to: miles2go@cheerful.com
FLASH ANNOUNCEMENT!
Microsoft announced today that there will be an
unexpected delay in the release of the newest
version of their popular browser software. Due
to a slight glitch, the "Windows 2000" program will be
delayed until the first quarter of 1901.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Becky Downey (73) (downeyb@mlssw.com)
To: bjangary@colfax.com (Gary B.)
Subj: THANKS, BUT SICK OF THE CLINTON THING
[From a Bomber Web Site Guest Book]
Hi Gary and Maren,
I want to thank you again for all your effort and work
on this wonderful site!! I'm really enjoying all the
readings from past and present alumni!!
I know the Clinton thing is big right now, but is
anybody else besides me getting a little tired of this
whole thing??? It's 1999. Can we find something
brighter and more positive to start talking about??
I'm sorry if I offend anyone, I'm just sick of hearing
about it all the time and then reading it here too. It
has been interesting, though, to read all the different
opinions..!
Take care and thanks again!
-Becky Tonning Downey (73)
[Believe us, We feel your pain, Becky, but comments
about the "Clinton thing" are likely to continue as
long as Clinton does. As one news commentator
always used to say, "And That's The Way It Is."
But believe this please: We certainly welcome also,
the bright, the positive, the beautiful and whatever
else you wish to talk about. If anything you have to
say is worth saying anywhere, it's well worth
saying here. WE ARE LISTENING TO YOU!
Remember this also: Wherever you are in the
world, right now, you are also here. And regardless
of how heated some of the exchanges may seem
at times, YOU ARE WITH YOUR FRIENDS!
What could be more POSITIVE than that?
-Al Parker, YOUR SANDBOX coordinator.]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MORE TABLE TOPICS UP FOR GRABS: (Pick one
(or more), if you like, and tell us what you think.
1. Any ideas on how to preserve SOCIAL SECURITY?
2. IS THE WORLD GETTING TOO HOT? OUR
FAULT, OR NOT?
3. HAVE YOU NOTICED ANY Y2K EFFECTS YET?
Some think effects are begining to appear well ahead
of 12:01 AM, January 1, 2000. How about
your bank accounts, your computer, your VCR, your
source of power, your water supply, your Ferbie doll?
How will the sewers be functioning? What about
computer controlled medical equipment. What about
inaccesable imbedded chips in systems that are not
Y2K compliant? Are nearby nuclear reactors secure?
Will there be automatic shutdowns or meltdowns when
the year "00" is interpreted to mean 1900, not 2000?
What about our military, what about sattelites, what
about global positioning abilites, communications, radio,
TV? What about your car? Will you be able to buy
groceries and gasoline? Will your employment
collapse? Does it concern you at all that Pacific Power
is trying to sell itself off shore to an Irish company?
Would it be prudent to make a few preparations, just
in case? What steps would be reasonable to take
for the safety, health, comfort and security of yourself
and your family?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's it for this issue of The Sandbox, folks.
My personal thanks to everyone who has contributed
to this issue of THE SANDBOX.
--Al Parker (53) -- Sandbox Coordinator --
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-22-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #23 ~ January 16, 1999
"I do not mind lying but I hate inaccuracy."
---Samuel Butler 1835-1902
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HISTORICAL MARKER: CLINTON IMPEACHMENT
TRIAL CONTINUES.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RHS/ColHi ALUMNI SHARING OPINIONS AND
MEASURING THE UNIVERSE WITH YOU TODAY:
Mike Franco (70), Kathy Rathvon (63),
Ray Wells (54), Ken Heminger (56),
Peggy Hartnett (72), Steve Carson (58),
Alan Porter (67), Shannon Lamarche (82),
Jerry Lewis (73), Patty Stordahl (72),
Norma Loescher Boswell (53).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exchange Your Opinions, Your Ideas, and Your
Responses with Richland Alumni All Around The
World! MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
STILL TAKING YOUR PREDICTIONS FOR 1999!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Mike Franco (70) (Bmbr70@aol.com)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: QUESTIONS AND ISSUES ADDRESSED
Hi everyone...I want to address some questions and
issues raised concerning some of my comments of
the recent past:
Tony Sharpe....Marc and I are brothers (although
neither of us admitted it until a few years ago)...and
yes, we DID live in the Richland Village, on
MacMurray.. was back in the late 50's...Marc would
know the years.
Dick Epler...you spent a lot of words and thought
explaining to a lot of fellow Bombers what I, my
brother and Democrats in general think and feel. I,
for one am flattered! I found your words interesting and
revealing as you point out many things about my
thoughts and feelings that never knew before. I have
always envied those of you who can be so comfortable
in the absolute rightness of one political party and the
absolute wrongness of another. It must make one's
entire outlook so easy and simple. Once that is totally
and blindly acceptable, life can be as simple as labeling
and bucketing all ideas, world events and (especially)
people into one category or another then attack the
label as all good or bad, black or white, up or down......
An example is your statement that I feel Democrats
are... " more compassionate than Republicans...." I
never used the word COMPASSIONATE and it is a
word I would NEVER use to describe ANY large group
of people, let alone an entire political party!
Dick, some of your statements are absolutely
fascinating..."Most prominent Republicans have strong
character...most prominent Democrats have good
image but often have poor character... "WOW!!! Is that
a serious statement? You just did that bucketing thing.
I am truly encouraged that there are 25 million people
identified with good character out there (and people
worry about finding good baby sitters !!!) and that they
conveniently all reside in the same political party. If we
ever have a Republican National Convention in Seattle
we can all leave our cars unlocked! (Sorry Dick.... I
AM struggling with this, help me out.)
Also you wrote the words..."Hollywood inspired
Democratic Party... "I fly a lot on business so I do see
a lot of movies on airplanes, but some of them have
guys like Charleton Heston in them....do they count?
To close...I DO have relatively (all this is relative,
everyone) libleral political philosophies. However, I
have given myself permission to feel ANY way I want
on any issue I want. I admit that my political positions
are much stronger concerning ISSUES (positions)
than PEOPLE (politicians). I reserve the right to decide
who I attach myself to and refuse to allow others to do
it for me.
One attribute that appears common to both vocal
liberals and vocal conservatives....they both seem to
be absolute experts on EACH OTHER....what the other
guy thinks, wants, believes......
And finally, to all of us...don't drop out of The Sandbox
(as some recently have).....For any of us to cease
exposing ourselves to opposing views truely would be
a tragedy.....keep it coming, we ALL need this!!!
--Mike Franco
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Kathy Rathvon kathrath@blarg.net
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: DEM REPUBS
To Jerry Trosper:
It's not the American public that is caught up
in the Jerry Springer mentality, It's the repubs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Patty Stordahl (72) DZIGNRITE@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
REGARDING DICK EPLER'S CONTRIBUTION:
For what it is worth & in my opinion-
Incredibly well thought out & written.
Powerful in it's ability to cause a reasonable brain to
think. Very inspiring. Are you a politician? LOL
I will be looking for more from you.
REGARDING KATHY HILLS KRAFT:
Thank you for sharing your space with someone else.
Good bye have a great life. I am not paranoid just
level headed & think rationally & logically.
Hillary is spineless & needy & thrives on marital abuse
& infidelity.
OR Hillary really wants to train Chelsea that
she deserves a lying scum for a father to her potential
children & husband.
OR Hillary just doesn't give a damn about any one but
Hillary & her Insatiable climb for power.
I for one don't believe men are paranoid over an
insecure, overachiever nor [do I] think she is smart.
Power hungry, starved for public recognition maybe,
but "Hillary & smart" are like "oil & water." Degrees &
colleges don't produce smarts in my neck of the woods.
Common sense & decency prevail. Hey Dick want to
go have coffee? On me.
-Patty Stordahl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Old White Guys
From: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells) (54)
For John Allen.
Thanks for your comments about Kathy's comment
about "Old White Guys." On first glance I thought
Kathy was taking about Dick Epler and myself.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Ken Heminger (56) kenh@mt.net
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: MY 2 CENTS WORTH
First let me say up front that I'm not glib and do not
have the gift of expressing myself as some I have seen,
but I have some thoughts that I would like to share. I
have become a C-SPAN junky and I must admit I have
had to buy me a sponge rubber brick so I can throw it
at the TV when I listen to the liberal distortions of truth.
I'm sure most will understand what I'm talking about so
I'll not get into that. I have heard many say that we
should not pry into Clinton's sex life. And that what
happens in his bedroom we should not be concerned
with. I totally agree. What happens in his bedroom is
his business. But.... ! What happens in the White
house, be it in the Oval Office or a hall way is my
business. The thing that gets me is Clinton had heads
of state waiting in the garden while he and Monica
were doing their thing. Had these heads of state knew
what was going on they could have walked out and we
would have an international incident on our hands.
Private affair? I don't think so! Then there was the time
hewas talking to a senator on the phone (while getting
serviced) about sending troops to Bosnia. I can see the
possibilities here also. "Mr. President should we send
more troops into harms way?" Clinton replies "Yes
YES!, Ohh God, Yeeess" Far fetched? yes, but with
this guy who knows. All in all it shows total disrespect
for the job and his office. It gives me great cause to
wonder why more attention was not given to these facts.
The way the liberals defend Clinton with the "All the
allegations against him have not been proven" just
shows that what is obvious to a conservative is gray
water to a liberal. The following story demonstrates a
possible liberal conclusion to an obvious situation. A
guy had suspicions that his wife was cheating on him
while he was out of town on business. He hired a
private detective to watch her while he was gone on
one of his weekend business trips. When he returned
he contacted the Private detective and asked what he
had found out. "Well," the detective said, "about an
hour after you left a guy came to your house and your
wife let him in. I went to a window where I could see
inside and I could see them sitting on the couch talking.
Then the guy gets up brings out some wine, while she
puts a record on and they begin to drink and dance.
After about an hour of this the guy picks up your wife
and carries her into the bedroom. I ran to the bedroom
window where I could watch some more." The husband
asks "What are they doing now?" The detective says,
"They are standing in front of the bed and slowly
removing each others cloths, after which they promptly
jumped into bed. The husband asks again what did
they do next. The detective replies "I don't know, your
wife reached up and turned out the light and I couldn't
see any more." The husband says, "Damn there's
always that element of doubt."
---Ken Heminger
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From Peggy Hartnett ('72) highdesert@theriver.com
THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: THE SANDBOX Issue#21 1/6/99
Dear Al,
Happy New Year, I was wondering if your hard drive has
melted from the heat. A few quick notes: "No" to the
Instant Replay. Please let humans make the few calls
that are left to us and as far as I am concerned, don't
let the networks show us. It just causes unnecessary
angst---like there isn't enough.
-Peggy
To John Northover-surrogate big brother--did you have
to hold your breath to get that all out in one fell swoop?
Wow, and will you be on our spelling bee team?
Seriously, I agree with you about the deplorable state
of American intelligence. Everyone should spend a little
time in the service industry, any doubts or warm-fuzzies
one might harbor disappear pretty quickly, per example,
what is the proper response to someone standing in the
lobby of your business, bellowing "We come to eat."
Come to think of it, I'm not sure there is a proper
response to some of these situations.
Here at home in AZ our Congressman Jim Kolbe was
outed a while back by a gay paper, I think The New
York Native. Jim had a woman companion who
accompanied him on his campaigning for many of his
elections, never said she was his wife, never said he
preferred the company of men either. So the other day
he is quoted vis a vis Clinton, "He lied." All I can say is
"hum." I remember Sister Margaret Joan drilling us on
sins of omission vs commission--they're equally bad
as I recall. Granted most of us aren't violating the
constitution of the US, just a more basic standard-
ethical behavior. Anyone want to hold themselves to
that standard all the time?
Before we go down the well-trodden road again-I know
we are talking politics and given that it is being played
out in the Constitutionally mandated fashion, let's let it
be for a while and deal with the fact that it won't make
a damn bit of difference what you or I think, it is not up
to us.
The other thing that is not up to us is how to spend our
tax dollars. I have always wanted the IRS to include a
blank pie chart with our returns and let us fill it in as to
how we would like to have the taxes divided, they could
even offer categories. I realize this would be another
exercise in futility, but I would love to see the difference
or similarity between what our choices would be and
how they actually get spent. I don't think you need to be
a rocket scientist-or a nuclear engineer, as it were, to
question the government's willingness to trust us to
make those decisions.
Best wishes for 1999 to us all, remember: cash in small
bills and water. Maybe all those fallout shelters weren't
such a bad idea!
--Peggy Hartnett
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Steve Carson (58) SteveNitro@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: TABLE TOPICS
Cuba: Yes we should lift the embargo and establish
a positive diplomatic relationship. We need another
cruise ship destination to relieve the congestion.
Instant Replay: Yes it should be reinstated with the
charging of a time out to a coach asking for a review.
Executive Orders: The Congress can reverse.
Sunshine on his (Clinton's) actions is the best
protection.
Global warming: I find it interesting how there can
be expert scientific testimony on both sides with no
consensus. It's six below in Chicago with 26" of
snow on the ground.
--Steve Carson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Alan Porter (67) adporter49@hotmail.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Corporate Welfare
I'd like to thank all the people who have been sooo
kind to help me out with my identity problem. It seems
that all this discussion about liberals/conservatives,
democrats/republicans has pretty well defined who I
really am. FYI I am a democrat who typically votes
democrat and I am actually able to sleep quite well at
night.
I would like to correct some misinformation: John Allen
wrote "If the Dems lose this impeachment and removal
battle, they will have lost the last of the three
institutions they controlled when Clinton took office" I
agree that they have lost the house and the senate but
if Clinton is removed it still leaves a democrat as
president.
I'm also somewhat confused by David McAdie's
comments, "Three words should scare the hell
out of all of us --- President Al Gore!!!!" "I am actually
more disturbed by his 'suspiciously' silent wife Tipper."
[Sure--]--bet old tipper is up to some type of dirty tricks
and would be pretty awful as 1st lady. Maybe Ken Starr
should look into what she's been doing - you never can
tell about those Demos.
Personally I'd prefer to have Al Gore as president. I do
believe that Clinton lied and the appropriate response
would be to indict him on perjury and send it to trial.
This trial would take place after he finished his
presidency. But if we must go through the trial and the
republicans help more demos get elected - you won't
get any complaints from me.
I would encourage everyone to pull out their Time
magazine from Nov 9 to Nov 30 1998. Time reporters
did an 18 month investigation of Corporate Welfare.
The following quotes are taken from over those issues.
"A TIME investigation uncovers how hundreds of
companies get on the dole--and why it costs every
working American the equivalent of two weeks' pay
every year." "How would you like to pay only a quarter
of the real estate taxes you owe on your home? And
buy everything for the next 10 years without spending
a single penny in sales tax? Keep a chunk of your
paycheck free of income taxes? Have the city in which
you live lend you money at rates cheaper than any
bank charges? Then have the same city install free
water and sewer lines to your house, offer you a
perpetual discount on utility bills--and top it all off by
landscaping your front yard at no charge?" "The
Federal Government alone shells out $125 billion a
year in corporate welfare, this in the midst of one of
the more robust economic periods in the nation's
history." and finally "The justification for much of this
welfare is that the U.S. government is creating jobs ...
Bechtel, Boeing, General Electric and McDonnell
Douglas (now a part of Boeing)--tell another story. At
these companies, which have accounted for about 40%
of all loans, grants and long-term guarantees in this
decade, overall employment has fallen 38%, as more
than a third of a million jobs have disappeared."
Congress decided two years ago to cut welfare to
individuals because it didn't work and only kept people
dependent on the government. It seems to me if all you
Republicans were truly interested in smaller government
you would encourage your congressman to stop giving
billions of dollars to corporations and we might even
be able to get a tax cut.
--Alan Porter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Shannon Lamarche (82) lamarche@infosel.net.mx
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Y2K Glitch
We would all have more time to talk about things other
than the Y2K problem if the whole world would switch to
Macintosh! Apple solved this problem 15 years ago.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Jerry Lewis (73) jlewis@owt.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: FURBIES & ETC.
Regarding the post about "ferbies(sic) and Y2K":
Whenever a post says "this is not a joke" or some
variation ("this is not a chain letter, this is for real,"
etc.)
you can almost discount it out of hand as being a hoax.
Furthermore, you might expect an employee of the
company that produces them to spell it right (Furby).
And how likely is it that the chip in a Furby knows
what time it is to begin with, let alone cares when the
Y2K happens. It's possible, but unlikely. And even if
it's true, how many Furbys out today are still going to
be functional or of interest in a year? Ha, it is a joke!
We're back at the beginning of my argument.
I was going to contribute to the Clinton exchange, but
don't have time now. Maybe later.
Jerry Lewis (73) * jlewis@owt.com *
http://www.owt.com/users/jlewis/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: WHO SAID SR. DRIVERS AREN'T SAFE?
From: boswelln@oneworld.owt.com
(Norma Loescher Boswell) (53)
[Just when you might have thought you'd heard the
last of our discussions on the subject of Senior
Drivers, I couldn't resist passing along this "Report
>From The Field" that someone sent to Norma. -ap]
As a senior citizen was driving down the freeway, his
car phone rang. Answering, he heard his wife's voice
urgently warning him, "Herman, I just heard on the
news that there's a car going the wrong way on I-82.
Please be careful!"
"Hell," said Herman, "It's not just one car. It's
hundreds of them!"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TABLE TOPICS UP FOR GRABS: (Pick one
(or more if you like), and tell us what you think. Or
ask for information on any subject about which you
would like to be better informed. Chances are good
there are fellow alumni out there who will have the info
you need on just about anything.
1. HOW ABOUT "THEM" HMO'S? Too expenseive?
Too limited? Too intrusive? Too selective? No
complaints at all? Good or bad experiences?
2. YOU HAVE JUST WON FIRST PRIZE IN A VERY
UNIQUE CONTEST: YOU GET TO TAKE 20 OF YOUR
FAVORITE BOMBERS ON A MONTH LONG ALL
EXPENSE PAID VACATION ANYWHERE. (Total Limit
$1 million dollars.) Where will you go. What will you do?
3. Here's a Question some of you might enjoy
answering: WHEN DOES THE NEW MILENIUM
ACTUALLY BEGIN? (There MAY be more than two
opinions on that.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's it for this issue of The Sandbox, folks.
My personal thanks to everyone who has contributed
to this issue of THE SANDBOX. "If WE aren't talkin'
about what YOU wanna talk about, WHO are YOU
going to blame?"
LEARN FROM YOUR FELLOW BOMBERS.
LET THEM LEARN FROM YOU!
See ya next time!
--Al Parker (53) -- Sandbox Coordinator --
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-23-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #24 ~ January 17, 1999
"Ah! don't say that you agree with me. When people
agree with me I always feel that I must be wrong."
--Oscar Wilde 1854-1900
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RHS/ColHi Alumni Sharing Thoughts and Measuring
The Universe With You Today:
Flossie McCoy Hatfield (GED), Robert Shipp (64),
Marv Carstens ('61), Tony Tellier (57),
John M. Allen (66), Steve Carson (58),
Ron Richards ('63), Carol (Wiley) Wooley (63)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exchange Your Opinions, Your Ideas, and Your
Responses with Richland Alumni All Around The
World! MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let Us Know What's Eating You!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Flossie McCoy Hatfield (GED)
Subj: Why The Cost of Postage Went UP
Dear friends and Bomber Family,
It's time I got in touch with you all to let you know
what's been happening. So I thought I'd better get
this letter out right after the postage went up,
hoping it would get better service than under the old
postage rates. You see, when Hector, our local mail
dude, dropped all the outgoing mail down into the town
outhouse hole it kind of raised a stink hereabouts. I
guess the reason the rate's went up is cause they had
to pay big money to get Clyde Herkel to go down and
get all them postcards and letters and things out of the
hole and clean them up a bit before putting them back
into the delivery system with all that postage way past
due.
We got a new mail person now, since the visiting
Postmaster Inspector General, (PIG), used the town
privy, during the use of which, associated with what he
was doing in the privy, caused one of the talking
Christmas cards down below to start singing Christmas
Carols. Of course the Postmaster Inspector General,
(PIG), jumped up quick and ran out of there like the
Devil was chasing him, thinking the outdoor biffy was
haunted. Further investigation by the PIG revealed the
cause of the haunting. So that's why Hector Hoople,
our beloved mail dude for so many years, is no longer
shucking out the mail hereabouts no more. And that is
why also it costs a penny more to mail this here letter
to you than it would have, had I done it a couple of
weeks ago.
