Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
GOP Primary Has Hurt Romney
4 views
Skip to first unread message
John Manning
Jan 27, 2012, 10:20:11 AM1/27/12
to
The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
(1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
(2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
problematic."
"He's already in a bad position. George W. Bush, John McCain, and
Bob Dole were all in primary fights and ALL were a net-POSITIVE at
this time in the election cycle.
"In the past 20 years in the poll, no one who went on to be the
major party nominee of either party with a net-negative at this
point - except John Kerry, and we all know how that turned
out. Clearly, Romney is looking like he's getting his momentum
back, but he has fundamental problems for the general. The primary
has done him no good."
Links here:
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/01/27/gop_primary_has_hurt_romney.html
INTRADE: Barack Obama to be re-elected President in 2012 -- 54.9%
Mitt Romney to be elected President in 2012 -- 40.0%
Newt Gingrich to be elected President in 2012 -- 1.8%
http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/?eventId=84326
• R. L. Measures.
Jan 27, 2012, 12:29:36 PM1/27/12
to
In article <BrednQ2jB5YzXb_S...@giganews.com>, John Manning
evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
in Mormon Heaven.
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
<jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> problematic."
>
АА another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> problematic."
>
evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
in Mormon Heaven.
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
Logan Sacket
Jan 28, 2012, 10:24:59 AM1/28/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
wrote:
>In article <BrednQ2jB5YzXb_S...@giganews.com>, John Manning
><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
>>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
>>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>>
>>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>>
>> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
>> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
>> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
>> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
>> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>>
>> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
>> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
>> problematic."
>>
>€€ another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
go into his religion to defeat him?
wrote:
>In article <BrednQ2jB5YzXb_S...@giganews.com>, John Manning
><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
>>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
>>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>>
>>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>>
>> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
>> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
>> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
>> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
>> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>>
>> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
>> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
>> problematic."
>>
>evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
>male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
>impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
>in Mormon Heaven.
I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
>male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
>impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
>in Mormon Heaven.
go into his religion to defeat him?
sully
Jan 28, 2012, 5:00:37 PM1/28/12
to
On Jan 28, 7:24 am, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <BrednQ2jB5YzXb_SnZ2dnUVZ_vOdn...@giganews.com>, John Manning
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ><jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
> >>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
> >>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
> >>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
> >>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> >> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> >> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> >> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> >> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> >> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> >> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> >> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> >> problematic."
>
> >€€ another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
> >evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
> >male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
> >impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
> >in Mormon Heaven.
>
> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
> go into his religion to defeat him?
How would you judge if he did or didn't?
>
> >>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
> >>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
> >>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
> >>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> >> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> >> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> >> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> >> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> >> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> >> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> >> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> >> problematic."
>
> >€€ another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
> >evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
> >male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
> >impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
> >in Mormon Heaven.
>
> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
> go into his religion to defeat him?
• R. L. Measures.
Jan 28, 2012, 6:00:23 PM1/28/12
to
In article <4f261305...@news.eternal-september.org>,
€€ it would be a mistake to criticize the wacky religion Romney was born into.
panamfloyd@hotmail.com rade
Jan 28, 2012, 6:50:44 PM1/28/12
to
On Jan 28, 10:24 am, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <BrednQ2jB5YzXb_SnZ2dnUVZ_vOdn...@giganews.com>, John Manning
> ><jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
> >>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
> >>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
> >>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
> >>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> >> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> >> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> >> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> >> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> >> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> >> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> >> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> >> problematic."
>
> >€€ another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
> >evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
> >male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
> >impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
> >in Mormon Heaven.
>
> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
> go into his religion to defeat him?
Just a thought..would religion actually become *less* of an issue,
>
> >>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
> >>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
> >>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
> >>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> >> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> >> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> >> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> >> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> >> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> >> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> >> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> >> problematic."
>
> >€€ another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
> >evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
> >male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
> >impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
> >in Mormon Heaven.
>
> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
> go into his religion to defeat him?
since Romney's is giving him so many problems in the primaries? I
really can't see Southern Baptists & such voting for Obama..but I can
sure see them staying home on election day.
