Thanks, Murray, for the info re Jeannette Rankin. Gosh, I wonder
why I didn't know that? I suppose it must be due to the fact that in my
youthful days at college there was no such thing as "Women's Studies"
celebrating the irrelevant, and when I returned to graduate school after
taking early retirement I was just a "male chauvinist pig" who avoided the
non-subject. When they institute a Division of Men's Studies I might take
Women's Studies more seriously. Service in Congress then undoubtedly
carried more intellectual weight and prestige than it does presently, but
this quotation doesn't indicate it. My Britannica tells me Ms Rankin served
in the years1917-19 and again in 1941-43 and had the dubious distinction of
casting the only Congressional vote against the Declaration of War after
Pearl Harbor. The statement is still inane relative to this day and time,
and relative to some previous wars also as a matter of fact.........cases
in point... the American Revolution and the War Between the States as we
"rednecks" like to call the American Civil War. We do like our freedom, and
slavery is and was an abominable institution. It should be noted that Ms
Rankin also cast one of 49 votes against the U. S. entry into WW I. She was
not returned to Congress then and also not returned in 1943 when her term
expired. I now remember reading that about this lady but her name was was
as meaningless as her vote, particularly in December, 1941. Thanks again
for unveiling the "contribution" of Ms Rankin to the safety of our nation
and its institutions.
Regards
Don A.
At 11:22 PM 6/11/02 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi Don and SuperMario and All,
>
>"Jeanette Rankin, whoever she may be..."
>
>Jeannette Rankin, U.S. Representative from Montana,
>the first woman in Congress, that's who...
>
>Jeannette Rankin, born June 11th. 1880.
>
>look here for the story ...
>http://www.salsa.net/peace/faces/rankin.html
>
>cheers ............ murray
>
>* * *
>
>On 11 Jun 2002 at 22:21, supermario wrote:
>
> > Hi Don,
> >
> > "
> > However, some of them are really not thought provoking at all and are "just
> > plain dumb" in my opinion. This one by Jeanette Rankin, whoever she may be,
> > (am I uninformed? perhaps I should know!) is more than obtuse."
> >
> > In plain English, they just don't make sense.
> >
> > Very eloquently stated.
> >
> > Mario
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Don Adams" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 9:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: QT: win : Non-PD
> >
> >
> > > At 06:04 AM 6/11/02 -0400, Janet wrote:
> > >
> > > Quote.......
> > > >you can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake
> > > >
> > > >jeannette rankin
> > >
> > > My dear Janet,
> > > I sincerely hope that akinetic rigidity is a playful and perky
> > > exaggeration of your condition. If not, forgive me for what follows (I
> > > would have just let it slide) although now I have to stand behind my
> > > comments in either case.
> > > A few of the many quotes with which you quite often entertain us
> > > fall into the category of "truisms" and I do appreciate them as such.
> > > However, some of them are really not thought provoking at all and are
> > "just
> > > plain dumb" in my opinion. This one by Jeanette Rankin, whoever she may
> > be,
> > > (am I uninformed? perhaps I should know!) is more than obtuse. I can
> > > easily think of several wars which, if we had lost, would have the
> USA and
> > > Canada, not to mention the European continent, living in a despotic
> > society
> > > in which YOU could not share your thoughts with this group and I
> could not
> > > disagree....if our opinions did not follow the "party line" (better known
> > > these days as "Political Correctness"). The war in which we are now
> > engaged
> > > is surely one that must be won. Can you not imagine the consequences
> if it
> > > is not won or at least our adversaries being contained?
> > > At any rate I do not see how this statement by Ms Rankin lies
> > > within the PIEN guidelines, and I am sure that this, my response, does
> > not.
> > > If the war is assumed to refer to our war against Parkinson's Disease the
> > > statement would be just as stupid. I trust that if I am "called down" for
> > > this "non-PD" contribution that I will not be alone in being reprimanded.
> > > In any case I ask for indulgence by the group for this mild
> "outburst''. I
> > > promise not to do this again until next time LOL. I hope you have a good
> > > dictionary (Heh, Heh). I have one, as you will notice.
> > >
> > > Don
> > > (a sinistral anaseismic, eclectic, seldom perky,
> > > paronomasial Parkie)
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
> > mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
>
>
>* * *
>
>"Murray Charters" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
>In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