I hope you all are doing well. Please write me when
you get work. The well is working fine and the wood is
piled high and we've got plenty of candles on hand. We
got a couple of elk on the rack right now and are salting
them down real good. There is plenty of kerosene for
our lamps, no plumbing to worry about, and boy, do we
feel sorry for all them suckers out there with their
outdoor biffys on the inside, (How fowl can you get?),
and needing electric power lines to keep things
going around their place. I know not what course those
poor souls may take, but as for me and my darling
hubby, Chubb, we are ready already for Y2K. We
don't worry about no global warming, neither, so long
as we got each other to hold on to.
Now, as soon as we can raise the money to buy
another one of them high-priced postage stamps, I will
write again and tell them lying hummers in Washington
how to run the government.
I hope you all get this letter OK. Please let me know if
you don't. Chubb says "howdy" and Hector Hoople,
Pasco Hi (67), is lookin' for a job if ya know of any.
Love to ya all!
-Flossie
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Robert Shipp (64) rshipp@gateway.net
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Slick Willie & Premature Evacuation
I have to agree with David McAdie's(79) observation that
the worst consequence of Bill Clinton leaving office
prematurely (voluntarily or otherwise) would be the head
start it would give to Al "Treehugger" Gore on the 2000
election (talk about your Y2K horrors!). I personally
believe Clinton's actions meet the constitutional
requirements for removal, but I really hope he isn't. If
the Republicans were truly acting in a partisan fashion,
they would do everything in their power to avoid that
situation.
Regardless of your political slant, you have to admit that
Mr. Clinton is probably the most brilliant politician in
this
century. Consider what he has accomplished: He
managed to win the most powerful office in the world,
even though the overwhelming majority of the electorate
believed the allegations about his womanizing, draft
dodging, pot smoking, and participation in
anti-American demonstrations overseas. After vetoing
several budgets passed by Congress, when the
Republicans refused to go along with his "play by my
rules or I'll take my ball and go home" attitude and
continue to spend unbudgeted money, he was able to
put the blame on them for shutting down the government.
After months and years of stonewalling, lying and
stalling, he convinced the public to be angry with Ken
Starr for dragging out the investigation. After admitting
to lying under oath, lying to his family, and lying to the
American people, he still has a large majority of the
public believing he is doing a good job.
I am firmly convinced that Slick Willie could be caught
on video tape cavorting naked with a half dozen
schoolgirls on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, and
still find a way to convince the general public that the
Republicans are to blame.
--Robert Shipp (64)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Marv Carstens (61) carstens@owt.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Clinton, et. al.
Let's examine (in a bi-partisan display of fairness,
PLEASE) some of the recent B.S. that has
emanated from Washington, D.C.:
1. The violent crime rate is the lowest that it has been
in 30 years, thanks to Clinton's Anti-Crime bill of 1994.
(I don't know about the city you live in, but here in the
Pacific-Northwest, according to local police department
statistics, the violent crime rate is up by anywhere from
8-21% in large population areas, and more than that in
many medium and smaller centers. Maybe it's a
situation peculiar to our part of the U.S. ... anyone else,
from anywhere else, give me some info from their
region?)
2. Employment is up, to near record numbers, thanks
to the Democratic party's aggressive actions on behalf of
the nation's workforce. (How much of that is full-time,
with benefits such as medical insurance, retirement,
share options, etc., which was THE definition of 'full-time
employment' from post-Korea through the mid 90-s?
How many people are working two, three or more jobs
to keep their heads afloat and provide for their families?
How are YOU doing?)
3. The economy is moving along at terrific rates, and
the nation is in a new era of prosperity [paraphrased
from several news sources over the past few months].
(The bankruptcy rate is higher than in any other time in
our nation's history, personal debt is staggering, the
stock market is exhibiting knee-jerk reactions to crises
around the world, the nation is playing a losing
cat-and-mouse game with Saddam Hussein, costing
millions of dollars daily.)
4. In the infinite wisdom of the 'collective' mindset, the
new head football coach of the U of W is to be paid
$1M+/year for the next several years while the top
professors in academia get about $50,000 yearly.
People ... what are we being 'fed' by the news media?
Does anyone else notice a disturbing similarity to
German 'news releases' from the early-to-mid 30's to
those of today, right here in the U.S.? Do we, as a
country dedicated to equality, individual freedom and
rights of the common man, have our priorities in
order?
Where are we going?
Marv Carstens ('61)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Tony Tellier (57)
(Tony_Tellier@compuserve.com)
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com>
For: Peggy Hartnett
Ref: Jim Kolbe
Peggy said" Here at home in AZ our Congressman
Jim Kolbe was outed a while back by a gay paper,
I think The New York Native. Jim had a woman
companion who accompanied him on his campaigning
for many of his elections, never said she was his wife,
never said he preferred the company of men either.>>>
How interesting! I am/was an AZ resident and "know"
of Kolbe ... as a political name. Did this "outing" get
any Phx paper press at all? If "No," why not? If so,
what was the reaction ... or better yet, so what?
Tony Yuma
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: John M. Allen (66) miles2go@cheerful.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Conversing with Alan Porter (67)
Alan, you were absolutely, 100% on target with your
correction of my statement in Issue #17 of the
SANDBOX - seriously! I'm just disappointed that it
took this long for some Democrat (I won't call you
a "lib" because you sound more intelligent than that)
to fall into my little trap. The point was to get a
Clinton apologist, liberal, or just plain Democrat to
jump on that bait and thereby admit that impeachment
and conviction of Bubba would NOT, in fact, be the
"coup d'état," the "overturning of two elections," or the
"right wing putsch" that so many Clinton defenders have
been whining about for weeks. It would simply be the
cleaning up of a badly soiled office and replacement
with an adequate temp from the same political party
who would hopefully set a less offensive example for
the nation to follow.
As for der Schlickmeister, I'm sorry for any pain you
are experiencing while watching your ox being gored,
but Bubba deserves everything he is currently getting.
Unfortunately, it looks as though he won't get
everything he deserves. That IS the unspoken prayer
of all politicians; not to be the recipient of what they
truly deserve. You know, of course, that with the
demographics in the jurisdiction where Bubba would be
indicted and tried after leaving office, he stands less
chance than Marion Barry of ever being convicted of a
crime. So much for justice in America.
Don't fall off your chair, but I agree completely with the
elimination of Corporate Welfare. Corporations
NEVER pay taxes anyway. They just collect them.
---John Allen (66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Steve Carson (58) stevenitro@aol.com
SteveNitro@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Mike Franco: Well said, issues must be the focus
and the constant heated hyperbole must be screened
out. I consider myself a conservative and though I tend
to vote Republican hesitate to wear that label. Rather
than assuming I know what others think, I just can't
understand how issues which appear to be black and
white, can be so effectively spun.
-Steve Carson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Ron Richards ('63) G1A1S1@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: THINGS ARE WARMING UP
For: Ken Heminger:
You might be short changing yourself with your two
cents worth. Your private detective story might have
been worth twice that much to some people. It might
have even sent shivers up the spines of Henry Hyde,
Robert Barr, and John Livingston, and joy to the heart
of Larry Flynt.
To Steve Carson:
There is a consensus among scientists that global
warming resulting from human impacts is very probably
occurring. Those who want you to blindly ignore that
probability are those who also want you to think
that there is no concessus on the issue.
There is also a reason why there is expert scientific
opinion on both sides of the issue. The coal industry
has deep pockets. Just as the Bonneville Power
Administration can hire "experts" to testify that dam
reservoirs help salmon by making it easier for the
salmon to swim upstream (imagine how those millions
of salmon that used to spawn in the Columbia River
must have so miserably struggled to swim upstream
far beyond where Grand Coulee Dam now is for those
thousands of years before man built the dams), the
coal industry can hire "experts" who attempt to
challenge the overwhelming scientific evidence
supporting the consensus.
A minus six temperature in Chicago with twenty-six
inches of snow on the ground should not give you too
much confidence that global warming is not occurring.
First, as the consensus so frequently points out,
temperatures over one year, let alone one day, mean
very little on this issue. It is the trend that matters,
considered in the light of what the earth's temperature
would have been with naturally occurring cycles. The
bottom line is that the earth's temperatures are warming
at an unprecedented rate during a period where a
cooling trend should naturally be occurring. Second, if
you think this winter has been cold, check out energy
prices and gas storage inventories. It's really no secret
that this winter has been unusually warm.
Third, twenty-six inches of snow on the ground should
not give you too much confidence that global warming is
not occurring. High relative humidities, with resultant
high rates of precipitation, are an effect of global
warming.
Finally, if you're still here and if you are genuinely
interested in global warming, I suggest that you read
some of the speeches of John Browne, the CEO of BP
Amoco. Although Mr. Browne operates in an industry
where you risk all influence by suggesting even the
most remote connection between energy consumption
and global warming, Mr. Browne has very responsibly
taken the position that now is the time for precautionary
action because the evidence supporting global warming
is mounting. He also recognizes an opportunity for profit
resulting from precautionary actions due to increased
efficiencies and better public relations. See
www.bpamoco.com / world issues / climate change/
speeches.
Have a warm and pleasant day.
--Ron Richards
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[Widely reported in the news: 1998, (worldwide
aggregate), was the hottest year on record. -ed.]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Carol (Wiley) Wooley (63) Rowein@aol.com
Subj: Let's Talk About Something Else.
The Presidential bashing is getting SOOOOOO boring!
He screwed up, (which of course none of us has ever
done), he has been found out by the world, his life and
I believe, marriage is pretty screwed up. Can we
please get out of Bill's life and go on with ours??!!!
Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion, but
could we possibly have opinions on something else?
Is it just possible that there are some other serious
issues that could be of interest? Suggestions: the
Veteran's Administration, medical costs in our country,
AIDS Research, Censorship, Parental Rights regarding
minors in Washington State.
Be brave fellow alumni, don't just go along with the
crowd....discuss something the news media doesn't
want to talk about!
P.S. The donkey was in the stable when Christ was
born, where was the elephant??
Carol (Wiley) Wooley
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What would you like to talk about or hear discussed?
What do you think about playing baseball with Cuba?
Seen any movies worth seeing? Read any books worth
reading? Visited any Web Sites worth visiting? What
do you think the ever-nearer Y2K is going to bring?
Is Global Warming just a cycular thing? How about
some of the topics suggested by Carol (Wiley) Wooley,
such as the the Veteran's Administration, medical
costs in our country, AIDS Research, Censorship, or
Parental Rights regarding minors in Washington State?
Tell us how you feel about things that are important to
you, exciting, or just plain fun to talk about. We are
listening! Thanks, everyone, for your participation,
both as readers and writers in Your Sandbox forum!
See you again, soon!
--Al Parker - Sandbox Coordinator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-24-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #25 ~ January 22, 1999
"To be or not to be. That IS the question."
--- William Shakespeare
"Well, that depends on what IS is."
--- William Clinton
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Historical Marker: Clinton Impeachment Trial
Continues. The written Questions are what IS.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RHS/ColHi Alumni Sharing Thoughts and
Measuring The Universe With You Today:
Mike Franco (70), Ray Wells (54),
Don Ehinger (54), Gene Trosper (84),
William L. Porter (68), Dick Wight (52),
Dick Epler (52), Dustin Rector (88),
John Northover (59)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exchange Your Opinions, Your Ideas, and Your
Responses with Richland Alumni All Around The
World! MailTo:The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let Us Know What YOU are thinking, what you are
feeling, what YOU are doing, and if you should so
choose, what YOU are eating today!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Mike Franco (70) Bmbr70@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: The Town Square
Hello everyone...a few responses to past issues of this
town square of ours...(Richland never really had a
"working" town square, did it ?)...
1) To all: When one wants to do character damage to
another, labeling him a "pot smoker" and /or "draft
dodger" merely lumps that individual in with millions of
others demographically. I do not support either
activity.. but reality is that during certain periods
millions did.... and those that are comfortable with
reality know it, those that hide from reality become
senators and congressman and even presidents!
2) To Marv Carstons....as a relatively liberal person
(me), your statements are really interesting....UW
football coach grossly overpaid when "top profs are
only making $50k....top profs make more than that
but your point implies that SOMEONE (the
government ???) needs to fix our priorities???.......The
economy is growing, doing great, with very low
unemployment BUT how many of these jobs have full
benefits, etc.......great point....but this sounds like
typical bleeding heart liberal pabulum to me (I learned
some of that from John Allen during Husky football
games !).....Violent crime rates are NOT really down
but are up in the Pacific Northwest 8-21%...the
numbers I see shows much of the most violent crime
(murder, rape) IS down, but is your point that all the
right wing conservatives our there who are claiming
that "Three-Strikes- Yer-Out" legislation has driven
crime rates down are just smoking something
(oops, sorry) ???
The wonder of most real issues is that once we label
each other, then politicize the issue we really do start
sounding like each other!!! My god, that could lead to
solutions.....
And to my pal John...are you still "setting traps" out
there?
-Mike Franco
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Moving Beyond Clinton
From: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells) (54)
I'll try to put a bottom line to this impeachment thing so
we can move on:
1. It's not about sex
2. it's not about removing Clinton from office
3. It's not about partisanship
It's about having one set of laws for the rulers and
another set of laws for the ruled. It's about sentencing
116 Americans to prison for lying under oath (many of
these lies were about sex) and exempting William
Jefferson Clinton.
We used to see an American Indian standing on a
cliff with a tear dripping down his face, as he observed
how we have polluted the land, the rivers, and the air.
I now envision Thomas Jefferson, with a tear dripping
down his face as he sees how we have polluted the
Constitution of the United States, because he was well
aware that having one set of laws for the rulers and
another set of laws for the ruled, amounts to a
dictatorship, and once we have this, all those
Americans who gave their lives fighting for freedom,
from the revolutionary war forward, have died in vain.
--Ray Wells
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Don Ehinger (54) dme@oz.net
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Said Well
To Mike Franco (70)
Well Said!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Gene Trosper (84) trosper@ez2.net
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Bi-Partisanship Follies
Just finished reading another issue of the [Sandbox.]
Great reading always!
Marv Carstens employed the much-repeated phrase
"bi-partisan" in a missive regarding the "B.S. emanating
from Washington." While I pretty much agree that
most, (actually, everything!), of what emanates from the
beltway is B.S., I'd have to make an exception with the
usage of "bi-partisanship."
I submit partisanship is not only a good thing, but
something to actively employ philosophically and
politically.
Partisanship is essentially what separates political
idealism (i.e., Republicans from Democrats). How are
we to honestly assess what any given politician or
political party professes or hold as ideals, if
partisanship is wiped away? You cannot.
Bi-partisanship consists of melding, not separating.
It may sound cynical to say this, but in essence, we
already have a bi-partisan political machine in place.
Both parties are essentially the same in political
idealism, which is: CENTRISM, politics of pragmatism
and poll numbers.
Philosophically, I am an individualist, politically, I am
Libertarian. This allows me a chance to view the
political goings-on from a unique vantage point. I agree
with the old assessment that "there ain't a dime's worth
of difference" between political parties. Both operate
on a collectivist bent.
The only means of discerning between the two parties
are through the "radical left" and the "radical right"
fringes of the two majors. The radicals tend to more
honestly reflect what their respective philosophies are
supposed to be. Bi-partisanship only blurs the
distinctions until a homogenous philosophy is created.
Secondly, I argue that bi-partisanship is primarily used
as a "let's be fair" political tactic by the minority
political organization, in this case, the Democrats.
Partisanship may not seem "fair," but to keep politics
on the level and philosophically honest, (we don't want
sheep in wolves' clothing, do we?), we must demand
clear partisan differences. The real fairness that
emerges will be the fairness for citizens, who will not
be fooled by false philosophy by our representatives.
Enough for now.
--Gene Trosper
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: William L. Porter (68)
William.Porter2@PSS.Boeing.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Social Security Means Testing
I am interested in peoples' thoughts of implementing
means testing for social security. Do you think you
should be denied S.S. benefits because you thought
ahead to your retirement and have a 'healthy' income
from your investments and retirement funds?
If you were 'secure' in your finances, would you
decide to not collect S.S. benefits just to help it stay
solvent? Or would you take anything the government
would give you, whether you needed it or not?
William L. Porter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Dick Wight (52) wight@nwinfo.net
Subj: Salmon Be Dammed?
RE Ron Richard's comments in issue #24. Gee,
Ron ... it's at least twice you've got on the "dam" issue
about salmon. As a kid (before your time) I chased
spawning chinook or coho salmon (too young &
inexperienced to know which) up and down Crow Creek
in the eastern Cascades. I still see a few Chinook up in
the American River, over 300 freshwater miles from the
Pacific. As an adult, I spent a number of years chasing
errant commercial/professional fishermen of several
nationalities...Russians, Japanese, Koreans,
Canadians...Americans included, American Indians
included...illegally fishing the hell out of the species
wherever they could find them, including a 100-mile line
of gill nets strung along the 180th in the Bering Sea,
helpless to do anything but keep them west of the line.
I also helped capture some Japanese gillnetters hauling
'em in by the thousands, in violation of international
treaty, in the Gulf of Alaska. They abandoned their float
nets, miles of them, and ran. We caught them, then
eventually recovered their nets full of dead salmon. I've
tried to carefully pick my ship's way through U.S. and
Canadian gillnetters lining the inside waterways from
Puget Sound up to Dixon Entrance, and on two
occasions "snared" a gill netter whose nets crossed
the navigable channel without lights, both at night...
one U.S., one Canadian. I towed one of boats
backwards for perhaps a half mile before we got
stopped! I've seen U.S. and Canadian trollers so thick
you could walk on them out on Switsure Bank, and
hauled in (as in arrested) a Canadian not only in our
waters, but with undersized fish under both U.S. and
Canadian law. Didn't you used to fish commercial in
Alaska?
I've seen rabid individual "sportsmen" catching salmon
in fresh water streams of Alaska, Canada, Washington
and Oregon by the dozens, throwing back carcasses
of the smaller or most "wasted" ones. Last week I
watched tribal members (I think) catching steelhead
right at the mouth of the Elwha. I've seen networks of
gillnets stretched across the Quinalt at Tahola that
made me to wonder how ANY got by. Ad nauseam.
There aren't any (or at least many) native trout in our
streams any more, or darned few, and no planted fish
any more. Dams didn't get many of THEM. Dams are
far from the only problem. Part, for sure...but
overfishing the species contributes, as does destruction
of spawning habitat by timbering near rivers, bridge and
road building, dikes, etc., etc., etc.
I gave up salmon sport fishing in '80, a favorite saltwater
fishing "sport" for me. I LOVED eating fresh-caught
salmon. But I never have fished or caught one in fresh
water. Never would have. No one else should be
allowed to either. Period.
If we did nothing else other than ban fishing for salmon
in the North Pacific, Bering Sea and the streams that
feed them for 6-8 years, we'd be up to our asses in
salmon. I've seen them spawn actively in streams
in which they couldn't go "inland" more than 1/2 mile.
There are LOTS of problems salmon (and other
species) face in surviving a relationship with homo
sapiens. Dams are one of them.
P.S. I hope they nail Clinton. He smells like dead
salmon.
Dick Wight '52
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: John Northover (59) jnorthov@spawar.navy.mil
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Response to Ms. Carol (Wiley) Wooley (64):
(re comments in Sandbox #24 of 1/17/99
The question of the century??
"P.S. The donkey was in the stable when Christ was
born, where was the elephant??"
Possible answer:
Was she in stable yard unpacking her trunk???
The bigger question is: What was the donkey doing
when Christ was born? Was she, [can there be
she-donkeys??] a practicing nurse-maid, a famous
sino-cologist, a lady-in-waiting or just a friend of the
family?
ON Opinions ... as my wife says 'Opinions are like a..
holes, we all have them.' The issues you raise are valid.
We should get out of the moral dwarf's sex life. We
should get out of his personal life. However, it is no
longer a matter of sex and personal ... it has become
a constitutional issue ... which must be resolved before
we can do anything about any of the valid issues you
raise .... just be patient. All things in their own good
time.
We Americans have the best we can offer. We have
exactly the government we want. We have the people
we want in office to look after us the way we want. We
have the system in place we want. AND the bigger
benefit is that when enough of us want to change things
... we do change. We want and we have. When we no
longer want; we discard and we then want some other
thing and we have as our hearts desire. And the cycle
rotates.
Our government has served us exactly as it should.
We want our government to provide jobs, safety and
wealth ... We are the top of the hill ...
Perhaps you should offer your opinions on those issues
you hold so dear to your soul. We then can compare
what we are thinking and then we can read, get huffy
and respond...you know toss that old written rubber
brick back!!!
Response to Ms. Peggy Hartnett (72): re THE
SANDBOX #23 ~ 1/16/99:
Thank you for you kind comments ... I work very hard
at my mis-spellings and my fel-swooping. As far as a
spelling bee ... Well, the last time I was in the running
for correct alphabetical sequencing was ... so long ago
that I forget what I was spelling.
