Patrician certain fits...

 pa·tri·cian /pəˈtrɪʃən/
<http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html>Show Spelled[p
uh-trish-uhn]
<http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html>Show IPA
 noun
1.
a person of noble <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/noble> or high
rank; aristocrat.
2.
a person of very good background, education, and refinement.
3.
a member of the original senatorial aristocracy in ancient Rome.
4.
(under the later Roman and Byzantine empires) a title or dignity conferred
by the emperor.
5.
a member of a hereditary ruling class in certain medieval German, Swiss, and
Italian free cities.


On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:30 PM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>  nobleman - patrician - noble?
>
> Miss that part?
>
> We have no aristocracy in America.
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Eric Roberts <
>  ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > They were very much the American aristocracy.  They were rich white
> > guys...most of whom inheritied it.  Some earned it.  Most inherited.
> > Besides, what of your definition denies that they weren't?  They were
> > members of the American aristocracy...making them aristocrats.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:21 PM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > *a·ris·to·crat*/əˈristəˌkrat/Noun:
> > >
> > >   1. A member of the aristocracy: "an aristocrat by birth".
> > >   2. Something believed to be the best of its kind: "the trout is the
> > >   aristocrat of freshwater fish".
> > >
> > >
> > > Synonyms:
> > > nobleman - patrician - noble - peer
> > >
> > >
> > > So no, they weren't.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Eric Roberts <
> > >  ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > keeping in mind that with all the nobility of most of thier actions,
> > > these
> > > > were all also artistocrats...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:15 PM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, so whats the solution?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think Ron Paul or Gary Johnson, and I'm sure you would disagree,
> > > right?
> > > > >
> > > > > Not that either of them will likely be on my ballot, so I will
> likely
> > > > write
> > > > > in a candidate.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Eric Roberts <
> > > > > ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would agree with Maureen...if you are not part of the
> > > solution...you
> > > > > are
> > > > > > part of the problem...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Maureen <mamamaur...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > And I repeat, even thought I am sure it is a waste of time,
>  all
> > of
> > > > > > > those candidates have supporters and contributors in your group
> > of
> > > > > > > "decent people".  If they did not they would not have won any
> > > > > > > primaries or election.   Not everyone who vote for a candidate
> > does
> > > > so
> > > > > > > because they don't like the opponent.  Santorum, Romney and
> Obama
> > > all
> > > > > > > have rabid supporters.  Are you denying that?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Jerry Barnes <
> > > critic...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "All of those megalomaniacs have supporters, contributors and
> > > > voters
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > your pool of decent people."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Maureen, I don't know how I can explain it any clearer.  I'll
> > > try,
> > > > > even
> > > > > > > > though I am pretty sure it'll be a waste of time.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Let's take Rick Santorum.  Many people voted for him because
> he
> > > was
> > > > > NOT
> > > > > > > > Mitt Romney.  Now, that Romney has pretty much wrapped up the
> > > > > > nomination,
> > > > > > > > many people will vote for him because he is NOT Obama.  They
> > are
> > > > not
> > > > > > > > "supporters" in the traditional sense.  They are choosing the
> > > > lesser
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > two
> > > > > > > > evils (in their opinion at le
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:350003
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to