HK wrote:
Don White wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:02:35 -0400, "Reginald P Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

Frogwatch wrote:
.

Froggy,
I would be VERY VERY careful providing Harry with ANY personal info.
I most fervently agree with that post.
--

John H
Really, Herring? I've known your address for years. Ever seen me
sniffing around your humble abode?

Of course not.


You actually invited that ungrateful 'soldier' out for a cruise on
your boat......what does he do in response?
Quite a piece of work.



Actually, I invited him out a couple of times, including once when his
boat was out of service for a while. He was a **** then, and he's a ****
now.




You can't buy friendship with a ride on a steeenkin skow. I expect Mr.
Herring had good reason to respectfully decline your invitations.

Don White wrote:
"John H" wrote in message
...
In the Army, I always addressed senior females as 'ma'am'. Senior
males were 'sir'.

That's the way it was.

Boxer's a bitch.
--

John H


Is she an army officer, genius?


Is he a senator, (I can't say the rest. I just can't)

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:10:57 -0400, Jim24242
wrote:

HK wrote:
Don White wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:02:35 -0400, "Reginald P Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

Frogwatch wrote:
.

Froggy,
I would be VERY VERY careful providing Harry with ANY personal info.
I most fervently agree with that post.
--

John H
Really, Herring? I've known your address for years. Ever seen me
sniffing around your humble abode?

Of course not.


You actually invited that ungrateful 'soldier' out for a cruise on
your boat......what does he do in response?
Quite a piece of work.



Actually, I invited him out a couple of times, including once when his
boat was out of service for a while. He was a **** then, and he's a ****
now.




You can't buy friendship with a ride on a steeenkin skow. I expect Mr.
Herring had good reason to respectfully decline your invitations.

You see his behavior here. Could you imagine spending several hours on
a small boat with that?
--
John H

"HONK - if I'm paying your mortgage!"

On Jun 18, 12:09*pm, Loogypicker wrote:
On Jun 18, 12:57*pm, "Reginald P Smithers III, Esq."

wrote:
JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Jun 18, 12:42 pm, "Reginald P Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryEGmkjv8R8

--
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq.

This Newsgroup post is a natural product. The slight variations in
spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in
no way are to be considered flaws or defects

Problem is with her, she always has that attitude with military.. It's
part of her Shtick while her husband makes a fortune in the supply
side of it..

He was being VERY respectful, and she came across as a real bitch. * It
he was not showing her respect, I could go along with *her stopping the
testimony to demand she be called Senator, but the way she handled it
showed that she does have a real insecurity problem.

As do almost all politicians. That's why they are what they are.

agreed!

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:13:28 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
. ..

In the Army, I always addressed senior females as 'ma'am'. Senior
males were 'sir'.

That's the way it was.

Boxer's a bitch.
--

John H


Is she an army officer, genius?


She's a Senator.

Sometimes I think the folks who refer to you as 'stupid' or 'dumb' are
correct.
--

John H

Duh! Yu'd better be looking in a clear mirror when you're calling someone
stupid.
You said..."In the Army, I always addressed senior females as 'ma'am'"
I replied..."Is she an army officer, genius?" Go smoke some more of Looneys
'Georgia Bud'.

On Jun 18, 12:19*pm, HK wrote:
JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Jun 18, 12:42 pm, "Reginald P Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryEGmkjv8R8

--
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq.

This Newsgroup post is a natural product. The slight variations in
spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in
no way are to be considered flaws or defects

Problem is with her, she always has that attitude with military.. It's
part of her Shtick while her husband makes a fortune in the supply
side of it..

The senator was absolutely correct. That general would not have
addressed a male senator as mister. If he wanted to use that form of
speech, he could have properly and respectfully addressed her as Madam
Senator, madam being the full form of ma'am. "Senator," would have been
sufficient, as would have "Senator Boxer."


Last time I knew, the military protocol for addressing senior
officers is either "yes/No Sir, or Yes/Mo Ma'am. Even to the point
where it becomes a natural habit. I address others with Sir/Ma'am,
even to this day because it was the way I was taught while young.

I'm sure the general meant no offense, and to him he was following a
proper protocol.

OK so Boxer thought it uncouth. well, I think it was her problem, not
his.

maybe being addressed as "Senator" makes her feel more important.
Maybe she has low self esteem or something.