Perhaps a response for those that come into your
hostel .. and shout 'We are here to eat!!!" You could
say: "McDonalds is just down the street ... ", or "I
am sorry, do you have reservations? If so, perhaps
you should leave now," or "Room service???...Please
dial 911," or "We do not serve the socially
challenged!!!...HHhrrruumph!" ... exit stage left.
Thanks, John
The civil savant
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Dustin Rector (88) dustin_00@hotmail.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Y2K vs. MacIntosh or:
Or: An *OS By Any Other Name...
Mac's aren't any smarter about Y2K than any other OS.
Most OSes have been Y2K compliant for over a decade.
The problem is the software from 1975 that's never
been updated. The problem is that little clock in
your coffeemaker from 1985. The little electronic chip
in your '88 Toyota. The railroad switch that controls
where the coal train goes when the track branches.
Your PC is a minor bump compared to the mainframe
computers that track your bank accounts, FICA tax,
Medicare, and power distribution grid.
The only thing switching to a Mac does is help Steve
Job's ego. Bill Gates doesn't care -- Microsoft does
great business selling office software for Macs too.
BTW, what web browser are you using on that Mac?
Dustin Rector (88)
[*OS = Operating System (I think) - ap]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Note: The following submission was written and sent
to The Sandbox shortly before President Clinton
gave his State of The Nation Speech.
From: Dick Epler (52) depler@pdx.oneworld.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com>
Subject: The Nature of Political Issues
Clinton’s upcoming State of the Union message should
provide a welcome respite from his impeachment
proceedings, while providing an opportunity to refocus
on the “The Issues.” Contrary to Impeachment stuff,
which makes us all a little uncomfortable. Most of us
love issues, and with good reason. Today, what we’ve
come to think of as “issues,” are those things offered by
politicians in the Form of Federal aid to redress some
imbalance, or unfairness, in the cornucopia of
entitlements due its citizens by the richest nation in
the world.
We talk a lot about fairness these days, but again,
there are different definitions. Where I might equate
fairness with “a consistency in the use of Rules, logic
and ethics” to getting something done, I think many
define fairness more in the context of their favorite
political issue, as in “no one should be getting more
“aid” than I, considering my more deserving condition
or situation.”
I understand that Clinton’s State of the Union
message tonight will deal mostly with issues. Sam
Donaldson, of ABC, informs us that Clinton will propose
something for everyone. Tomorrow, the news analysts
will tell us who the big winners are, and who was
shortchanged. Those who got less will immediately
lobby for parity, and the whole process will ratchet the
bar, for Federal giveaways, a little higher.
But that’s the American way, and most really can’t think
of any other way to play the game. The media will, no
doubt, address these issues in the context defined by
Clinton (big government), and that would be a mistake.
Of course, it wasn’t always this way. In the beginning
(pre-America), the first governments consisted simply
of local merchants and citizens who got together to
establish various rules for conducting business, and to
establish an armed force for protection from outsiders.
A local tax structure was established to fund this
activity. States, whose boundaries were generally
established on the basis of defendable geographical
features (rivers, etc.) was an attempt to serve a
common economic and defense interest, and were
organized in a similar manner. Except that the state’s
“army” (which today we would call the National Guard),
was simply a reorganization of existing community
armies for a specific purpose. In those days, issues
were always local, which was both highly cost effective
and results oriented. Of course, the “issues” of the day
were somewhat limited, as most citizens were either
slaves (surfs) or soldiers.
At the time of the American Revolution, most of the
Colony's inhabitants knew well the dangers of
authoritarian governments, and sought to form a
different kind of government based primarily on
ensuring personal freedom, to pursue life liberty
and, happiness on an individual basis. This meant
minimizing the possibility of a highly centralized
oppressive government. Thus, in the beginning of the
American experiment, the Federal Government was
required to do only what the states could not do for
themselves. Initially this consisted of a relatively weak
national army, a central monetary system for stable
commerce, a judicial system to resolve disputes
between the states, and, of course, another taxing
authority. This concept, where the Constitution is
viewed a compact between the states, assigns only a
few, very specific, powers to the national government.
Everything else belonged to the states. This is known
as the 'states rights' view of the Constitution.
As time went on in the new United States, however,
events required a more nationalistic view, whereby the
Constitution is seen as a compact, not between the
states, but between ALL the people so that the states
(few people) are subordinate to the Federal Government
(all people). At the time, this was a necessary
interpretation, required to finance both the western
expansion, and especially the two world wars, but it was
not without cost. The resulting highly centralized
government led to a situation where citizens began to
look primarily to Washington D.C. for solutions to ALL
their problems, and thus politicians were able to use
tax dollars, and “acquired” income to buy votes
according to the “issues” they sponsored.
Issues have now divided the nation: Oldsters favor
Social Security and Medicare. The young favor
welfare and education (the two just seem to go
together). Women favor childcare and abortions
(which don’t seem to go together). Blacks favor
affirmative action and Eubonics. Homosexuals favor
marriage benefits and lots of AIDS money. Urban
centers favor lower crime, marijuana and euthanasia.
And all these many factions can be made “active” at
election time by irresponsible politicians for the
purpose of generating votes. But note that the one
“issue” missing is national defense, which is one of
the few legitimate functions of the Federal Government,
but one that receives the least attention in times of
peace.
Today, we have the interesting situation where the
original impetus for expanding the powers of the
Federal government (expansion and major wars) no
longer exist, while at the same time, our resulting
inability to acquire new resources requires citizens
alone to pay (no more acquired income) for both
government’s largess (issues) and inefficiencies
(administration) with the surety that the disparity
between costs and benefits will increase every year.
All government entitlements, so far as I can tell, are
based on a sort of pyramid scheme, where the initial
beneficiaries win the most at the expense of those who
follow. Pyramid schemes tend to push the costs
associated with the program as far into the future as
possible with the assumption that those who follow will
adequately spread the costs. Because of this,
government-type pyramid schemes are heavily
dependent on population growth for continued viability.
Without an ever-increasing populace, the costs for
any government program tends to increase far beyond
the benefits offered. This is the fundamental problem
with Social Security and Medicare today. With a
decreasing population rate of growth, and without the
prospect of acquiring (stealing) cheap resources from
other nations, these problems can’t be fixed within the
framework of the Federal Government. Of course
pyramid schemes are illegal for everyone except the
government. Without government to force mandatory
participation, pyramid schemes always fail in a
relatively short time frame. With forced participation, it
takes a little longer but they WILL fail.
There are a number of self-supporting solutions to the
Social Security and Medicare problems that don’t
depend on the continued influx of new members. I’ll
save that discussion for another time, but I’ll give you
a hint: To make it work, we’ll need an honest
accounting system for the federal government, where
the costs for highly visible programs can’t be migrated
to less visible accounts. And of course, such an
accounting program MUST be based on accrual, rather
than cost, accounting principles. With an honest
accounting system, it would be obvious that we DON’T
have a balanced budget, and that there is NO surplus.
We continue to spend more money than we collect.
With every minute of every day, our national debt
continues to increase. And Clinton continues to lie.
- Dick Epler (52)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: The State of The Union Speech
From: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells) (54)
Clinton appeared as his usual charismatic charming
self and his delivery was excellent, but the content was
really scary! What he was promoting was pure
socialism. I call it his, "I'll promise you everything
under the sun if it will save my ass speech." His
privatization of Social Security plan really amounts to
direct government investment in the stock market and
would allow the government to directly influence the
market. Trent Locke, leader of the senate was quoted
as saying it was the worst speech he had ever heard.
I taped the speech, and if there are enough interested,
I would like to cover (and encourage the rest of you to
cover), each item in the Sandbox. - Ray
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's it for this issue of the Sandbox, folks. Please
remember... Your Ideas and Opinions Are Always
Welcome Here! By the way, what do you think about
the following?
1. America and Cuba playing baseball?
2. How to discourage telemarketers?
3. Mariners Hopes? Seahawks Dreams?
4. If you could design a very unique and special
Computer Program... What would you like it
to do?
5. Will Hilary Clinton make a great U.S. Senator?
Talk to us about these topics, or whatever else you
might find moving to the forefront of your brain today.
See you next time with comments from Bronyn
Bennett Mosman (71), Eva (Clark) Perry (49), and
others. Maybe even you! See you next time!
--Al Parker - Sandbox Coordinator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-25-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #26 ~ January 24, 1999
"When a man assumes a public trust, he
should consider himself as public property."
President Thomas Jefferson 1743 - 1826
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
History Happening As We Speak: Clinton
Impeachment Trial Continues. Indonesian
Riots Force Evacuations.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RHS/ColHi Alumni Speakers of The Day:
Bronyn Bennett (71), Eva Clark (49),
William Porter (68), Lloyd Swain (66),
Mari Eckert (65), Marc Franco (66),
Debbie Nelson (77), Bob Rector (62)
Mary Lou Watkins (63)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Share Your Opinions, Your Ideas, and Your
Responses with Richland Alumni All Around The
World! MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Will You Soon Be Paying L.D. Charges
For Using The Internet?
From: Bronyn Bennett Mosman (71) bronyn@quicktel.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com>
Subject: I Hope It's Not True!
I just received this message from a retired friend, and
it has me concerned. It will affect all of us!
There seems to be another of those "quiet bills" that
go through Congress and comes back to bite us later.
You may wish to reply to this now or pay higher phone
bills in the future. Congress will be voting on this bill in
less than two weeks. CNN stated that the Government
would, in two weeks time, decide to allow or not allow
a Charge to your phone bill equal to a Long Distance
call EACH time you access the Internet.
The address is http://www.house.gov/writerep/
If you choose, visit the address above and fill out the
necessary form!
If EACH one of us, forwards this message on to others
in a hurry, we may be able to prevent this injustice
from happening! Please Pass This ON!
Bronyn Bennett Mosman (71)
[Note: If you want to write to your Representative in the
U.S. House for any reason the above official government
website will identify your rep. and put you in touch. -ap]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Eva (Clark) Perry "49" jeperry@supersat.net
To: the_sand@hotmail.com
Subject: To Go or To Stay?
I found this article in a paper that I was reading. It left
me with, [the question,] do I really, truly, know what I
would do.!!!!
SIFTING OUT THE FAINT OF HEART
One Sunday morning during service, a 2,000 member
congregation was surprised to see two men enter, both
covered from head to toe in black and carrying
submachine guns.
One of the men proclaimed, "Anyone willing to take a
bullet for Christ remain where you are."
Immediately, the choir fled, the deacons fled, and most
of the congregation fled. Out of the 2,000 there only
remained around 20 people.
The man who had spoken took off his hood, looked at
the preacher and said, "Okay Pastor, I got rid of all the
hypocrites. Now you may begin your service.
Have a nice day!" And the two men turned and walked
out........
--Eva Clark Perry
[Are there pastors out there who would denounce the
authority of the interlopers to demand such choices of
the congregation and command the men with the guns
to leave the building on the authority of Jesus Christ?
Just wondering... In the meantime, 911 on the cell
phone might not be a bad idea. What would you do?
-ap]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: William.Porter2@PSS.Boeing.com (68)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Ray Wells' Bottom Line
Ray said: "I'll try to put a bottom line to this
impeachment thing so we can move on:
1. It's not about sex
2. it's not about removing Clinton from office
3. It's not about partisanship
It's about having one set of laws for the rulers and
another set of laws for the ruled. It's about
sentencing 116 Americans to prison for lying under
oath (many of these lies were about sex) and
exempting William Jefferson Clinton."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You almost got to the bottom line. You forgot to
mention the number of perjury cases that prosecutors
refused to do anything about because it wasn't worth it,
or trivial to the case. Over 400 prosecutors have said
they wouldn't even bring charges against a 'normal'
person for what Clinton did. So, minus the 110, that's
290 more prosecutors than convicts that think the
case should be dropped. So much for statistics.
William L. Porter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Anthony Tellier (57)
Tony_Tellier@compuserve.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com>
Quoting from earlier Sandbox:
> To all: When one wants to do character damage to
another, labeling him a "pot smoker" and /or "draft
dodger" [it] merely lumps that individual in with
millions of others demographically.
No s**t ... the "and" fits me to a "T" (for Tony Tellier)!
So THAT argument holds zippo H2O for me ..
Now Clinton being such a bonehead DOES!!!! I don't
want my President to be nicer than me ("Nice guys
finish last") ... but I want him (or her) to be at least as
smart and hopefully smarter and wiser and cleverer
than me.
Tony Tellier ('57)
Boeing 717 Flight Test Center
Yuma, AZ USA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Lloyd Swain (66) LSwain6680@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Baseball with Cuba- Si'. Telemarketers- No!
Should America and Cuba play baseball?.....
Absolutely.... also.. I would love to smoke a Cohiba or
Romeo and Julieta without paying an arm and a leg.. :-)
How to discourage Telemarketers.... Pretend you don't
speak English.. ( that's why I always answer
anonymous caller id's with an accent... hehe)
-- Lloyd Swain
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
[O.K. Let's visualize the following scenario---
Householder: "Lo sciento, no puedo hablar Ingles!"
Telemarketer: "No problemo. Aqui' nosotros hablamos
todas de las linguas del mundo!"
Translation---
Householder: "I'm sorry. I can't speak English.
Telemarketer: "No problem. Here, we speak all the
languages of the world!"
Your idea still seems to have merit, though, Lloyd.
Does anybody else have some ideas on how to handle
unwanted telemarketers?
-ap ]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Mari Eckert Leahy (65) Me12147@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Like a Soap Opera
Promised myself I wouldn't write anything on the
subject of Clinton but find I need to say a little.
Re Ray Wells.......moving beyond Clinton......I can
just as easily picture Thomas Jefferson with tears
running down his face, but for a different reason. I see
it due to the many Americans that have accepted all
the accusations made against the President of this
United States without any basis in fact. Oh, there has
been much said that is said to be factual, but I have
yet to see or hear of these so called "facts." I, myself,
am to the point of having tears run down my face
because so many intelligent? Analytical? Common
sense? type of folks have jumped on these "facts" with
no regard to there validity. Anyone with even a slightly
open mind that has bothered to listen to the defense
side of this situation, cannot help but have very real
doubts about the validity of ANY of the accusations!
What ever became of the concept of innocent until
PROVEN guilty? Whatever became of fairness and
listening to BOTH sides before blaming or accusing?
Whatever became of good sportsmanship?......you
know.......if your candidate loses, you shake the
winners' hand and support him and help him and
accept the fact that the majority was more comfortable
with this candidate than the one you were for and you
continue to back this winner until the next election and
try again to get a candidate that YOU want, to be
elected instead. This president has withstood five
years of intense scrutiny by his harshest opposition,
and all they could come up with was a sordid affair
with a woman of legal age that was totally consensual.
If Clinton was guilty of even one or two of the crimes
that so many are laying at his feet......well, use your
brains folks, if that was the case, we might actually
have a legitimate reason to try and kick him from
office!!!!! There isn't any FAIRNESS in the process
Clinton and his family is being made to endure. It is
nothing more than POLITICS at it's worst, and we as
a nation are letting them degrade, and humiliate our
wonderful country. If other countries think less of us, it
is only because we deserve it for letting these
pompous, hypocrites air all this madness for the world
to enjoy like a soap opera.
-- Mari Eckert Leahyme
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Marc Franco (66) mfranco@uswest.net
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: A proposal
As one of many people who are not consumed with
hatred, bitterness, and venom, but yet who are still
dismayed at the sight of our President lying under
oath- albeit lying about something that actually is not
even a crime (amazing thought, isn't it?), how about
this for an idea? I continue to think that what Clinton
did- lying under oath - does not deserve impeachment,
but yet should be punished. How about putting him in
jail AFTER he leaves office? Then he really would be
like any of the rest of us, caught lying under oath and
punished for it, and yet would spare the country what
it is undergoing right now.
-- Marc
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Debbie Nelson Burnet (77) EDJMSB@aol.com
Subject: Re: Ray Wells '54 - "Moving Beyond Clinton"
Well said. What I have believed all along and even
more. If Clinton was an honorable man he would have
resigned from office long ago. But we all have realized
that he is not an honorable man.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Mary Lou (Watkins) Rhebeck (63)
E-mail: DAZNDIG@aol.com)
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Prayer for our Country
Something has really been bothering me during these
last few years with Clinton as our elected leader. I
couldn't believe that voters believed him. Granted, he
is an excellent speaker and full of charisma; but there
is something in the man's demeanor and eye's that
have always set me on edge.... Liken it to a child lying
to my face hoping I will think she is so darling I will
believe her. But Clinton is capable of much damage,
and I love my country too much to support him. But
truly, the problem is not Clinton. It is the lack of
outrage and the apathy from so many of Americans
that point to a bigger problem, one that could spell the
downfall of what our country was based on and what
keeps us great. The morality today is mudsliding
downward. We accept terrible acts and terrible beliefs
because we are "informed" now. I haven't been sure
how to word this "thing" that has been bothering me
until I recently ran across the following. It is "A Prayer
For Our Leaders" given by Pastor Joe Wright, when he
opened the new session of the Kansas Senate on
January 23, 1996. Please stay with me...it is important.
It reads:
"Heavenly Father, we come before You today to ask
Your forgiveness and seek Your direction and guidance.
We know Your Word says, 'Woe to those who call evil
'good'; but that's exactly what we have done. We have
lost our spiritual equilibrium and inverted our values.
We confess that: We have ridiculed the absolute truth
of Your Word and called it pluralism; We have
worshipped other gods and called it multi-culturism;
We have endorsed perversion and called it an
alternative lifestyle; We have exploited the poor and
called it the lottery; We have neglected the needy and
called it self-preservation; We have rewarded laziness
and called it welfare; We have killed our unborn and
called it choice; We have shot abortionists and called
it justifiable; We have neglected to discipline our
children and called it building self-esteem; We have
abused power and called it political savvy; We have
coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it
ambition; We have polluted the air with profanity and
pornography and called it freedom of expression; We
have ridiculed the time-honored values of our
forefathers and called it enlightenment. "Search us,
O God, and know our hearts today; try us and see if
there be some wicked way in us; cleanse us from
every sin and set us free' "
I will end the prayer here,,,, There is a bit more
directed at the people of Kansas. I have given
myself a goal to pray this every day for our country
and I hope others will join me. Thank you for the
opportunity to share with those of you who were
raised as I was. I don't expect total agreement
(heh-heh-heh), however I feel we do need to figure
out what is wrong and do what we can to correct and
heal our country.
Mary Lou (Watkins) Rhebeck (63)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Bob Rector (62) b_rector@owt.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com, Letters@time.com
Subj : Y2K: How We Got to This Date Anyway.
Or: Remind Doomsdayers that we do not
know what year it is.
Or: Will God Read the Polls Before Deciding
When To "Pull The Plug?"
Or: Do You Have The Correct Time?
My Time Magazine, (Jan 18, 1999) page 64 has a poll.
It claims that 9% of the population believe the world as
we know it will end on Jan. 1, 2000! Wow, that's just
crazy! Wrapping up Y2K computer problems together
with the Apocalypse is simply bizarre.
Just for fun, I've edited through the chapter on "The
Birth of Jesus" in Charles Guignebert's Book on the
subject of Jesus. (Guignebert was professor of History
of Christianity at the Sorbonne) Here's the confused
facts. We have little idea when Jesus was born. Bear
with me, and you decide
When Was Jesus Born?
"The Gospels afford only a few vague indications, which
are either contradictory or obviously erroneous.
Matthew 2:1 places the Nativity 'In the Days of King
Herod.' It is not questioned that they are talking about
Herod the Great, who's successor in Judea was
Aarchelaus. But we know that Herod died in the year
750 of the Roman Calendar, early in the spring, either
in March or April, of the fourth year before the Birth of
Christ, which constitutes a serious difficulty to begin
with." (I'll repeat, Herod died 4 B.C.....humm) The
Gospel of Mark is totally silent on the subject, further
reason for misgiving. Luke is more explicit: 'Elizabeth,
the mother of John the Baptist became pregnant 'in
the time of Herod, King of Judea,' and Mary conceived
six months after her cousin (Luke 1:26,36&42). At the
time of the latter's delivery, an imperial edict for a
census made it necessary for her to go to Bethlehem,
at which time, Quirinius is stated to have been
Governor of Syria....no further mention being made of
Herod.
Continuing in the good book, it says, "John the Baptist
began his preaching in the fifteenth year of the reign of
Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was Governor of
Judea, Herod Antipas Tetrarch of Galilee, and Annas
and Caiaphas were high priests. It was shortly after
this that Jesus came to be baptised by John and then
began his ministry. He was then, "about 30 years old."
