>From: Cal <[log in to unmask]> > >Fascinating. Friend Giordano comparing David Duke and George Bush. If there >was nothing to be ashamed of, why would the good folks deny supporting their >duly elected President? Who they are supposed to (asked to) Trust? > >Hey, if elections weren't horseraces then their would be no need to vote, but >it may be relevant to the previous observation that the British bookmakers >have Bush at 3-1 (bet one and get three plus your one); Perot at 25-1 and >Clinton as an odds-on favorite at 1-6 (bet six to get one). Hmmm... I can't remember what odds were being offered, but bear in mind that, during our own general election, the pundits and opinion pollsters were predicting a decisive win for the Labour party. As you all know, not only did the Tories win, they got a majority. And now Britain is well and truly up the creek without a canoe, never mind a paddle... do I see a connection... Liam. ====- KERR AVON | Work: ICL, *"To you, Baldrick, the Renaissance aka Liam Cairney |Reading, England* was just something that happened All e-mail to:- | Home: Glasgow, * to other people, wasn't it?" [log in to unmask] | Scotland * -- Edmund Blackadder