On Jun 18, 12:19*pm, HK wrote:
JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Jun 18, 12:42 pm, "Reginald P Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryEGmkjv8R8

--
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq.

This Newsgroup post is a natural product. The slight variations in
spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in
no way are to be considered flaws or defects

Problem is with her, she always has that attitude with military.. It's
part of her Shtick while her husband makes a fortune in the supply
side of it..

The senator was absolutely correct. That general would not have
addressed a male senator as mister. If he wanted to use that form of
speech, he could have properly and respectfully addressed her as Madam
Senator, madam being the full form of ma'am. "Senator," would have been
sufficient, as would have "Senator Boxer."

There is a protocol for addressing officials, and the fact that you and
the other uneducated ****s don't know it doesn't excuse those who should
know from not knowing.


Last time I knew, the military protocol for addressing senior
officers is either "yes/No Sir, or Yes/No Ma'am. Even to the point
where it becomes a natural habit. I address others with Sir/Ma'am,
even to this day because it was the way I was taught while young.

I'm sure the General meant no offense, and to him he was following a
proper protocol.

OK so Boxer thought it uncouth. well, I think it was her problem, not
his.

maybe being addressed as "Senator" makes her feel more important.
Maybe she has low self esteem or something.

Reginald P Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
m...

The senator was absolutely correct. That general would not have
addressed a male senator as mister. If he wanted to use that form of
speech, he could have properly and respectfully addressed her as
Madam Senator, madam being the full form of ma'am. "Senator," would
have been sufficient, as would have "Senator Boxer."

There is a protocol for addressing officials, and the fact that you
and the other uneducated ****s don't know it doesn't excuse those who
should know from not knowing.



You can tell by listening to the General that he addressed her as
"ma'am" purposely to indicate disrespect for her or her official
title. Sure he did.

He screwed up, that's all. A simple, innocent and human mistake.
I am sure this is hard to understand by those who never make mistakes.

Eisboch

During the exact same committee meeting General Walsh referred to the
male Senators at the hearing as "sir" without receiving even a dirty
look for any faux pas in protocol. Sure the correct protocol would have
been Senator, but the male senators focused on the purpose of the
meeting, instead of worrying about someone inadvertently using the wrong
title.



Well said. I agree with this post.

Frogwatch wrote:
On Jun 18, 1:56 pm, "Reginald P Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
m...
The senator was absolutely correct. That general would not have
addressed a male senator as mister. If he wanted to use that form of
speech, he could have properly and respectfully addressed her as Madam
Senator, madam being the full form of ma'am. "Senator," would have
been sufficient, as would have "Senator Boxer."
There is a protocol for addressing officials, and the fact that you
and the other uneducated ****s don't know it doesn't excuse those who
should know from not knowing.
You can tell by listening to the General that he addressed her as
"ma'am" purposely to indicate disrespect for her or her official
title. Sure he did.
He screwed up, that's all. A simple, innocent and human mistake.
I am sure this is hard to understand by those who never make mistakes.
Eisboch
During the exact same committee meeting General Walsh referred to the
male Senators at the hearing as "sir" without receiving even a dirty
look for any faux pas in protocol. Sure the correct protocol would have
been Senator, but the male senators focused on the purpose of the
meeting, instead of worrying about someone inadvertently using the wrong
title.

--
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq.

This Newsgroup post is a natural product. The slight variations in
spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in
no way are to be considered flaws or defects

No need to insult bitches everywhere, just refer to her as "Democratic
Senator" which is as derogatory as possible.

I also agree with this post.

Don White wrote:
"John H" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:13:28 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
...
In the Army, I always addressed senior females as 'ma'am'. Senior
males were 'sir'.

That's the way it was.

Boxer's a bitch.
--

John H

Is she an army officer, genius?

She's a Senator.

Sometimes I think the folks who refer to you as 'stupid' or 'dumb' are
correct.
--

John H

Duh! Yu'd better be looking in a clear mirror when you're calling someone
stupid.
You said..."In the Army, I always addressed senior females as 'ma'am'"
I replied..."Is she an army officer, genius?" Go smoke some more of Looneys
'Georgia Bud'.


Don't expect folks to pick up on your stupid reasoning. The normal brain
doesn't work like yours.