(Luke 3:21,28)
Finally, John 8:56-57, makes Jesus say, in the course
of a dispute with the Jews: "Your Father Abraham
rejoiced to see my day, he saw it and was glad, to
which his opponents replied: Thou art not yet fifty
years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?" Could it be
that Jesus was almost 50 years old? Important note:
John presents a different number than Matthew and
Luke, but scholars agree that because Mat,MK,&Lk.
have similar stuff (are synoptic, or synonymous), then
what we have is simply two traditions. One tradition
has Jesus, "about 30 years old" and the other at
perhaps 50 at the crucifixion.
Tradition and history in the synoptics have Jesus'
ministry at three years. However, the probability is
that it lasted hardly more than one year....i.e. if we
date Jesus from John the Baptist, we would have
even more difficulty in a guess on the date of
crucifixion.
Several of the foregoing are contradictory. So where
to start? Guignebert, begins with the two undisputed
fixed points: Pontius Pilate was Procurator of Judea
from A.D. 26 to A.D. 36. Additionally, the fifteenth
year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar...made Emperor
on the tenth of August in the year 14, falls between
the nineteenth of August, year 28, and the Eighteenth
of August, year 29.
Therefore, if Jesus was thirty years old between the
years 28 and 29, he could not be near 50, a year or
two later. (have you got all that?) He could barely,
but possibly have been born under Herod the Great,
which would make him at least 33, and born no later
than 4 B.C. But, if the census of Quirinius, is the
same as the one spoken of by the Historian Josephus,
it took place in A.D. 6 to 7....which excludes the
possibility of the birth of Jesus under Herod, and
brings him to the age of only 22 or 23 by the year
A.D. 28-29. Furthermore, Annas and Caiaphas were
not high priests at the same time: Annas was governor
of the Temple, from A.D. 6 to 15....Caiaphas from 18
to 36.
Got it....grave difficulties in reconciling Biblical
information on the date of Jesus' birth. Some other
Bible scientists have accepted the "Star of the Magi"
(i.e. the year of Nativity) as the passing of Haley's
comet in A.D. 12.
The chronology of Luke is very confused anyway &
most scholars agree that Luke simply used the
census to get Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem. Luke
refers to "the census" therefore, not really caring or
knowing the date...only the tradition. *The edit itself
is outrageous...be counted not in the city of your birth,
but the city of the birth of your ancestor! (which
ancestors, etc?) It would have been nuts, and a
logistical nightmare for a census to have been done this
way. This means that scholars dismiss Luke's census
account for the birth of Jesus, and revert to other
accounts...pointing to the reign of Herod the Great.
Date of the Death of Jesus.
Taking John 8:57 to be accurate, some claim that
Jesus was crucified during the time of Claudius
(A.D. 41-45). Many of these accept the date of birth
at year 9. Others place the crucifixion at A.D. 21,
forgetting that Pilate had not received his appointment
until 26, and the opponents forgetting that he lost it
in 36.
So, How Did We Get to the Date We Have?
It happened....in the 6th century. A Roman monk
named Dionysius the Less, having no more information
than ourselves...calculated like this: "If John the Baptist
began his preaching in the fifteenth year of the reign of
Tiberius, and if we allow an interval of about a year
between the start of John the Baptist's ministry and that
of Jesus...then Jesus would have been 30 years old in
the sixteenth year of Tiberius (year 784 in the Roman
Calendar). Deducting thirty years, we reach the 754th
year. The date of Nativity is set at Dec.25th (celebration
of the solar god Mithra) in the Roman year of 754 and
this becomes year one of the new era.
Why? Because Dionysius was not hindered by what
we have discussed. He did not admit that the gospels
could be contradictory. He had no way to fix the exact
dates of the death of Herod or of the census. He did
not know that those dates were subsequent to 754.
It is wisest to conclude, says Guignebert, that we do
not know, within about fifteen years or more, the time
when Jesus came into the world.
Is this fun or what? Don't panic on Dec. 31, 1999.
Sorry for all the verbiage.
Semper Bomberus, Bob Rector
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's all for today's Sandbox, folks. Say what you
are itching to say today and send it right away to:
The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Not sure what you want to talk about? Well, then,
here are some ideas for you:
1. How about Dan Quayle for President?
2. What's the best way to cook okra?
3. Have you finished your Thanksgiving leftovers yet?
4. Other ideas suggested in previous issues.
See you next time!
-Al Parker, Your Sandbox savant, Learning from you!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-26-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #27 ~ January 29, 1999
"A wise Tory and a wise Whig, I believe, will agree.
Their principles are the same, though their modes
of thinking are different."
--- Samuel Johnson 1709 - 1784
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Top News: Wash D.C. -- Clinton Impeachment Trial
Enters Deposition Phase. Richland -- Ten year study
involving 3,400 people has found no link between
"Cold War-era radiation releases from the Hanford
Nuclear Reservation and the rate of thyroid disease
among people living downwind. (Associated Press
Release.) See Tri-City Herald and Yakima Herald-
Republic 1/29/99 for more info.
LONDON (Jan. 29) - The United States took one step
deeper into the quagmire of the Balkans this week
when it put NATO's military might behind a drive for a
quick political settlement in the Serbian province of
Kosovo. --Reuters
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RHS/ColHi Alumni Speakers of The Day:
Peggy Roesch (71), Richard Henderson (62),
Jerry Lewis (73), Sandi Cherrington (66),
Peggy Lewis Johnson '62, Peggy Hartnett (72),
Elizabeth McAllister McCardle (78),
Nancy Fellman Lysher (62), John Wingfield (66)
Peggy Lewis Johnson (62), Ray Wells (54)
Dick Epler (52), Kathy Rathvon (63)
Patty de la Bretonne ( 65), Rob Teats (70),
Jim Fowler (72)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Share Your Opinions, Your Ideas, and Your
Responses with Richland Alumni All Around The
World! MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Peggy Roesch (71) plroesch@sprynet.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subj: Y2K and Dan Quayle,
Two Seemingly Unrelated Topics
Or: Y2Quale: Start Hoarding Potatoes?
Ohmigod. Dan Quayle. Now I WILL pray that the world
ends at the stroke of midnight December 31, 1999 ... or
2000 ... or whenever the gosh darn new millenium is
supposed to start ... Maybe I should hoard money and
water and food ... including the everlovin' potatoe.
-- Peggy Roesch
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Progressive Government
From: Richard Henderson (62)
Mail: grassroots3@earthlink.net
The recent State-of-the-Union speech was an example
of why the liberal/socialist holds fast to the belief that
"progressive government" knows what is increasingly
best for you and wants to take care of you. This
speech, (wish list), was riddled with paybacks, perks,
power and pork that truly validates such mindset...
Offered is a poem, styled after the 91st Psalm, that
reflects the opinion of many about the increasing
intrusion of "progressive government" into our lives.
PSALM OF PROGRESSIVE GOVERNMENT
Government is my shepherd,
therefore, I shall toil no more;
entitling me to collect benefits
off those that labor.
My individuality and initiative
matter the least;
politicians insuring that my
dependency shall not cease.
An economic utopia is promised for me;
confiscating future earnings, of others,
as far as the eye can see.
Yea, though I walk through
the valley of dependency,
and fear no loss;
government goodies
shall remain my boss.
Surely, in my old age, they
will care for me evermore;
I shall dwell in a fantasy of bliss
until they pull my life support.
This is the creed and motto
they hold fast to;
progressive government - giving
and requiring more from you.
-- Rich Henderson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Dick Epler (52) depler@pdx.oneworld.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Y2K Computer Compatibility
[Personal and Network Sharing Computers]
Regarding Y2K compliance for IBM and Apple PCs, I
might weigh in with just a few comments.
First, there IS an Official Y2K Specification that any
general purpose computer must meet to be called Y2K
compliant. Right now, some machines are close, but
very few are fully compliant.
Second, there are five areas of computer operation that
need checking: The Hardware (BIOS for PCs) level, the
OS (Operating System) level, the Application Software
(e.g., Quicken), any critical Data Bases with embedded
dates, and lastly, the sharing of Data Files between
different computers.
The latter two areas, legacy data bases, and
inter-computer data sharing, is the most difficult and
time consuming to verify and is where most systems
continue to fail at this time
Having said that, however, not even Win98 out of the
box is Y2K compliant. You can get closer by
downloading 6Mbytes of files from microsoft.com, but
you still won't be fully compliant. As another
example, a class action suit was filed against Intuit for
marketing NEW versions of Quicken and Quickbooks
that weren't anywhere close to being compliant ...
thereby requiring another upgrade in the near future
(which the plaintiffs wanted for free).
Third, the reason that data sharing compatibility may
take quite some time is that programmers have used
different techniques to implement quick Y2K fixes
(which are incompatible with each other). For example,
consider the "Windowing" technique, which is fairly
popular. This is where a window consisting of the
years between 00 and 49 are assigned 20, whereas the
years between 50 and 99 are assigned 19. However, if
a different programmer chooses a breakpoint of 60
rather than 50, data sharing will fail. Many IT
(Information Technology) managers in small business'
are under the false impression they've addressed
their Y2K problem and don't need to test. WRONG!
Fourth, date rollover from 12/31/1999 to 1/1/2000 is only
part of the problem and is far from a comprehensive test.
The other part of the problem is the calendar algorithms
used to compute dates throughout the year 2000 and
beyond. These are often flawed (different rules are
required than pre-2000).
Lastly, Apple computers ARE much more Y2K
compatible on all levels than are WinTel computers as
I believe all dates are expanded to four digits.
However, I don't know if their calendar algorithm is fully
compliant with the Y2K specification.
If Darwin Perkins is still reading the SANDBOX, he
might be able to offer some other observations,
especially with respect to LMSI compliance. And there
may be other computer experts out there who could
contribute.
--
Dick Epler
depler@pdx.oneworld.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Kathy Rathvon (63) kathrath@blarg.net
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Apathy
Are Americans apathetic? I don't think so. I think they
just want our congressmen and women and Senators
to get on with the business of running our country.
-- Kathy Rathvon
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: jlewis@owt.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com>
Subj: Urban Legends
Jerry Lewis (73) wrote:
I must step in to quash yet another Internet urban
legend. In fact, I highly recommend checking out any
dire warning before posting it to a) your entire address
book, b) all mailing lists that you belong to c) the world,
or d) anyone else.
(References for this legend follow my diatribe)
Some questions to ask about any such post are:
- where did the poster (or you) get the message
('a retired friend'). If there is not a specific source or it
is not a credible source for that particular warning,
start questioning the veracity (no offense meant to the
'retired friend').
- are there any credible references in the post, such
as links to articles at cnn.com or nytimes.com. Do
they work and do they describe the problem with
references to credible sources. If quotes are
included for print pubs. without reference to day/pg,
etc., consider that they are fabricated. (Even if there
were day/pg, I would be suspicious).
- is there no specific dates (or bill numbers) in a
post like this that would give a reference. A
message that refers to something happening in two
weeks could circulate for a long time. Hoaxes don't
have dates in them because they diminish the viability
of the hoax.
- anything that has lots of exclamation points in the
heading or has been forwarded to a half dozen other
e-mail lists (usually still included), is totally suspect.
- anything that says it's not a) hoax, b) urban legend,
c) chain letter, etc., probably is.
(Hmmm, can this be generalized to the Clinton
discussion: "1. It's not about sex, 2. It's not about
removing Clinton from office, 3. It's not about
partisanship." I don't think I'll go there).
A little bit of critical thinking can go a long way
towards avoiding the panic, waste of time and
effort that these messages can engender.
You can find out about this particular legend by
going to http://www.snopes.com and clicking on
"Currently Circulating", or you can go directly to the
page if you don't like frames:
http://snopes.simplenet.com/spoons/
faxlore/congress.htm
Just call me "Mr. Throw Cold Water on It."
Jerry Lewis * jlewis@owt.com
Some Web Pages: http://www.owt.com/rhs73
http://www.cbc2.org
http://www.owt.com/users/jlewis/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Elizabeth (McAllister) McCardle (78)
MailTo: Cn201@webtv.net
Subject: About Prayer [Referred to by Mary Lou (63)
In Sandbox #26]
About that prayer-- AMEN!
[Referring Sandbox #26 -- "A Prayer For Our
Leaders" given by Pastor Joe Wright, when he opened
the new session of the Kansas Senate on 1/23/96]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Nancy Fellman Lysher (62) nlgl@email.msn.com
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: What To Say To A Telemarketer
"I'm really busy right now. How about you give me your
home phone number and I'll call when I've got time?
No, you can't do that? Well, you are calling me on my
home phone. I could call you back at say 3 a.m. your
time.
Or....I tell them I have a policy not to do business with
anyone who does telemarketing. I have a private home
phone for my convenience, not theirs. Any questions?
- Nancy Fellman Lysher 62
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
From: Sandi Cherrington (66)
MailTo: LkWdCherri@bigfoot.com
Subj: Mandatory Support of Designated Drivers
There is a new petition added to the
"E-The People" site!
Go to the E-The People site at:
http://www.e-thepeople.com/affiliates/national/
Click on:
"Mandatory Support of Desiginated Drivers"
You will then be able to read what this petition
proposes and add your name if you wish.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Peggy Lewis Johnson (62) gpjohn@sos.net
To: THE_SANDBOX THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com>
Subject: Capitalism
Peggy Johnson wrote:
O.K. Gee whiz I guess I better jump in the skillet with
the rest of you. First of all, what really can you all
expect when this capitalistic country defines success
as it does? To argue from a democratic or republican
point of view is a bit passe at this point when these
opinions are driven not from the ideals which
originated them but from the power and wealth behind
them. Is it possible that it is neither the democratic nor
the republican "camp" that is driving this massive,
on-going move to remove Clinton from office? Of
course Senators and Congressmen represent certain
areas geographically but much more influential are the
financial interests behind them - and I certainly don't
mean little financial interests.
In this global economy that we, from the class of '62
could only think of as a science fiction novel, there is
a greed for power unknown to the masses - yes like
you and I. This global struggle to dominate is
powered by money from both legitimate, as well as
illegitimate commerce.
I'm as concerned as most hard-working Americans
about ethics, honesty, truth and being represented
appropriately by elected officials but it would be
foolhardy to think in a second that we are dealing
with politics as usual when this global economy has
an agenda we could barely fathom. Resources,
corporate take-overs, the politics and ethics of the
Internet, the environment, and education and work
opportunity for the masses, viruses (both
technological and biological), resistance to antibiotics,
not to mention man's obsession with violence and war.
all weigh heavier on my mind and in my heart than this
president's weakness for a "non-sex" sex act and an
unfulfilled "Elvis Presley-like" drive to be something,
achieve something, for something or someone that it
doesn't seem he really has the answers to - like who
would want that job, anyway? So, he lied - and I think
in the real world he should take the fall - but folks, his
world ain't the real world. If it was, idealism would reign
and he would resign with a humble apology to the
country and we would know "he did the right -
honorable thing"
But, once again, we are forced to look at the way, and
the reason we make judgment calls, moment to
moment in this country, based on perception of
evidence, and often, how it is fed to us so we can see
it as it is intended we see it, based "what the cost is to
us" as individuals in money, face, survival, rightness
about who we are, prejudice, race, ethnicity. One truth
is that we are individuals as long as we choose to be
individual.
I'm happy that my children are fine, my days are worth
looking forward to, that I have a history, that I have
friends, that I live in a wonderful community and I can
make a difference here and a contribution. I question
the luck of being gifted with being born into this
relatively safe life when so many in this country live in
poverty and there is such incredible brutality waged
against men, women, children here and especially in
war-torn countries. The furor about Clinton has a
"thorn-like" aggravation about it that we should not
take lightly - but it's a human - condition, survival of
ethics issue with some mass of wealth and greed,
too big for us to imagine, driving it on.
Nice chattin' with 'ya Peggy Lewis Johnson '62
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: A modern hotel in a timeless town
Mail: highdesert@theriver.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Telemarketer Stoppers
Also: Likes Mayan Calendar better than Julian
Peggy Hartnett (72) writes:
I let them prattle on a little while, then very quietly I say,
"excuse me, (pause), what are you wearing?" They
hang up. Quick, simple and I hope slightly unnerving
to them.
Calendars & the Millenium: I personally prefer the
Mayan calendar, no heads of state or religious figures
vying for special status and it makes a lovely
decorating accessory.
-- Peggy Hartnett
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Patty de la Bretonne ( 65)
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Table Topics: How to Cook Okra
Okra is best lightly breaded and quickly deep fried.
I like the taste, but in soups and such, the texture of
okra is, well, slimy.
Patty de la Bretonne
BrassEar@aol.com
PS. Mari Eckert, thanks for writing in. I am in
agreement with much you say. I am not watching any
of the "trial" on tv.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Rob Teats (70) PARUMC@aol.com
To: the_sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: The Year 2000 Date
For Bob Rector (62)
Thank you for your detailed view on the date of Jesus'
birth. Very enlightening.
You mentioned the calculations made by Dionysius
the Less, (could be translated as, Denny the Dwarf),
that created the dating of our current calendar.
Marcus Borg, professor of Religion and Culture at
Oregon State, suggests that Dionysius' calculations
were incorrect because of a mathematical mistake.
The result is that, even if his assumption of Jesus'
birth were correct, the date he calculated was
mathematically off by four years. Correcting
Dionysius' calculations places Jesus' birth at 4 B.C.
This would mean that the 2nd millenium of Jesus' birth
has already happened in 1997. Those who think the
world will end 2000 years after Jesus' birth are wrong!
Rob Teats (70)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Jim Fowler (72) jhfowler@earthlink.net
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Internet Charges
The rumor about the Government taxing Internet access
is an Urban Legend. It's been around for a while.
http://urbanlegends.miningco.com/library/
weekly/aa012099.htm
Jim Fowler 1972
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: John Wingfield (66) unity@gaia.com
Mail: unity@gaia.com (Unity of Beaverton)
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Regarding Lloyd Swain's great idea about reply to
tele-dinner-interuping-marketeers. I like your
suggestion, but my Spanish would not convoke anyone.
However, last year my older son was studying in Poland
and when you call a home in Poland they always
answer with "Hello." And then with that familiar greeting
I would always start speaking English only to get a full
onslaught of Polish in reply. So Lloyd's suggestion fits
right into that. Perhaps a mixture of German, Polish
and Japanese after the caller's opening line: "Ah, ser
gut, haben zie einer mushi mushi, so des nei, dochira
no ho, vershten zei?" Any gibberish would improve on
every other reply I've come up with to date.
Peace, -- John Wingfield (66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: None so blind as they who will not see
From: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells) (54)
These national news web sites have enough on Clinton
to destroy him. When this kind of stuff (and more) is
available to anyone who takes the time to surf the net,
why, in God's name, is Ken Starr, The House, and the
Senate fooling around with small stuff like Monica?
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover.shtml
http://www.drudgereport.com/matt.htm
Please check it out today as the stories will probably
change by tomorrow on these websites.
P.S. - I found out why the Chinagate thing is not being
pursued. According to Ken Hamblin, too many
Republicans also had a hand in Chinagate. God, what
a den of thieves we have in our government.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Howie Mandel's TV Show as aired 1/28/99
Subj: Evolution
Howie's son: Dad, if man descended from apes, why
are there still apes?
Howie: Because the ones that are still apes are the
slow learners.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's all for today's Sandbox, folks. Say what you
are craving to say today and send it right away to:
The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Not sure what you want to talk about? Well, then,
here are some ideas for you: What do you think
about:
1a. In the military: Would you recommend that women
be assigned to combat roles side by side with males?
A U.S. senator, no longer in office, stated that she
believes the separation of sexes in the armed forces
has outlived its usefulness. Know who she is?
(Someone else recently suggested that it might be
better to have all-female units assigned to combat
rather than mixing the sexes together in front line
combat situations.)
1a. Should men and women in the military train
and live in barracks together, in order to enhance
team cohesiveness and esprit de corps?
2. Should your government hire a company such as
Monsanto to create a designer fungus with the
express purpose of killing hemp plants worldwide?
3. What will you be doing (or what did you do), while
your spouse is (or was) watching the Super Bowl
Game?
4. After the game: Which commercial, (costing
$1,600,000 for a 30 second spot) did you find to be
the most effective or most memorable or most
entertaining or the biggest waste of over one and
one half million dollars?
5. Did you team win? Did you bet the farm on the
losing team?
See you next time!
-- Al Parker
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-27-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #28 ~ February 6, 1999
"I never resist temptation, because I have found
that things that are bad for me do not tempt me."
George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950
--The Apple Cart -- act II
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
News of Interest This Week:
Middle East: King Hussein On Life Support.
Hanford East: High Winds Blow Irradiated Tumble
Weeds Through 200 East area. Hanford workers
warned, "don't touch."
Officials are not overly concerned, however.
According to lead contractor Fluor Daniel Hanford, Inc.,
"A person would have to ingest several contaminated
tumbleweeds to be subject to harm."
In any case, this news does inspire a great idea for
a movie with Meg Ryan, Mel Gibson and a cast of
thousands of Richland Bombers, entitled:
"Please Don't Eat The Tumbleweeds."
The musical background will be supplied by the
digitally perfected Sons of The Pioneers.
"See them tumbling along,
Deep in my heart is their song,
Although their rads are not strong,
I'm told to eat them is wrong...
And deep in my heart I do know
Though deep in the night I do glow
I'll just keep rolling along...
With the tumbling, tumbling tumble weeds!
The plot will be sort of a combination of "Please
Don't Eat the Daisies" and "Volcano" with Richland
and the Hanford Reservation as the locale. Will Mel
Gibson be able to save Meg Ryan from her fast track
fixation for a fast flux finish? That is the question!
Want to hear some of the background music for this
great movie in which you could play a role? Go to:
http://www.hondoshonkytonk.com/sounds/chuck/
and click on: tumblewe.mid -ap
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Your RHS/ColHi Alumni Speakers of The Day are:
Ray Wells (54), Vince Bartram (62), Tony Tellier (57)
Lee Johnson (54), Arthur Roberts (48),
Darwin Perkins (69), Jenny (Smart) Page (87),
Annette Pierce (62), John M. Allen (66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Share Your Opinions, Your Ideas, and Your
Responses with Richland Alumni All Around The
World! MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells) (54)
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Answering questions, allegations and comments from:
William.Porter2@PSS.Boeing.com
Mari Eckert Leahyme (65) Me12147@aol.com
Debbie Nelson Burnet (77) EDJMSB@aol.com
1. Concerning William Porter's comment about 400
prosecutors who have said they wouldn't even bring
charges against a 'normal' person for what Clinton did:
Since you did not say 'allegedly did' I have to assume
that you believe Clinton did it, but since you didn't
specifically mention what 'it' referred to, I am unable to
access the full import of your statement. This is the
first time I have heard this '400 prosecutors' statistic,
and I would appreciate your sharing the source with the
Sandbox, including the circumstances and questions
involved, since this appears to be a survey a.k.a. a poll.
Speaking of polls, I heard an example on the radio on
how polls are conducted:
20 people were asked if they knew who Mike Tyson
was. All 20 answered yes. Then they were asked if
they knew that Mike Tyson bit off a chunk of an
opponent's ear. 18 said yes, and 2 said no. Then they
were asked if they knew that Mike Tyson served time
in prison for assaulting his girlfriend. 19 said yes, 1
said no. Then they were asked if they respected Mike
Tyson as a person. All 20 said no. Lastly they were
asked if they believed Mike Tyson was a good boxer.
16 (80%) said yes, 2 said no, and 2 had no opinion.
Announced results of the poll: Tyson has an 80%
approval rating.
2. Concerning Mari Eckert Leahyme's 'Like a Soap
Opera' comments. I doubt that Thomas Jefferson would
have shed any tears for President Bill Clinton. Jefferson,
who was the actual author of the U.S. Constitution, was
well known for his mistrust of government, and elected
officials in general, and that is why we find
impeachment covered in the Constitution. It would be
interesting to hear from someone who can quote
comments from scholars who are authorities on
Thomas Jefferson, who have expressed what they
think Thomas Jefferson would have said about this
Clinton mess. There is a world of information on the
Internet about Thomas Jefferson, and if anyone has
the time to research it, and share it with the rest of
us, I'm sure it would make worthwhile reading.
Mari said, "What ever became of the concept of
innocent until PROVEN guilty? Whatever became of
fairness and listening to both sides before blaming or
accusing?" Blaming and accusing are rights that are
guaranteed under the first amendment (it's called
freedom of speech, and it only exists in a democracy).
Trials are conducted to prove innocence or guilt. You
can't get any more fair than that. Bill Clinton is being
tried according to his Constitutional right. The
Republicans want a trial. It is the Democrats and
liberals who are against the trial and against hearing
witnesses. Witnesses, by the way, can also be used
to testify on behalf of the president (unless of course,
these kinds of witnesses don't exist).
3. Concerning Debbie Nelson Burnet's 'Well said'
comment. It's nice to hear that at least one other
person agrees with me. Like you, I also think if
Clinton were an honorable man he would have
resigned from office a long time ago. Any decent
husband and father would have resigned rather than
subjecting his wife and daughter to such humiliation,
and he would have resigned rather than polarize his
country from the spin-off of his immorality.
Ray Wells (54)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Vince Bartram (62) vlewisb@msn.com
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Questions re Y2K (Thanks to Bob Rector)
So Bob,
Help me out here.
Should I party like it's 1985, or party like it's 2015?
Or how about we all agree to just do 1999 over again?
Actually, if I could get my body to agree, I wouldn't
mind doing the last 30 years over again. I wonder if I
would make some of the same dumb mistakes. Oh
well.
Thanks for the discussion
— Vince Bartram
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: RIS/SW Tony Tellier (57)
Mail: Tony_Tellier@compuserve.com
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Can a Computer Virus Spay Your Dog?
Re: "A little bit of critical thinking."
[Re virus urban legend virus alerts] ... I never pay any
attention to them anyway but your tips might be
enlightening for those who shotgun virus warnings.
I liked the warning about this virus that will spay your
dog, invalidate your Visa card, cause global warming or
cooling depending ...
Tony Yuma
RHS '57 (Fifty-SEVEN! Has it been THAT long?)
This is not a chain letter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Lee Johnson (54) BeegByte@aol.com
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Another Big Columbia Flood Coming?
Or: Columbia Point Construction At Risk?
Or: Time to Widen The Old Horn Rapids Road?
Just heard some disturbing news. Apparently the snow
pack is growing at an alarming rate and the possibility
is there for a major flood on the Columbia and its tributaries.
Is there anyone out there who can remember the
"GREAT FLOOD OF 48"? I remember GW Way
being roped off and only the big Eukes and
Turn-a-pulls running wide open up and down the street
24 hours a day. At night, there was a two foot flame
coming out of the exhaust pipe. It amazes me there
are developers who want to tear down the dike around
Richland. And there is a lot of construction down on
what they now call Columbia Point. In 1948 that was
under 20 feet of water. As I recall the only way out of
Richland during that flood was to drive to Benton City
using the old Horn Rapids Road. Does anyone else
recall that flood?
-- Lee Johnson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From Arthur Roberts (48)
FluffDry@hotmail.com
Subj: Please Interpret My Dream
I would welcome any and all to try to interpret this
weird dream I had recently. I was in the kitchen. The
refrigerator door was open. My wife's cat, (I am no
longer married in real life), jumped into the refrigerator
at crisper level, then came flying out of the refrigerator
just below freezer level and landed in my arms. My
wife kept telling me to keep the cat out of the
refrigerator. Her cat kept jumping in near the bottom
and popping out near the top. I couldn't catch it or
make it stop. I could tell my wife was getting mad at
me for letting this continue, but there was nothing I
could do to make the cat stop. What do you think this
means?
— Arthur Roberts
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Darwin Perkins (69) dperkins@3-cities.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Millennium Bug and other Y2K thoughts
In response to Dick Epler (52) in the Sandbox #27.
Yes, I do still browse these occasionally
Dick's synopsis of the intricacies of the Y2K problem
was very well done. I won't attempt to improve on it.
I'm not involved with Lockheed Martin (LMSI)
anymore, so I can't say exactly what they are doing on
the Hanford site. But, after spending the better part of
the last 5 years working in three separate companies
on various aspects of the Y2K problem, it's obvious to
me that a problem does exist. However, it's just as
obvious that it's not a life-threatening, world ending,
kind of problem. So you can class me in the non-Y2K
believer group.
There are a number of Y2K sites on the Web. If you're
interested, just search for the word "Y2K". It can
provide you several months of reading material.
I've been asked several times to present information on
Y2K and its potential impact on life as we know it.
Here are some observations:
Businesses in the world are in business to survive and
to make a profit. They will do as much as necessary to
"fix" the Y2K bug and no more. There will be some
problems, but, for the most part, life as we
know it will continue.
Remember, regardless of the rumor mongers, only a
small part of your life hinges on a computer doing its
job, you'll still get a paycheck the first week in
January. There will still be gas at the pumps and they'll
still sell coffee and rolls inside.
Banks and other financial institutions have already run
through Y2K several times AND they will fully back
up current information on December 31, this year. For
them, the worst case scenario does not involve their
computers, but their customers: A run on the bank
would devastate the. There is not enough printed
money in the country to allow people to pull their
savings from the bank over that last week in
December. A public panic over not being able to
physically hold money is a real concern.
In major cities, whenever there is a abnormal
occurrence, fire, earthquake, power failure, etc., a sub
group of the population makes the best of the situation
by rioting and looting. I expect that will happen
regardless of the real effect of Y2K. Merely the
expectation will be sufficient reason for this group.
The potential for power and utility outages does exist.
The last time a major power provider tripped off line in
the Western Region Grid, some parts of Idaho and
Utah were without power for 3 days. Will this happen
as a result of Y2K? No one knows. However, this fits
in the same class of 'disasters' as a major snow storm.
The power people will reset the systems, bypass those
that are causing problems and start up the generators
again.
Travel: I'm planning to go somewhere fun and/or warm
for the holidays. Will there be a problem getting back?
Probably not, and if there is a delay, it will probably
involve the weather, not Y2K. Radios still work,
pilots still pilot, there will be gas at the airports, radar
still works. Could there be a problem? Sure. Will it
stop all flights for the next century? Nope.
Food: If you knew that there would be a major winter
storm in 3 weeks and that the power and all
transportation in and out of your town would
be shut down for 3-5 days, what would you do? For
Y2K, do the same thing.
Summary: There is a problem with computer systems
and the year 2000. With a highly technical lifestyle we
enjoy, there may be some inconveniences. However,
this too will pass. Take what you hear with a grain of
salt. Remember, most people who know a bunch about
Y2K are making their living by fixing the problem.
The worse they make it sound, the more work they
have...
--Darwin Perkins (69)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Jenny (Smart) Page (87)
MailTo: jpage@3-cities.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: The Nation's Business Is Being Done
In response to Kathy Rathvon and how the congress
needs to "get on with the business of running our
country." Well, Kathy, what they are doing IS the
business of running the country. Although what is
currently occurring is not an activity that happens with
each session, it is a part of the "job description" of
being a Representative or Senator. Granted, it's not a
fun part of the job, but occasionally it is a necessary
part. Let them do this part of their job.
And in response to Peggy Roesch, I would gladly take
someone who makes a (common) spelling error like
Dan Quayle, over someone who is a disgrace to such a
dignified office, like William J. Clinton. What is
saddest about this whole "affair" with Clinton is that
we, the American people, are no longer shocked with
each additional "bimbo eruption." My point: A few
Weeks back when the Danny Williams-thing occurred;
I did not speak to one person (even my Clinton
supporter friends) who doubted that it could be true.
Everyone just accepted it as "Yep, ol' Billy knocked up
some bimbo back in Arkansas." No one said "No
Way!! He wouldn't have done that!" (or something
along those lines....get my point?). William J. Clinton
is an embarrassment to all of America. He is a liar
(even his staunchest supporters admit that), and God
knows what else. The man should hang his head in
shame and leave.... Leave the office he holds....Leave
Washington D.C....... Leave America... He's done
enough damage already.
— Jenny (Smart) Page (87)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Annette Pierce (62) almond@uswest.net
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Question:
Hi,
I am Annette Monson Pierce. (Would be class of 62 but
moved to Benton City and graduated in 62 there.) I
have a question and would like some feedback from
Bombers growing up in Richland during the years of
W 42-55. I would like to know if you have noticed an
increase in the amount of breast cancer in your area.
We don't have much of a history of breast cancer in my
family but now the three oldest girls in our family
including myself have developed it.. My two younger
sisters are on six months rechecks because of
suspicious spots and lumps. Marion my older sister
said two of her friends also developed breast cancer.
All of us developed it before the age of fifty five. I
would be interesting in hearing some responses.
Thanks.
Annette Monson Pierce (62)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: John M. Allen (66)
Reply-To: miles2go@cheerful.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com>
Subject: Speaking for Myself
In responding to that which Mike Franco claims he
learned from me during Husky Football games, I
would like to preface my remarks with the admonition
that true communication, and specifically the
teaching/learning process, are usually tricky things.
For purposes of my remarks here and in the future, I
will define true communication as having taken place
when one person precisely understands information or
ideas in the same manner that the conveyor of the
information or ideas WISHES for the other person to
understand. This process can be hampered by
inadequacies on the part of either the communicator or
the "communicatee" or both. It can also be hampered
by ambient circumstances (like the roar of a crowd, for
instance).
Having said that, and having reviewed Issue #24 to be
sure MarvCarstens wasn't being misquoted or
misinterpreted, I have to say that, in general, it appears
Mike Franco was a pretty good student (at least from
the standpoint of having UNDERSTOOD certain very
basic Conservative principles).
While I understand the frustrations of people at the
SEEMING value placed upon certain jobs in society, I
still believe (about 85% of the time) in the MARKET
DYNAMIC of the capitalist system. For instance, I
am sure that the UW does not pay its attorneys as little
as it does its highest paid professor, and ONLY to the
extent that the head football coach does a completely
different job than a professor, do I make this
comparison with the attorney. One must also consider
the relative good done by the athletic program as a
whole, and how much the football program contributes
not only to that whole program, but to the academic
side of University life as well. I doubt that any single
fund raising method contributes to the University,
anywhere near the amount of raw cash that the football
program does. Even in situations where the overall
good is far more suspect than college football
(specifically professional sports in general, and the
NBA in particular) I still believe in the market system.
Even if the public wishes to continue demonstrating its
overall ignorance by paying outrageous sums to
horribly spoiled athletes and team owners so that they
may prey upon that same public and its daughters in
the pursuit of their own private Sodom and Gomorra, I
still maintain it is NOT up to the government to
legislate against the public's ignorant behavior. While
contrary to popular opinion, we can and DO legislate
morality, we cannot AFFORD to legislate against
ignorance; at least not in adult society. There is simply
FAR too much of it.
As for Mr. Carstens' comments about the state of
employment in this country, I agree with the point he
SEEMED to be making that neither the Democratic
Party nor (presumably) the Clinton Administration is
responsible for current economic conditions, whatever
one perceives those conditions to be. I would say the
same about any Administration regardless of party.
This stems once again from the basic Conservative
belief in capitalism and the market system; specifically,
that in general, market dynamics are primarily
responsible for the state of any nation's economy. A
GOOD administration of government is rather like a
good referee in a football game. It applies the rules in
as inconspicuous a fashion as possible and does not
attempt to make lots of new rules or become the focus
of the game. But as for Mr. Carstens apparent
complaints about what he perceives to be inadequate
benefits, I can only say that no Administration,
regardless of political party, should insert itself into
this process. A good argument can be made that in
many cases, it has been precisely the inappropriate
involvement of the government that has screwed things
up. One example, without doubt, is the Social
Security System and its so-called Trust Fund which
DOES NOT EXIST due to the federal government's
meddling and lack of self control when it comes to
spending. That's what happens when one party
is left in control of the House for 40 continuous years.
When it comes to business, there are few bodies less
qualified to control it effectively than the US Congress,
since most of the Congressmen, Congresswomen, and
Senators have so abysmally little experience in
business. They all have lots of IDEAS but those ideas
almost always involve spending your money and mine,
all the while thinking it is really theirs.
As for my little traps, I have tried only the one so far,
but I will not be advertizing any future ones in
advance. I had really expected that it would be one of
the Francos or maybe Ron Richards who would take
the first bite at the bait, and the fact that they didn't,
MAY be an indication of how completely libs have
come to believe their own swill about this
impeachment being equal to an attempted coup d'état.
---John Allen ('66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Howie Mandel's TV Show as aired 1/28/99
Subj: Evolution
Howie's son: Dad, if man descended from apes, why
are there still apes?
Howie: Because the ones that are still apes are the
slow learners.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's all for today's Sandbox, folks. Say what you
are itching to say today and send it right away to:
The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Not sure what you want to talk about? Well, then,
here are some ideas for you: What do you think
about:
1. Will we... Should we... soon be sending U.S.
troops to Kosovo to help restore peace there?
2. Is Russia still a threat to the U.S., to world
peace?
3. What do you think should really be done with the
so-called national budget "surplus?"
4. Why would you like to have yourself cloned?
5. Why would you not like to have yourself cloned?
6. What is your "favorite" pet peeve?
See you next time!
-- Al Parker
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-28-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #29 ~ February 13, 1999
"Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive."
-- Sir Walter Scott 1771 - 1832
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
History This Week
Sun Feb 7, 1999-- King Hussein Dies. Son Assumes
Throne. World Leaders Attend Funeral and Offer
Support. Will Middle East "Peace" Hold?
Friday, Feb 12, 1999-- The U.S. Senate clears
the president of perjury and obstruction of justice
charges, making William Jefferson Clinton the
second U.S. president to be impeached, but not
convicted. Paul Harvey comments: "Senate
Completes Cover Up." [to paraphrase] Popular
Consensus: "The President engaged in despicable
behavior not [sinking] to the level of impeachable
offenses." The Country, the President, The
Presidency, the Congress and the Constitution
appear to have survived the a monumental and
tedious ordeal. Only with time will all the
ramifications of that ordeal and its outcome be put
to the test(s).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RHS/ColHi Alumni Speakers of The Day:
Bob Rector (62), Willard Ule (73), Ray Wells (54),
Gary Behymer (64), Mike Franco (70),
Bob Rector (62), Sandy Carpenter McDermott (61),
Kent Sinkey (59), Arthur Roberts (48),
Robert Frost (1874-1963) (Bomber Guest)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Special Feature Today: "Bomber Boomer Baby Trivia"
Trivia questions throughout. Can you pass the test?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Share Your Opinions, Your Ideas, and Your
Responses with Richland Alumni All Around The
World! MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Bob Rector (62)
ReplyTo: b_rector@owt.com
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Dream Interpretation for Arthur Roberts (48)
"Doctor Bob" subscribes to classic assumption that
dreams are metaphors. i.e. the cat coming out of the
refrigerator (ice box) is the admonition "Don't let the
cat out of the box." The woman complaining that you
could not keep the cat in the box, is claiming you have
"spilled the beans." Boy are you in trouble!
— Bob Rector
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Boomer Baby Trivia #1: 1. Name the Beatles,
first and last names.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Willard Ule (73) WULEMD@webtv.net
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Black and White and Gray
May we forever respect the indulgence of the simple
minded. Those whom only see in black and/or white.
The only gray they know is the matter which separates
their ears. If you lie, then you shall burn!!!!! But how
quick do They expect us to forget all of the lies which
they told to win the office in which they attempt to
serve the People. Even though the majority of the
people make their wishes known via- Polls. But they
excuse this with comments like, "They don't know
what's good for them." This bothers me whenever
another adult thinks they know what's best for me,
because of their moral convictions. It's like when
someone tells you to trust him while he has his hand in
your pocket. This whole thing reminds me of my days
at Jason Lee. If we didn't get our way we would
search out the play ground Teacher who would give
us our way. Then came the day that we were forced to
realize that some times we were just plain wrong. No
matter how many teachers we asked, we were still
wrong. I often wish others would learn this lesson.
Maybe then we could come to the important vote.
THANK YOU MUCHLY
LATER, "DOC"
WILLARD DOUGLAS ULE M.D.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #2: Finish this line:
"Lions, and tigers, and bears ..." (2 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Ray Wells (54) ray@transcribing.com
Subj: Best Y2K information
To: TheSandbox@hotmail.com
Best Y2K information I have found yet ---
http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/Tip/Lord/
http://www.y2ktimebomb.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #3: "Hey kids, what
time is it?" (4 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Gary Behymer (64) bjangary@colfax.com
Subj: DANCE LIKE NO ONE'S WATCHING
We convince ourselves that life will be better after
we get married, have a baby, then another. Then we
are frustrated that the kids aren't old enough, and we'll
be more content when they are. After that we're
frustrated that we have teenagers to deal with. We
will certainly be happy when they are out of that stage.
We tell ourselves that our life will be complete when
our spouse gets his or her act together, when we get a
nicer car, are able to go on a nice vacation, when we
retire.
The truth is, there's no better time to be happy than
right now. If not now, when? Your life will always
be filled with challenges, It's best to admit this to
yourself and decide to be happy anyway. One of my
favorite quotes comes from Alfred D. Souza. He said,
"For a long time it had seemed to me that life was
about to begin - real life. But there was always some
obstacle in the way, something to be gotten through
first, some unfinished business, time still to be served,
and a debt to be paid. Then life would begin. At last it
dawned on me that these obstacles were my life."
This perspective has helped me to see that there is
no way to happiness. Happiness is the way. So,
treasure every moment that you have. And treasure it
more because you shared it with someone special,
special enough to spend your time...and remember that
time waits for no one....
So stop waiting until you finish school, until you go
back to school, until you lose ten pounds, until you
gain ten pounds, until you have kids, until your kids
leave the house, until you start work, until you retire,
until you get married, until you get divorced, until
Friday night, until Sunday morning, until you get a new
car or home, until your car or home is paid off, until
spring, until summer, until fall, until winter, until you
are off welfare, until the first or fifteenth, until your
song comes on, until you've had a drink, until you've
sobered up, until you die, until you are born again to
decide that there is no better time than right now to be
happy. Happiness is a journey, not a destination. .
Thought for the day: Work like you don't need
money, love like you've never been hurt, and dance like
no one's watching.
— Gary Behymer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #4. What do M&M's do?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Mike Franco (70) Bmbr70@aol.com
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: The Good, The Bad, And D.C. Parking Spaces
I see my ole buddy John Allen still truly feels that all
good is driven by anything/anybody conservative and
all bad by anything/anybody liberal. Well since those
are totally relative terms, John and any who share
those all-left or all-right views....will always be correct.
Me, I think most of those guys back there (Wash DC)
really do work the same side of the street. When it
comes to spending money, the only difference between
the right and left is what they spend it on.....national
social programs or unwanted C-130's....Well John, I
am still more liberal than conservative. I don't think all
or hardly ANY conservatives are bad. What I do think
IS bad is people who advocate minimal or NO
spending......back in those "good old days" we all talk
about we called these people "deadbeats". And that is
what we have created....a generation of deadbeat
taxpayers. Anybody out there care about the $140 -
$160 billion a year in income taxes that go
UNCOLLECTED ???? If we collected even 20% of
that would that give us a little tax relief ? Why does
NO conservative OR liberal EVER even mention
this???? Not even one ....I really would like to hear
everyone's view on this. If I were a conspiracy buff, I
would believe there is one at work here.....fill me in.
As far as open market belief.....I have always supported
ALL open markets, including free trade, elimination of
ALL corporate income taxes (the middle class will
ALWAYS pay the taxes in our economic structure,
live with it) and inheritance taxes. I also believe we
ALL should pay our share and tax cheats belong in the
slammer at LEAST as much as adulterers....tax cheats
steal from me and you !! (Just a thought, if ALL the
tax cheats and adulterers were run out of Wash DC a
lot of parking problems would be solved!!!) Please
accept my humble apologies if any of these views do
NOT neatly fit with anyone's neat views of us "libs"....
I am sure any conflicts can be explained away...
Thought for the day....with "the trial" going on, things
seem to be going ok out here in reality land. I would
like to hear any support out there for declaring a two
year recess for both houses of congress....and
whenever Clinton leaves office (lots of folks will run
out of things to fill their life with when that happens!!!)
let's just leave the office vacant...we do it with Judges,
corporate officers....Just a thought...take care
everyone.
Remember: Things are NEVER as bad as they appear.
They are either better or worse!
— Mike Franco
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #5. What helps build
strong bodies 12 ways?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Ray Wells (54)
For Arthur Roberts (48) FluffDry@hotmail.com
Subj: Please Interpret My Dream
Since your dream is fraught with Freudian Symbology,
I will answer you off line.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #6. Before he was
Mohammed Ali, before he was The Greatest, we knew
him as ... (2 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Food For Thought
ray@transcribing.com Ray Wells (54)
It seems to me that the population our country can be
classified in four general groups:
1. Those who are out to get Clinton any way they can.
These people believe that Clinton is without redeeming
social value. These people are zealous, conservative,
right wingers who believe the end justifies the means.
2. Those who are willing to overlook Clinton's
misbehavior, no matter how serious because they
believe he will guide the country in a direction they
agree with. These people are allowing main stream
media to do their thinking for them. These people
prefer to have the government decide what is best for
them. These people are zealous, liberal, left wingers
who believe the end justifies the means.
3. Those who want the constitution and rule of law
followed irrespective of whether it allows Clinton to
remain in office or causes him to be removed from
office. These people place a high priority on personal
freedom.
4. Those who don't want to be bothered about Clinton
one way or the other, i.e., the apathetic. These people
are willing to let the future take care of itself. As long
as they have access to food & water, booze, clothing,
shelter, TV, healthcare and sex, they are happy to let
someone else provide direction for their country.
Questions:
1. Which group do you belong to?
2. Which group do you believe is best for America?
3. Which group would provide the least resistance to a
takeover by a dictatorship?
4. Which group would provide the most resistance to a
takeover by a dictatorship?
5. The majority of the world's population lives under a
dictatorship. History has shown that a democracy can
be taken over by a dictatorship. Could it happen here?
If so, why? If not, why not?
Ray Wells ('54)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #7. "You'll wonder where
the yellow went, ..." (7 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Bob Rector (62) b_rector@owt.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@HOTMAIL.COM
Subject: More lame advice to Vince Bartram ('62)
about Y2K. (And when it is, or was, or still may be)
OK, so what this all means...that we ain't got no idea
what year it is really. (I learned my English at RHS)
Guess my advice is to party no matter what.
Addenda to earlier diatribe:
(1) Yes, there is another day's discussion over probable
calendar errors made by Dionysius the Less....along
with his poor formula. We are probably already into
the second millennium. (2) And yes, there is another
day's discussion over possible calendar errors made
since the sixth century. Some questions through the
Dark Ages, you know, when the sun didn't shine so
bright. (little humor there)
(3) Remember the Millerites, who waited on the hillside
for Christ's return years ago. Today they are Seventh
Day Adventists and still waiting.
(4) If you happen to be Mormon, better head for
Independence Missouri, cause that's where Joseph
Smith said Christ would return.
(5) Our good friend John Wingfield, (64?) reminds us
for our Jewish relatives, it is year 5759, for our
Muslim brethren it is 1420, and for our Chinese
sisters it's 4697.
(6) For Goodness Sake, I just want to know what year
it is for "Kennewick Man"?
Vince, as for making dumb mistakes, heck, I can still
do those! Semper Bomberus, Bob
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #8. Before he was the
Skipper's little buddy, Bob Denver was Dobie's best
friend, ... (First and last names, and middle initial)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WILL RICHLAND SEE MAJOR FLOODING AGAIN,
AS BAD AS IN 1948?
In issue #28 of The Sandbox, Lee Johnson pointed to
the possibility of major snow packs accumulating in
the mountains now, combining with fast-melt run-offs,
becoming a real threat to the Richland Area again. He
wondered, with such potential developing, why
developers were now seeking permits to take out the
dykes that were built to hold back the Columbia as a
result of the floods of 48. He also asked how many
remembered the floods that threatened Richland then.
Responses from Ray Wells and Sandy Carpenter
McDermott follow below.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #9. "M-I-C...See ya real
soon. K-E-Y..." (+5 letters)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Ray Wells (54)
ReplyTo: ray@transcribing.com
To: TheSandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Also Remembers The Floods of 1948
For Lee Johnson (54) BeegByte@aol.com
Yes I remember the 1948 spring flood. It was
proceeded by a very cold (the Yakima River froze
over), high snow fall winter. It either disabled or took
out the bridges from Richland to Kennewick and West
Richland, and it was months before you could drive
across the Yakima on a bridge from Richland. As kids,
we particularly enjoyed it when the warm weather hit
because we were able to swim (actually skinny-dip) in
the numerous pools that were left in the land west of
Richland. No one told us how polluted they were, and
not knowing this, we did not get sick. Like you, I
cannot accept the logic behind wanting to remove the
dikes.
— Ray Wells
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #10. A 'streaker' is
someone who might run across campus wearing what?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Sandy Carpenter McDermott (61)
ReplyTo: sandy12@gte.net
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subj: Re: Lee Johnson's comments on
the Great Flood of '48
Yes, I remember well the Flood of 48. We had just
moved into our new house on Davison Street across
from Jefferson Grade School. The yards were not yet
landscaped or planted with grass, so the dust blew
pretty freely. When they built the dike to keep the
flood waters back, they hauled sand bags in large
trucks. I remember how noisy it was day and night,
because they used our back yard to take the trucks to
the dike site, and our front yard for returning trucks.
It was just constant traffic, noise and, of course,
DUST. Who could forget THAT????
-- Sandy Carpenter McDermott
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #11. "Brylcream: ..."
(6 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Kent Sinkey (59)
MailTo:SINKEYSK@UCMAIL.UC.EDU
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: 40th reunion this year
I've enjoyed reading postings in the Sandstorm and
Sandbox and bringing back old memories of growing
up in Richland. I just wanted to take a minute, in the
hopes that I won't get badly flamed, to mention that a
friend of mine and I have started a travel agency last
year. If anyone would like to use our professional
services to attend the 40th reunion we can be reached
at: adtravel@one.net We're available for all business
and leisure travel.
Thanks, Kent Sinkey (59)
[No problem, Kent. Here's wishing you the best
success in your travel business. If anyone else would
like to plug your own business or service, feel free to
tell us about it. If, at the same time, you could share
an amusing or interesting experience that has occurred
during the course of your business, we would enjoy
hearing about that too! -ap]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Triva #12. Bob Dylan advised us
never to trust anyone .... (2 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To: The Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Quiescence.
All is quiet and the children are sleeping.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Robert Frost (1874-1963)
(A Bomber Guest)
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Miles To Go Before I Sleep
The woods are lovely, dark, and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.
--Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lincoln was born on February 12, 1809
The often heard phrase---
"You can fool all the poeple some of the time, and
some of the people all of the time, but you can not fool
all the people all of the time," are words attributed
to Lincoln in a speech given at Clinton, Sep 8, 1858,
according to Autobiography of A. Lincoln, 1927.
(N.W. Stephenson). (Attributed. also to
Phineas Barnum.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's all for today's Sandbox, folks. Say what you
are longing to say today and send it right away to:
The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Not sure what you want to talk about? Well, then,
here are some ideas for you: What do you think
about:
1. Kennewick Man?
2. Irradiating food to preserve it?
3. National I.D. cards?
4. National Park Entry Fees?
5. Indian Casino Slot Machines?
6. Online Casinos?
7. A National Sales Tax?
See you next time!
-- Al Parker
-- your Sandbox coordinator
Oh, were you looking for the answers to the Bomber
Baby Boomer Trivia Quiz? Well, if there were any of
those questions you don't know the answer to, perhaps
Gary Behymer, who supplied the trivia questions will be
kind enough to supply us with theanswers in time for
the next issue of The Sandbox!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-29-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #30 ~ February 17 1999
Now that the trial is over, T.S. Eliot (1888 - 1965)
Just might have said:
"A way of putting it-- not very satisfactory; ... A
paraphrastic study... Leaving one still with the
intolerable wrestle With words and meanings."
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Traffic Stopper: On Thursday, Feb 18, 1999
A rally to "Save The Dams" Will Be Held On The
Cable Bridge Between Kennewick and Pasco
between the hours of 5 PM and 7 PM.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
RHS/ColHi Alumni Speakers of The Day:
Marc Franco (66), Joe Ford (63),
Ray Wells (54), John M. Allen (66),
John Northover (59), Dick Epler (52),
Willard Ule (73), Gail Cherrington (56),
Alan Porter (67), Patty Stordahl (72),
Dustin Rector (88),
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Sandbox Is: A SHARING of Your Ideas, Your
Opinions, Your Experiences and Your Responses
To Richland Alumni All Over The World!
MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Marc Franco (66) mfranco@uswest.net>
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com>
Subject: No witnesses
Ray Wells made the comment that it is the Democrats
and liberals who are opposed to calling witnesses for
the impeachment trial. Unfortunately, he is quite
correct. As opposed as I am to this entire waste of
taxpayer money, etc., I have been quite irritated about
the Democrats stating on the one hand that they do
not see the need for calling witnesses, and on the other
hand stating that they see nothing new coming in the
trial, so why have the trial. Well, if they refuse to call
witnesses, then of course there will be nothing new.
Marc ('66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: "Joe Ford" (63) jbford@jbford.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
CC: "Kathy Rathvon" kathrath@blarg.net
Subject: Government business
Old Richlanders (and some not so old) ---
I vote with Kathy Rathvon, the voice of reason and
sanity, in regard to the charade underway in DC.
Whatever Clinton did or did not do, he has the great
majority of our country's support. Anthony Lewis,
journalist for the New York Times, has made a cogent
argument worth reading. As a librarian, I should be
able to give you a better citation, but you might start
with www.nytimes.com.
The point of his comments are that the Clinton-haters
have had him in their sights for years, and have spent
millions in pursuing him. What they found at the end of
the day that was even remotely actionable was that he
was involved with a young woman, and that they could
likely make him uncomfortable with that piece of news.
Four years, and $50 million, and it came down to
hanky-panky.
And so, in their pursuit, they've wasted our time, and
worse, their time. We pay them to take care of critical
business; health care, education, Social Security,
foreign affairs and national defense. Instead, they've
diminished themselves, the Government, and our trust
in them. Clinton, whose political skills I admire, had
already diminished himself.
End the farce, before it descends into tragedy.
Two predictions: The hard right will begin blaming
ordinary citizens for their lack of zeal, shortly after
Clinton is acquitted. Those of us who have little
stomach for kangaroo courts will become responsible
for Clinton. The Republican party, which should be
angling to attract those of us who have become more
cautious in our middle age, will, instead, lurch further
to the right seeking to purify itself.
Back to business.
Best to all.
--Joe Ford ('63)
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subject: Executive Order
From: Ray Wells (54) ray@transcribing.com
To: depler@pdx.oneworld.com (Richard Epler)
Dick, I think you came out in favor of executive orders.
After reading this I'd like to know if you would
reconsider. Ray
---------------------------
>From Rush Limbaugh's Web Site:
THIS IS NEW AND....DANGEROUS......
Below is the latest Clinton Executive Order (13107)
that will become effective January 10, 1999, UNLESS
CONGRESS FORCES HIM TO WITHDRAW IT!!!
(http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-res/I2R?urn:pdi://
oma.eop.gov.us/1998/12/11/4.text.1).
It will place the actions of all government within the
United States under the review and veto of the United
Nations (See Section 4 (c)(iii).
The only way to stop it is by beating the drums. I spoke
with Congressman Cox's office 12/23/98. They were
not aware of it!!! Help me to get the word out!
CLINTON MUST BE FORCED TO WITHDRAW
THIS ORDER!!!!!!!!!!!
--Ray
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: "John M. ALLEN" beaubar@effectnet.com>
Reply-To: miles2go@cheerful.com
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Pay Back, OR Just Too Late??
To all my Democrat "friends" who were SOOOO
outraged at the incredibly scurrilous behavior of the
Speaker of the House two years ago, how many of you
even bothered to notice the complete vindication given
him last week by no less than the one and only
legitimate agency of the Federal Government charged
with investigating his alleged criminal/unethical
activities. Oh, the unbiased National TV media
covered the story......for about a day and a half; to
which they will all proudly point in future as proof of
their unbiased coverage of national politics, but this
amounts to the page 22 retraction of an initial Front
Page Story of accusation in a newspaper. How many
days in late 1996 and early '97 was this the lead story
on every major network and on the Front Page of
major newspapers across the land? And further,
WHERE IS THE PIT YORKIE, DAVID BONIOR???
Bonior was the hammer that kept pounding Gingrich
and eventually caused him to have to pay a $350,000
"fine" to the House as repayment for costs of the
investigation for which he (Bonior) was primarily
responsible. Will Bonior now be repaying Gingrich
out of his pocket for the money Gingrich was
erroneously assessed? Democrats, liberals, and
so-called independents who contribute to the
SANDBOX, please explain to me why this should
NOT happen. Perhaps Mr. Bonior should even be
censured for his Left-Wing Extremist, PARTISAN
WITCH HUNT that has been completely rejected and
refuted by the Internal Revenue Service. It cost an
honorable man a good part of his reputation, and no
matter how many letters like this one are written in the
future, most Americans will remember Gingrich as an
unethical criminal who cheated on his taxes.
The problem with this and so many other situations in
Washington D.C. is that if you're a liberal Democrat, it
doesn't really make any difference if what you say is
true. It only matters that you say it and that it gets
repeated incessantly; the truth be damned.
---John M. Allen ('66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~
FROM: John Northover (59) Jnorthov@spawar.navy.mil>
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com>
Subject: Y2K Hysteria .... ???
Mr. Sandbox...
I Am Sending this as a Possible Sandbox Entry. Do
Not Know What People Are Doing, in Their
Personal Lives, to Get Through the Y2K Thing,
but Thought this Would Be Useful Information. I Will
Leave it to You, Whether You Feel it Should Be
Included. No Problem with Me Either Way.
*******************
A Naval Message with Possible ... Good Info ??? I
Have Stripped the Headings and All the Secret Stuff,
So I Will Not Have to Kill Anyone!!! Sorry about the
Capital Letters ... but the Navy Only Operates With
Shouting!!!
[No problem re the capital letters, John. I enlisted
WordPerfect to diminish the shouting a bit by lower-
casing all but the first letter of each word. -Al]
[Note to Sandbox Subscribers: Because of the length of
this comprehensive evaluation of Y2K problems,
preparations completed or under way, testing already
done and things you can do concerning Y2K, this
information "package" will be continued over the
course of more than one Sandbox issue, possibly
three or more. This is one of the most thorough and
"official" evaluations I have seen so far of anticipated
Y2K problems, what is being done throughout industry
and government and what you, personally, can do to
meet the Y2K challenges ahead. - Al P.]
Subj/guidance on Year 2000 (Y2K) Related Issues//
Rmks/1. It Is Important That We Provide Our Sailors
with Sound, Useful Information on the Potential
Impact of Y2K on Their Personal and Professional
Lives, as Well as the Lives of Their Families.
2. The Year 2000 (Y2K) "Millennium Bug" Is
Becoming an Increasingly Popular Subject for the
"Talking Heads" of the World as Mass Media Focus
On Possible Y2K Disruptions and Extremists Predict
Catastrophic Social Breakdown. Additionally, an
Increasing Number of Entrepreneurs and "Scam
Artists" View Y2K as an Opportunity to Capitalize on
Fear and Uncertainty for Personal Profit.
3. This Is the First in a Series of Messages Prepared by
the Navy Office of Information (CHINFO) Addressing
How Sailors Can Expect Y2K to Affect Various
Aspects of Both the Domestic and the Military
Infrastructure. Commanding Officers and Officers in
Charge Should Ensure Widest Possible Dissemination
Of this Information via Plan of the Day (POD),
Command Newspaper, Familygram, Site TV, Daily
Quarters, Captain's Call and Other Appropriate
Venues.
4. The Following Information Is Drawn from a Variety
of Private Sector and Official Sources Including
Commercial News Media Products. This Information
Is Considered to Be Reliable, but Not Necessarily
Authoritative, as No One Can Predict Future Events
With Complete Certainty. This Particular Message
Addresses Only a Few of the Wide Array of Y2K
Topics. Future Messages Will Continue to Address
Other Areas in More Detail. Together, this Series of
Messages Should Provide a Current, Comprehensive
Database of Y2K Information. Look for Additional
Information about Y2K Related Issues to Be
Communicated on a Regular Basis Through Navy
Internal Media Such As All Hands Magazine,
Navy-marine Corps News, Direct to Sailor and Navy
News Service. Y2K Information Is Also Available
Through [various] Navy Web Sites:
A. Y2K Bug--general/background:
Q1. What Is the Year 2000 Challenge and How Did it
Happen?
A1. The Year 2000 Challenge Potentially Affects Any
Digital Computer System, Equipment or
Product That Uses Date Information. It Arises from
The Nearly Universal Practice in Academia,
Government and Business of Using Two Rather Than
Four Digits to Designate the Calendar Year
(E.g.,Dd/mm/yy). It Also Has Its Roots in the
Common Practice of Using Two Digits to Shorthand
References To the Year (Just as People Commonly
Refer to "The Class of '99'" Instead of The "Class of
1999"). This Common Practice Can Lead to Incorrect
Results Whenever Computer Systems, Software or
Microchips Perform Arithmetic Operations,
Comparisons or Data Field Sorting Involving Years
Later than 1999. Non-compliant Systems May
Interpret 00 as the Year 1900, 01 as the Year 1901,
Etc.
TO BE CONTINUED
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.garynorth.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Dick Epler (52)
ReplyTo: depler@pdx.oneworld.com (Dick Epler
Subj: Lessons of Impeachment
To: The SANDBOX
I suppose the biggest lesson from the Clinton
Impeachment is NOT that "it's over," but rather that
it's just the beginning. This trial seems to be paving the
way for an entirely new phase of American Politics.
Maybe I shouldn't have been surprised, but the Senate
trial wasn't so much about Clinton as it was about
consolidating party power. The Repubs have some, the
Demos want it … all of it, if possible. And the
Constitution and associated Oath of Office be damned.
After the votes were counted, it was interesting to
listen to the justifications offered to dismiss. Though
all agree that Clinton is guilty as charged, most of the
Democrats assert that the offenses aren't impeachable,
while the Republicans contend that the offenses,
though impeachable, weren't proven as given by the
Senate's trial record. Of course, the Republicans (Lott)
were willing accomplices in crippling the trial process
(no live witnesses) and in tying the hands of the house
managers (no new evidence) so that a proper trial
record couldn't be built for the voting process. Neat,
eh? Everybody's covered, politically.
The end result, however, is clear. We are no longer a
"nation of laws." The "great experiment" is dead. In
the United States, as in the rest of the World, the "rule
of men" dominates the "rule of law." I suppose we've
been moving in this direction for a long time now, but
the Clinton trial has removed any doubt that remained
and for that alone, the trial was important. While I
worry that our nation is now more susceptible political
corruption, we may yet be able to fix it before another
Clinton comes along ... so long as we recognize the
problem.
But first, we need to clear up one very important point.
The "Clinton lesson" has very little to do with his
sexual indiscretions. As Ray Wells (54) likes to point
out, Clinton has committed (and continues to commit)
a good many more serious offenses than his abuse of
women. How Starr decided on the Lewinsky strategy
has bothered me from the beginning. At the time, I
rationalized his choice as being the easiest to prove,
which, though true, became irrelevant. In hindsight,
many say that Starr is a political neophyte who failed
to realize that such charges would be mischaracterized
as only "lying about sex," thereby serving as more of a
political vindication than as anything serious enough to
warrant impeachment.
There are other, perhaps more insightful,
interpretations. Some foreign correspondents, who,
unlike our own press, don't have the problem with
access to Washington news sources, make some
interesting observations. They point out that Starr is
pretty much a product of the system. He has never
been an "independent" counsel. Starr is a former
chief-of-staff at the Justice Department and his team in
Washington is dominated by fellow Justice Department
insiders. Moreover, he has relied primarily on the FBI
(another Clinton-tainted agency) for most of the
investigative work. The point here is NOT that these
people are corrupt themselves, but rather that they are
most assuredly NOT independent. Anybody that was
able to survive Clinton's purge of the Justice
Department and the FBI, in 1992, has to know that the
key to survival depends on being able to ignore the
most serious offenses of the Executive office.
That's another thing that has bothered me from the
beginning. When Clinton took office in 1992, one of
the first things he did was to fire all the senior
prosecutors at the Justice Department. Next he did
something no other President has ever done. He fired
the director of the FBI, a NO-NO, since that office is
appointed for 10 years (to ensure political
independence). But since the press was silent, I guess
we all assumed it was OK. In retrospect, these two
acts effectively gave Clinton direct control of most of
the Government's investigative machinery and thereby
cleared the way for him to ignore any laws he wished,
something he continues to do even today.
Many point out that this couldn't have happened
without the complicity of the press. I hesitate to say
that we don't have a "free press" any more, but with
the pressures of advertising, political pressure groups,
circulation numbers, Nielsen ratings, and the like, I
know our press has nowhere close to the integrity it
once had. More honest reporting now seems to come
from a guy with modem connected to the net (Matt
Drudge) and from foreign correspondents than from
anything our national media puts out. Consider that in
recent days, the Washington Post has been caught
feeding media intelligence to the White House
counsel's office and that NBC Television is sitting on
an interview with an Arkansas woman (Jane Doe #5)
who was allegedly raped by Clinton. These are only
two instances of a "pressured press."
So now let me ask: What do you think YOU could do
if you ran an office with a annual budget of
$1,770,000,000,000 (1.77 trillion dollars), had no
political opposition to speak of, had a spin-control
machine that the media loved, which, coincidentally,
allowed you to pretty much ignore the Constitution
and the law of the land? I suspect there are quite a
number of people out there with an answer to this
question. At least one investment journal believes that
Steven Spielberg is interested. Hmmm … could be.
Interesting how American Politics has changed in the
last few years.
Dick Epler (52) - Mt. Vernon, Oregon
depler@pdx.oneworld.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: WULEMD@webtv.net (Willard Ule M.D.) (73)
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: GIVE CREDIT WHEN CREDIT IS DUE.
When I wrote last I mentioned the simple minded, well
with our help they got something right. "We find
William Jefferson Clinton not guilty" even though it
took millions of dollars and longer than it takes to
bear and deliver a child. we were able to get the right
result. The only thing I fear is a repeat performance,
God help us if I am right. We may find ourselves in the
middle of a war. I feel it would be the marks of all civil
war's. It would be the conservatives against the rest of
us as we would be forced to protect ourselves against
Moral Displacement. this would be when others
morals dis-place our basic civil rights. may we
remember that it happened before. when we had our
last civil war. Let us be of more common sense this
time.
THANK YOU MUCHLY
LATER "DOC"
WILLARD DOUGLAS ULE M.D.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Gail Cherrington Hollingsworth (56)
Reply-To: kitty77@w-link.net
To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Trivia questions
Not sure you are asking for us to send you these
answers, but just in case you are, here are mine:
[Note to readers— since Gail is giving the answers here
to triva questions asked in Sandbox #29, You can, just
for fun, in the privacy of your own home, ask
yourself, or whoever is home with you, what the
questions are. (You know, like in Jeopardy.) Or, you
can play the same game with Patty Stordahl's set of
answers further on. -ap]
1. Paul McCartney, John Lennon, Ringo Starr and
George Harrison
2. Have I...... (not sure about that one)
3. It's Howdy Doody time.
4. Melt in your mouth, not in your hand.
5. WonderBread
6. Cassish (sp?) Clay
7. When you brush your teeth with Pepsodent.
8. Maynard J. Krebbs.
9.M-O-U-S-E
10. Nada-nothing
11. A little dab 'll do ya.
12. over 30.
Thanks, was fun ...
Gail Cherrington Hollingsworth
~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: "Alan Porter" (67) adporter49@hotmail.com.>
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Food for thought
Thanks for the trivial questions I answered all but one.
Now I'd like to answer Ray wells 5 questions. I belong
to group 3 - those who believe in the rule of law. It is
important to note that there can be legitimate
difference of opinions on just what the rule of law is in
this case. As I have stated previously I do not believe
that Clinton should have been impeached because it
does not rise to an impeachable offense and I believe
that the senate followed the rule of law - thanks to
moderate republican senators. Since I find myself in
group 3 I also feel that group 3 is the best group. For
questions 3 and 4 my best answer is - the strength of
this country is the diversity of opinions and actions, all
four groups add some strengths and weaknesses.
That's the purpose of a democracy is to acknowledge
and respect the differences. we need liberals and
conservatives and moderates. Even it I do find it hard
to understand why a person would want to be a
conservative I do believe it is important to have some
of them around. I just hope that my vote can keep
them from getting everything they wish vote for. So
Ray, lets encourage people to disagree and to continue
to cast their votes and to express their opinions.
Thanks for the questions.
Alan Porter (67)
~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Patty Stordahl (72)
ReplyTo: DZIGNRITE@aol.com
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subj: Regarding Trivia
[Editor's note: Patty is supplying the answers here. All
you have to do is remember the questions. Kind of
like jeopardy. But keep on reading. She has more to say!]
1. MaCartny Lennon Star Harison
2. "Oh My!"
3. "It's Howdy Dudey Time!"
4. melts in your mouth, not in your hands!
5. Wonder bread
6. Cassius Clay
7. when you brush your teeth with pepsodent ( I still do)
8. Maynard G. Krebs
9. Mouse
10.birthday suit ( nothing at all )
11. A little dab will do ya
12. Regarding Bob Dylan, my memory fails me on only
two words, to my recollection Bob sang almost
exclusively about lack of government or society trust.
Please help me on this one.
Also to the one who interprets freudian dreams.
Contact me.
Any one know the where abouts of RHS Mr. Stevens,
Mr. Nash or Mr. Vandenberg? What ever became of
the Skinners? They had a great club going in High
school for the Afro American students to increase
visability & awareness. I remember Belinda but was
not really close to her. What is she doing now? I
would imagine a governmental office or a leader
whereever she is. Meryl Husties?? Jessica Allen?
Karlyn Jerrish? Randy Woodby? Keith Brown, Bill
Church. List goes on & on but these are ones I have
not seen or heard of in a long while. Most every one
else still is in the loop somewhere out there. Densows
drugs just came into conversation with a group of us
Friday night.memories of J P Harris's visits to pick up
his parents scripts. He couldn't remember the name of
the pharmacist back in the 60's any one out there
remember? JP only remembered he was the nicest guy.
JP says that when his dad passed away, he inherited a
really unusual gift. His dad was the town lock smith &
kept a spare key to every job he ever did & marked the
key with the address & name of each client. The gift
was, the huge safe that holds ventrally every original
key to government houses in Richland as well as every
time the same address had a new lock added & key
made he added it to the original key ring. Pretty
scarey huh. Great thing that John Paul is very trust
worthy. Wonder if Richland has a museum that would
be interested it this collection? have a great Valentines
day every one.
— Patty
~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Dustin Rector (88) dustin_00@hotmail.com>
To: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Subject: Millennium Bug and other Y2K thoughts
Darwin Perkins:
For somebody offering no proof about what you're
claiming, you're awfully confident. I guess the work
you did was pretty minor.
Personally, I'm planning for 2 weeks of no power (I
figure if not Y2K, one day the Big Quake's gonna hit
and then we will REALLY need 2 weeks of food
stuffs).
At this point, I'm mostly worried about 2 things:
Cascade failure. Back in the late 80's a power company
had on their books that a customer owed them .001
cents. Rounding off, for several months they sent a
bill for $0.00. When they threatened to turn it over to a
collection agency, the confused customer wrote a
check for $0.00. This crashed the Federal Reserve and
sent a hiccup through the nation's banks.
The lesson is: 99% of the banks have a good handle on
this, I'd guess 99% have probably built in some solid
testing software to reject checks dated 1/1/1900, and
that sort of thing. But all it takes is one bank to have
missed one thing, and it's error could echo through the
system. If we have one power company, one traffic
signal timer, one airplane, one coal train, one
distribution company all choke, the waves could get
really rough real fast.
My main concern, though, is other countries. Russia
has just begun to discover that it has a problem. Their
military is already experiencing starvation, missed
wages, desertion, and a high rate of suicide. I don't
know if we have much to worry, maybe it'll just
implode and the soldiers will return home and be
producing members of society.
The big worry is if security will stay in place around
(nuclear/missile) weapons.
I've heard that while Russia isn't as dependant upon the
PC as we are, almost all are fairly old systems, which
means what few systems use the computer almost
certainly need work to keep running.
Has anyone heard what China's situation is? How
about our closer neighbors to the north and south?
-Dustin Rector
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
KwikNotes: From Gary-: " Dancing Like Nobody's
Looking was just forwarded... I did not write it."
From Mary to Gary- "Hi Gary. I just read the
"Dance..." and loved it...Are you familiar with the
Kathy Matter song that uses those lines? If you like
Kathy Matter, you'd like the song. Thanks for sharing
the message. I think we all need to be reminded of
things like that occasionally."
Trivia: Did you like the trivia questions? More are
planned for next time. If you have some trivia you'd
like to send along for future issues, please do so.
Table Topics: Not sure what you want to talk about?
Well, then, here are some ideas for you: What do you
think about the following:
1. A "Save The Dams" rally is planned to be held on
the Cable Bridge between Pasco and Kennewick on
February 18 between 5 and 7 PM. Are any of you
going to go? Please write and tell us your impressions
if you do. What do you think? Should we start
breaching (tearing down) the dams that provide
power, irrigation navigation and recreation on the
Snake and other rivers in Washington and Idaho in
order to try to save the native salmon runs? There is a
very strong effort being mounted by forces in favor of
having the dams removed. Is that something you favor,
or not?
2. What do you think about the policy of "social"
promotion in school? Does it serve the student?
Does it serve society?
3.. Should gun makers be sued?
4.. Where do you plan to be as 1999 turns into
the year 2000?
See you next time!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's all for today's Sandbox, folks. Say what you
are longing to say today and send it right away to:
The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
-- Al Parker, Gatherer of Your Thoughts
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-30-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #31 ~ February 20, 1999
"I have got no further than this: Every man has a right
to utter what he thinks truth, and every other man has
a right to knock him down for it..."
-- Samuel Johnson 1709 - 1784
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Share Your Opinions, Your Ideas, and Your Responses
With Fellow Richland Alumni All Over The World!
MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RHS/ColHi Alumni Speakers of The Day:
Andrew Eckert (54), John Allen (66),
Alan Porter (67), Patty de la Bretonne (65),
James Moran (86), Mike Franco (66),
Dick Epler (52), Ron Richards (63)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also Featuring: More Bomber Boomer Baby Trivia!
Answer the questions and fill in the missing words!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Andrew Eckert (54)
ReplyTo: ECKERT1108@aol.com
Subject: Please! think for yourselves! Lets get back to
running this country.
I certainly do not understand why issue no 30 is a
backdated issue dealing with the past. I barely began
reading all these ridiculous right wing writings and felt
compelled to ask JOHN M. ALLEN (66) to just reread
his hate letter and just substitute Bill Clinton for the
name Gingrich and you would have the majority of
thinking Americans attitudes.....but don't let me stop
you right wing hypocrites your doing a wonderful job
of destroying the new "hate" republican party. I was a
republican for all my voting life and only when this so
called religious right took over the party and started
giving the marching orders, did I finally come to my
senses and finally realize that the very best president
in my time has been Bill Clinton. If you people would
stop letting Rush do your thinking and try doing some
of your own, you might just see that your head is up
where the sun don't shine. You're old enough to know
better! Do your own thinking, It really does matter
what you think and how you vote. At 63 I've learned
the right to speak out please forgive me if I offend
anyone. Andrew Eckert (54)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #13. "I wonder, wonder,
wonder, wonder who ..." (6 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Alan Porter (67) adporter49@hotmail.com>
Subject: Y2K vs ( as in the days of Rome) Y-Zero-K
This was sent to me and I found it amusing and thought
a historical look at Y2K bugs was worth sharing. Just
how many of you learned about the Y zero K problem.
It seems we missed out on some important history
lessons.
A BUG IN ROME
While browsing through some dust-covered archival
material in the recesses of the Roman Section of the
British Museum, a researcher recently came across a
tattered parchment. After some effort he translated it
and found that it was a letter from a man called
Plutonius with the title of "magister fastorium," or
keeper of the calendar, to one Cassius. It was dated,
strangely enough, 1 BC, January 7--or 2000 years ago.
(Remember, there was no year zero). The text of the
message follows:
Dear Cassius,
Are you still working on the Y zero K problem? This
change from BC to AD is giving us a lot of headaches
and we haven't much time left. I don't know how
people will cope with working the wrong way around.
Having been working happily downwards forever, now
we have to start thinking upwards. You would think
that someone would have thought of it earlier and not
left it to us to sort it all out at this last minute.
I spoke to Caesar the other evening. He was livid that
Julius hadn't done something about it when he was
sorting out the calendar. He said he could see why
Brutus turned nasty. We called in the consulting
astrologers, but they simply said that continuing
downwards using minus BC won't work. As usual, the
consultants charged a fortune for doing nothing useful.
As for myself, I just can't see the sand in an hourglass
flowing upwards. We have heard that there are three
wise men in the East who have been working on the
problem, but unfortunately they won't arrive until it's
all over. Some say the world will cease to exist at the
moment of transition.
Anyway, we are still continuing to work on this blasted
Y zero K problem and I will send you a parchment if
anything further develops.
Vale, Plutonius
Alan Porter (67)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #14. "War, uh-huh, huh,
yeah, what is it good for? ..." (2 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Ron Richards (63) G1A1S1@aol.com
To Ray Wells:
Will your next communication inform us that you
are in Group 3? There might be those that think you
belong in Group 1, along with all the House Managers.
Their claim to have been upholding the constitution is
as deceitful as anything Clinton was alleged to have
done.
Ron Richards '63)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #15. Where have all the
flowers gone?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Patty de la Bretonne (65) BrassEar@aol.com
THANK YOU GARY BEHYMER [In issue #29] for
reminding us to live our lives today. It seems as if it
takes so much time and experience to finally come to
this place.. Very well said, I appreciated it very much.
--Patty
[Note" Patty also responded to the Bomber Baby Trivia
in SB29- Does everyone still remember the questions?:
Her answers were]: "and things' or 'and such', Paul
McCartney, Ringo Starr, George Harrison, John
Lennon, I don't think It was Holsum maybe that other
more famous bread, Cassius Clay,'when you brush
your teeth with pepsodent', MAYNARD G. KREBS!,
M_O_U_S_E!, nothing(or your birthday suit), 'a little
dable doya',over 30!!!! --THANK YOU."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #16. Superman, disguised
as Clark Kent, mild mannered reporter for a great
metropolitan newspaper, fights a never ending battle
for truth, justice, and ..." (3 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: "John M. ALLEN" beaubar@effectnet.com>
Reply-To: miles2go@cheerful.com
Subject: For Mike Franco
Mikey, I know to a reasonable certainty that you are
neither an ignorant nor a stupid person but about a
year ago, I offered you two suggestions you would do
well to reconsider. The first is to learn to read what is
ACTUALLY on the written page rather than what you
THINK is on it. You should understand that I am not
referring to spread sheets here, which I know you can
read very well, but rather the kind of prose that
one finds in the NY Times and the SANDBOX, or
between the covers of a novel, a history or a
biography.
I reread my submission to SANDBOX Issue #28 just to
be sure, and I found that indeed, my rant was almost
entirely economic opinion and, taken as a whole, the
least partisan thing I have ever submitted to the
SANDBOX. Read it again, Mikey, the way it was
written.
The second suggestion I made to you is closely related
to the first and equally important. Mike, you really
should learn to WRITE your native language as well.
Here again, I am not referring to spreadsheets.
Learn to write in complete sentences (it helps if you're
trying to convey complete thoughts) and to use
paragraphs to indicate where one idea leaves off and
another begins. When it comes to ideas, rather
than simply grabbing a handful and throwing them at
the page in some scatter gun fashion, give the ideas
some meat and try to construct a modicum of logical
thought progression so that your readers might arrive
along WITH you at whatever conclusions you are
leading them to. Finally, NEVER end a sentence with
a preposition! I realize that in general, following
rules is more of a Conservative than a liberal "thing"
but once you have mastered those fundamental rules,
perhaps you can learn the proper way to break them.
At that point, I'll refer you to the SANDSTORM
submissions (however infrequent) of Jim House ('63),
so that you might develop a sense of writing STYLE
and the ability to turn the occasional, clever phrase.
---John Allen ('66)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #17. Who came from the
University of Alabama to become one of the greatest
QB's in NFL history and appeared in a TV commercial
wearing women's pantyhose? (But do you know his
nickname!)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: "James Moran" (86)
ReplyTo: jpmoran@cyberhighway.net
It is interesting to read people's response / discussion as
it relates to "dead beats" who abuse the tax system, or
yet skip-out and do not pay their taxes. In fact one
person claimed these deadbeats should be placed in
the same category as "adulterers". But as I read the
many E mails from Bomber alums, I can't help but
notice how many are government or Hanford Email
extensions. In short, government contractors or
subcontracts who are on the job, and using
government equipment for personal Email. Is there
any difference from this and a tax cheater??? Not
much. Only one shafts a hard working tax payer like
myself in the end of the money chase instead of the
beginning. Also, after living over twenty years in the
Tri-Cities, (over fifteen in Richland), I find it very
strange to hear how many people complain about "Big
Government", in a community which has been living
off of the "Big Government" bosom for over 50 years.
In fact, what I discovered was many of the people who
wanted less government, usually were the best paid in
the "area".
So as a liberal, I'm all for a smaller government
expenditure at Hanford.
Jim Moran (86)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #18. "I'm Popeye the
sailor man! I'm Popeye the sailor man! I'm strong to
the finish ..." (5 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Some taxing questions.
From: Michael.Franco@PSS.Boeing.com
Mike Franco (66)
Just another quick note on taxes and how we all seem
to cheat...I just read a fellow Bomber's
characterization of Newt as ,,,"an honorable man"...
well honorable is another one of those relative terms.
But I ask again, why does NO ONE out there care to
even comment about the $140-160 BILLION per year
in uncollected income taxes....is it OK to cheat
because "we all do it?" Why do neither Dems OR
Republicans show any interest ? If you thought
everyone on both sides of the aisle in DC were
fathering children out of wedlock and having affairs
what do you think is the % that cheats on their taxes
????? comments out there ?
--Mike
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #19. Who played Peter
Pan before all these other imitators?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To: The SANDBOX
From: Dick Epler (52)
Subj: Instructions for Life
I came across the following "Instructions for Life" a
while back (author unknown). Every once in a while,
I get them out and try to edit them below 25, with
little success. I always seem to find other things to
add ... like "lessons" in the recent past. Try it. See
if you can do it ...
INSTRUCTIONS FOR LIFE
1.. Good relationships are achieved when both work
to make the good times longer – and the bad times
shorter.
2.. Give people more than they expect -- and do it
cheerfully!
3.. True happiness is basically three things: someone
to love, something to do, and something to look
forward to. Two out of three often wins.
4.. Don't believe all you hear, spend all you have, or
sleep all you want.
5.. When you say, "I love you" - mean it.
6.. Believe in love at first sight.
7.. Never laugh at anyone's dreams.
8.. Love deeply and passionately. You might get
hurt, but it's the only way to live life completely.
9.. In disagreements, fight fairly. No name-calling.
10.. Give people more than they expect -- and do it
cheerfully.
11.. Don't judge people by their relatives.
12.. Talk slowly but think quickly.
13.. When someone asks you a question you don't
want to answer, smile and ask, "Why do you want to
know?"
14.. Remember that great love and great
achievements involve great risk.
15.. Call your mom.
16.. When you lose, don't lose the lesson.
17.. Remember the three R's: Respect for self;
Respect for others; and Responsibility for all your
actions.
18.. Don't let a little dispute injure a great friendship.
19.. When you realize you've made a mistake, take
immediate steps to correct it.
20.. Smile when picking up the phone. The caller
will hear it in your voice.
21.. Marry a man/woman you love to talk to. As you
get older, their conversational skills will be as
important as any others.
22.. Spend some time alone.
23.. Open your arms to change but don't let go of
your values.
24.. Don't close your mind until you have something
in it.
25.. Remember that silence is sometimes the best
answer.
26.. Read more books and watch less TV.
27.. Live a good, honorable life. Then when you get
older and think back, you'll get to enjoy it a second
time.
28.. Trust in God but lock your car.
29.. Do all you can to create a tranquil, harmonious
home.
30.. In disagreements with loved ones, deal with the
current situation. Don't bring up the past.
31.. Read between the lines.
32.. Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve
immortality.
33.. Be gentle with the Earth.
34.. Pray. There's immeasurable power in it.
35.. Never interrupt when you are being flattered.
36.. Don't trust a man/woman who doesn't close
his/her eyes when you kiss.
37.. Once a year, go someplace you've never been
before.
38.. If you make a lot of money, put it to use helping
others while you are living. That is wealth's greatest
satisfaction.
39.. Remember that not getting what you want is
often a blessing in disguise.
40.. Learn the rules before you break them.
41.. Judge your success by what you had to give up
in order to get it.
42.. Remember that your character is your destiny.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #20. In "The Graduate,"
Benjamin Braddock (Dustin Hoffman) was advised
about his future and told to consider one thing. What?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Y2K Questions and Answers, Continued:
(This continues a series of Y2K info forwarded to us by
John Northover, based on U.S. Navy advisories to its
personnel early in 1999.) While this info has been
researched primarily to benefit Navy personnel in
preparation and planning for their personal and family
needs, much of what we are excerpting for this and
future Sandbox issues relates directly to the civilian
population as well.
C. Personal Finances:
Q3. I Heard Lots of Conflicting Advice on How I
Should Handle My Personal Finances in Order to Be
Well Prepared for Jan 1, 2000. What Should I Do?
A3. The Best Advice Is Don't Do Anything Rash with
Your Finances. Most Banks Are in Good Shape, since
Things like Loan Calculations and the Like Have
Required Year 2000 Compliancy for Years. So Keep
Your Money in The Bank and Don't Cash in Your
Investments. Beware of the Scam Artists Who Prey on
Your Fears. Their Interest Is in Getting Your Money,
Not Your Well-being. Many Y2K Sales Pitches Are
Designed to Scare You into Doing Something Rash.
If an Offer Sounds Too Good to Be True, it Probably
Is. As with Any Sound Financial Plan, You Should
Have Good Paper Records of Your Accounts and
Bank Statements. Having These Statements Allows
You to Quickly Resolve Any Administrative Errors
That Might Occur at Any Time, Not Just in The
Event of A Y2K-caused Administrative Error. If You
Have Specific Questions Concerning Your
Investments and Accounts, Contact Your Financial
Institutions Directly and Ask Them about Their Y2K
Compliancy.
D. Telephone Systems:
Q4. What Will Happen to My Telephone Service?
A4. There Are Varying Answers to this Question.
According to Ameritech Spokesman Frank Mitchell,
"Basically, Nothing Will Change. Your Caller ID
And Network Will Work. And We're Currently
Updating the 911 Services We Are involved with So
There Will Be No Disruptions." Most Y2K Observers
Believe That Widespread Disruption of Service Is
Extremely Unlikely. Incorrect Billing Is Much More
Likely to Occur. Obviously Unforeseen Events,
Including Issues Not Related to Possible Y2K
Problems (i.e. Ice Storms) May Make it Impossible for
the Phone Companies to Maintain All Service. Navy
Switches on Bases and Installations Have Been
Inspected and Only 21 of 165 Switches Still Require
Modifications to Meet Billing and Maintenance
Functions Related to Year 2000 Requirements. Work
Is Underway to Implement The Required Fixes and All
Work Will Be Completed by 30 June 1999.
TO BE CONTINUED
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #21. In 1962, a dejected
politician, having lost a race for governor, announced
his retirement and chastised the press saying, "Just
think, you don't have ... to kick around any more." (2
words) And he lied!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Table Topics: Not sure what you want to talk about?
Well, then, here are some ideas, still outstanding,
just begging to be discussed.
1. What do you think about the policy of "social"
promotion in school? Does it serve the student?
Does it serve society?
3.. Should gun makers be sued by states and
municipalities because "bad guys" use them to
kill people? Or is there more to the story than that?
4.. Where do you plan to be as 1999 turns into
the year 2000?
5. Do you want "them" to tear down the dams?
6. Should our troops go to Kosovo?
See you next time!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's all for today's Sandbox, folks. Say what you
are longing to say today and send it right away to:
The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
-- Al Parker ~ Gatherer of Your Thoughts
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-31-
***************************************
***************************************
********************************************
THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #32 ~ February 28, 1999
"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always
depend on the support of Paul."
-- George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sharing Your Ideas, Your Opinions, and Your
Responses With Richland Alumni Worldwide!
MailTo:THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Today's Specials: Ray Wells (54), Joe Ford) (63),
Barbara Seslar Brackenbush (60), Jack Grouell (61),
Eva Clark (49) Perry, Margaret Hartnett (72)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also Featuring: More Bomber Boomer Baby Trivia
and Information You Can Use Regarding 2YK.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Ray Wells (54) ray@transcribing.com
Subj: Clinton Haters?
To: Joe Ford (63) jbford@jbford.com>
In Sandbox 30, you used the inciting words "Clinton
Haters," and I wonder if the stereotype image these
words connote is really what you are trying to say.
First let's cite a current example of hate. I'm referring
to the drama that's taking place in Jasper, Texas.
Along with 2 other men, John William King has been
charged with murdering James Byrd, Jr. (a black man),
by using a 24 foot logging chain attached to the rear
of a pickup track, and the other end attached to the
ankles of James Byrd to drag Byrd along a three mile
stretch of road, tearing his body apart and killing him.
And yes, James Byrd was conscious when he was
dragged down the road. The press has said that John
William King is a white supremacist and that he has
racial slurs tattooed all over his body. If there are such
people as Clinton haters, I would expect that they
would have Clinton slurs tattooed on their body and
that they would like to drag a conscious Bill Clinton
behind a pickup truck.
To my mind, we have Clinton sympathizers, and
Clinton detractors. I have heard from many Clinton
detractors, but I have yet to meet a bonafide Clinton
hater. I guess on the other side of this coin you could
say that there are Clinton "lovers," but I would limit
this description to Hillary and Monica.
— Ray Wells
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #22. "Every morning at the
mine you could see him arrive. He stood 6'6", weighed
245, kinda broad at the shoulder and narrow at the hip
and everybody knew you didn't give no lip to ..." (2
words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: Re: Clinton Haters?
Date: 2/19/99 6:02:56 PM PST
From: jbford@jbford.com (Joe Ford) (63)
To: ray@transcribing.com (Ray Wells),
Ray;
Thanks for your message and for the thoughtful
presentation. I was quoting Anthony Lewis of the NY
times, who made the argument I summarized. I'm
sorry to say that at least some of the postings I read,
including some made to the Sandbox, suggest that
there *are* folk out there who hate the President.
One of my concerns in reading the Sandbox is the
vehemence, the heated rhetoric, and the sweeping
generalizations about character (one comment: "if
you voted for Clinton, you have no character"). The
all-upper case phrases and ad hominem attacks on
people who post to the Sandbox are my evidence for
heated rhetoric.
Thanks
--Joe Ford
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #23. Where did Fats
Domino find his thrill? (3 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Barbara Seslar Brackenbush (60)
ReplyTo: radman@gte.net
Subject: Response to Ray Wells (54)
Thank you for asking which group I belong to. There
has been a lot of poll-taking lately and none of them
has called me. : )
I believe I fit mostly in group 3 but I also consider
myself conservative and right wing. I want the
constitution and rule of law followed by ALL and I
place a high priority on personal freedom. I think it
could be frightening to let too much power rest on one
person.
Barbara Seslar Brackenbush (1960)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #24. "Good night, Mrs.
Calabash, ..." (3 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: "Joe Ford" (63) jbford@jbford.com
Subject: Acquittal; can we get on with life?
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:20:07 -0800
Fellow alums and Richlanders;
Following the President's acquittal, I'm hoping for
toned down rhetoric from our friends who supported
removing the President. Senator Lott has reduced his
level of anti-Clinton talk, and so has Representative
Hyde.
We don't have a parliamentary form of government, so
replacing the chief executive officer of the government
is/was a very serious matter. While about 25% of the
population (maybe more) wanted Mr. Clinton gone,
the great majority of us (60+%) did not think his
behavior warranted the most serious step our
constitution contemplates. Most Americans felt that
the efforts to impeach the President were based on
partisan politics, and the Senate failed to even reach a
majority. Representative Hyde had said, early on, that
to be successful, impeachment would have to be
bi-partisan, and he was correct.
The impeachment effort failed. It's time to move on.
We have Social Security, education, health care,
environmental matters, and other real world concerns
facing us, and I for one would like to see civil debates
about the choices we have to make.
For my part, I'll promise a close reading of reasonable
commentary, whatever the source, and no demonizing
of people who don't agree with me or my positions or
values. It seems reasonable to ask the same from other
folks. No name-calling, no ranting, no sweeping
generalizations about people (after all, we have a great
deal in common).
Regards.
— Joe Ford
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #25. "Good night, Chet.
..." (3 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Jack Grouell (61) grouells@millenicom.com
Subject: Y2K - NOT!
(Short note on Y2K:)
In computerese, 1k is 2 to the 10th power or 1024.
Therefore:
2k = 2048
BUT:
2048 is NOT the problem.
2000 is the problem
2000 divided by 1024 is 1.953125
Therefore:
The correct statement is not we have a Y2K problem but we have a
Y1.953125k problem.
Please help me correct this glaring error by replacing all references
to Y2K
with the correct value when ever you encounter it.
Thank you for your support.
Jack Grouell '61
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #25. "Good night, Chet.
..." (3 words)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Eva Clark Perry (49) jeperry@supersat.net
Subject: The Government
As I continue to read all the thoughts and complaints
and solutions given, I never seem to hear anything out
who actually controls the whole situation. People
seem to fear the Y2K, but not Yah, they seem to give
leeway and forgive all the moral sins that we all live
with, and excuse them, yet leave them wide open for
an example for all the little ones to follow. The taxes
of today, are no less or more than putting the straw in
the bricks of Egypt. I would much rather take my
chances with Yah, than Clinton.
Love and Prayers to all of you.
Eva
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #27. "When it's least
expected, you're elected. You're the star today! Smile,
_ _ _ _" (four words.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: A modern hotel in a timeless town--
Margaret Hartnett (72)
Write to her at: highdesert@theriver.com
"My Bit to Conquer That Nasty Y2K bug!"
Subject: Oh, all of it...
I love this gooey exercise we are engaged in and I
thoroughly understand the heating up of emotions,
why I get high blood pressure just seeing John
Allen's name in the list of contributors but I fear there
is a growing tendency toward digging in our heels and
dividing the camps pretty narrowly, I don't believe
anything is that black & white. My example of that
belief is myself. I am at heart a socialist, no, that even
begs the issue, so are most of the French, I am at heart
a Marxist but I am petit bourgeois in practice as I own
a small business which I run with soft glove
totalitarianism. I believe some crimes are so horrible
and evidence so clear that a trial is a mere formality,
one I agree to but I wouldn't feel robbed if , for
example: Mr. King in Texas got drug over 3 miles of
road [recently]... I believe that the drug crisis in this
country is largely the doing of COINTELPRO and that
African Americans should have listened to the
Panthers, stayed clean and fought back. I believe we
should not start from the question of "How can we
solve the problems of poverty and health care in this
country" but ask "Why the hell do we have problems
of poverty and health care in this country?" I believe
that if Afghani women formed hit squads and went
after everyone in this country who helped establish the
Taliban in Kabul, we should be able to understand
why. I think Boxers are the supreme expression of
canine development and all Akitas and Chows should
be shot (since they are cannibals and tried to eat one of
my Boxers). I could go on and on and on but the point
of this wee personal outing is that I have never, and I
do mean never, met a person who is totally consistent.
We all have our personal paranoias and chances are
there is a person or a group plotting to undermine
many of our personal sacred cows. I'd feel a little
better if I felt reason had the upper hand most of the
time but I think emotion rules and the best I can hope
for is to echo the motto of the Southern Poverty Law
Center: Teach Tolerance. I think that should do it for
now! Peace.
— Margaret Hartnett (72)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bomber Baby Boomer Trivia #28. Who put the bop in
the bop she-bop she-bop? (Socratic answer
required.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subj: John Knows His Trivia
From: John M. Allen (66)
beaubar@effectnet.com John M. ALLEN (66)
Reply-to: miles2go@cheerful.com
Al,
It was just in the most recent issue of the BOX that I
noticed the BB Trivia Quiz, so you have only my word
as a good Conservative that my answers to the first
issue's questions are given as of today without
researching anything but that space between my ears.
1. Ringo Starr, George Harrison, John Lennon, Paul
McCartney (and I still don't own a Beatles album.)
2. ? ....Really blank on this one.
3. "It's Howdy Doody time."
4. They melt in your mouth, not in your hand.
5. Wonder Bread
6. Cassius (Marcellus, for extra credit) Clay
7. "....when you brush your teeth with Pepsodent."
8. Denver's name in the Dobie Gillis show was
Maynard T. Krebbs (sp? on the Krebbs part).
9. "Y, because we like you."
10. Rien de tout.
11. "A little dab'l do ya" ("Use more only if you
dare. But watch out, the girls'l all pursue ya; they love
to get their fingers in your hair." - for more extra
credit)
12. over 30
13. who wrote the book of love.
14. "Absolutely nothing" (which is essentially the
translation for my answer to #10)
15. "Gone to young girls, every one."
16. the American way.
17. Joe Willie Namath (Broadway Joe)
18. "....'cause I eats my spinach."
19. Mary Martin
20. Plastics
21. Richard (Milhouse, again for extra credit) Nixon
---Big John (in Oregon)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Y2K Questions and Answers, Continued:
(This continues a series of Y2K info forwarded to us by
John Northover, based on U.S. Navy advisories to its
personnel early in 1999.) While this info has been
researched primarily to benefit Navy personnel in
preparation and planning for their personal and family
needs, much of what we are excerpting for this and
future Sandbox issues relates directly to the civilian
population as well.
Q5: Will I Be Able to Place Local and Long-distance
Calls in the Normal Way After Jan 1, 2000?
A5: Yes, According to U.S. West's Year 2000
Initiative Executive Director in An Interview with the
Glenwood Post Jan 4, 1999. U.S. West Is a Telephone
Company That Provides Long-distance Service to
Customers in 14 Western States. Executive Director
William White Explained That Most Telephone
Switches, Which Relay Long-distance Calls to Their
Proper Destination, Are Not Date-Dependent. "Most
Switches Don't Care What Day it Is," White
Explained, When It Comes to Completing Calls. "If
You Can't Program a Date into It, It's Likely to Be
Very Date Insensitive." White Said Regional
Telephone Companies Have Collaborated to Ensure
the Switched Network Works Smoothly Through the
Date Change.
E. Electric Power Supply Systems:
Q6. Will the Electrical Systems Be Y2K Ready in
Time?
A6. Based on Recent Analysis, on Average, the
Electric Industry Is Close to Its Y2K Readiness
Targets. According to a Report Prepared for The
Department Of Energy by the North American
Electrical Reliability Council, "Nearly All Electrical
Systems Necessary to Operate into the Year 2000 Will
Have Been Tested, Remediated, And Declared Y2K
Ready by June 30, 1999."
Q7. Some Reports Predict That There Will Be
Widespread Power Outages Anticipated at the Year
2000 Mark. Is this True?
A7. While We Can't Be Certain There Won't Be Some
Minor Power Disruptions, Industry Experts Do Not
Predict Widespread Outages. Speculation That Power
Distribution Systems Will Experience Widespread
Failures Are Not Based on Facts or Rational Analysis
Of Information from the Industry. Continuity of
Service Is a Historical Hallmark of the Nation's Utility
Industry. Electrical Industry Efforts Are On-target to
Maintain That Same Quality of Service Through the
Millennium.
F. Water Utilities:
Q8. Will the Water Utility Companies Be Y2K
Compliant by 2000?
A8. Industry Experts Offer a Range of Answers to this
Question. Some Experts Predict That Some Water
Suppliers May Be Temporarily Unable to meet
Customer Demand. However, Water Utilities and
Government Agencies Have Comprehensive
Y2K-compliance Programs under Way and Are
Spending Large Sums of Money to Prepare Their
Computer Systems to Become Y2K-compliant or
Y2K-ready. Most Experts Believe Water Treatment
and Distribution Should Not Be Greatly Affected by
the Y2K Problem.
TO BE CONTINUED
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grist For Your Mull: Not sure what you want to talk
about? Well, then, here are some ideas still
outstanding, just begging for your input.
Note: when responding to another item or person, it
would be helpful if you would describe or quote very
briefly the gist of that to which you are responding.
1. Where did you go on you honeymoon(s)? Wanna
go there again? Why? Why not?
2. Anything you want to say about the Sonics? The
Seahawks prospects?
3. Essay question if anybody wants to take it: Why
does it seeem like everyone is acting like the teacher is
out of the room?
4. Any comments on recent headlines? Such as:
A. BONN, Germany (Feb. 21) -- Finance officials from
the world's richest nations met in Bonn [recently] to
try to find ways to prevent economic crises like the
ones that have swept across Asia, Russia and Brazil.
B. The Independent Counsel Law: "End it, Don't Mend
It," says Susan Low Bloch, columnist for Intellectual
Capital.com
C. Taxes Are Taking More Time Than Ever
By CURT ANDERSON .(c) The Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- It takes more than 22 hours for a
taxpayer who itemizes deductions and has some
investment income to finish this year's required Internal
Revenue Service forms, the tax agency estimates.
That's three hours longer than last year.
D. Report: Tyson Throws TV at Guards; Early Release
in Doubt .(c) The Associated Press
E: Albright Critical of Serbs at Talks
Allies Divided Over Approach to Take
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's all for this issue of The Sandbox, folks. Join
others already waiting in line to speak their piece! Say
what you are itching to say today and send it right
away to: The_Sandbox@hotmail.com
Stay happy and remember: "If anything you have to say
is worth saying at all, it's well worth saying here!" See
you next time!
— Al Parker, Collector of Your Thoughts
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-32-
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø
End of JAN and FEB, 1999
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø
AUG thru DEC, 1998 ~ MAR thru DEC, 1999