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/Member, Knights of BAAWA!
H.E. Eickleberry
Jan 28, 2012, 7:07:39 PM1/28/12
to
> sure see them staying home on election day.
What makes you think that the problem is limited to "Southern Baptists?"
All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
Reformationists, Evangelicals, etc, etc--know that the Mormons are a cult.
Romney has yet to have any success outside of the Northeast, where the
motley liberal mutts live.
Ike
--
http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.html
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657386473773
Dakota
Jan 28, 2012, 7:48:15 PM1/28/12
to
Logan Sacket
Jan 28, 2012, 8:11:52 PM1/28/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 14:00:37 -0800 (PST), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Judge Obama?
I've already determined what he is. The question is how much has it
cost him to sell his soul.
wrote:
I've already determined what he is. The question is how much has it
cost him to sell his soul.
Logan Sacket
Jan 28, 2012, 8:14:03 PM1/28/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:00:23 -0800, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
Likely so.
In comparison to Rev Wright's religion, he might be opening a can of
worms where he can't stand the heat.
In comparison to Rev Wright's religion, he might be opening a can of
worms where he can't stand the heat.
Logan Sacket
Jan 28, 2012, 8:18:39 PM1/28/12
to
have a glass ceiling. There are some people that really wonder about
how it would effect his presidency.
If the church decides to create an atmosphere where they think they
could take control of the govenment as Joseph Smith prophesied, how
would Romney handle it.
To a lesser degree, who is this man who belongs to a cult, putting is
soul on the line believing the stories of another man who is known to
have made it all up.
panamfloyd@hotmail.com rade
Jan 28, 2012, 9:27:02 PM1/28/12
to
On Jan 28, 7:07 pm, "H.E. Eickleberry" <xeicklebo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Oh, it probably isn't. "Southern Baptists" was just because if the
South doesn't vote Republican, they're going to have problems winning
a nation-wide office.
> All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
> Reformationists, Evangelicals, etc, etc--know that the Mormons are a cult.
The actual "beliefs" of these various cultists are irrelevant. To
argue that the number of adherents a cult has, or the longevity of
their particular cult (or as you put it, "historical churches"..) has
any bearing upon whether or not their nonsense is true is ridiculous.
Two logical fallacies--ad populum, and ad traditio. (to "popularity",
and to "tradition")
Long story short: I was posing a question to Mr. Sacket about how the
different versions of batshit crazy religious folks might vote (or
decide not to) in the next US election cycle. IIRC, we (Mr. Sacket &
I) are both atheists..whether or not *any* theistic moron's particular
version of their fairy tale is "TROO" really wasn't a relevant part of
the conversation.
I gotta ask you though..you seem to be one of the people I was
actually asking about!
So..if Obama somehow can prove he is a "Real Christian" (hey, he's a
black guy..it's more likely than it would be for a white guy), would
you vote for him instead of that dirty Mormon? Or would you just give
up on politics this year and not vote at all? I'm honestly curious..I
could use the data point for my hypothesis.
snip
South doesn't vote Republican, they're going to have problems winning
a nation-wide office.
> All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
> Reformationists, Evangelicals, etc, etc--know that the Mormons are a cult.
argue that the number of adherents a cult has, or the longevity of
their particular cult (or as you put it, "historical churches"..) has
any bearing upon whether or not their nonsense is true is ridiculous.
Two logical fallacies--ad populum, and ad traditio. (to "popularity",
and to "tradition")
Long story short: I was posing a question to Mr. Sacket about how the
different versions of batshit crazy religious folks might vote (or
decide not to) in the next US election cycle. IIRC, we (Mr. Sacket &
I) are both atheists..whether or not *any* theistic moron's particular
version of their fairy tale is "TROO" really wasn't a relevant part of
the conversation.
I gotta ask you though..you seem to be one of the people I was
actually asking about!
So..if Obama somehow can prove he is a "Real Christian" (hey, he's a
black guy..it's more likely than it would be for a white guy), would
you vote for him instead of that dirty Mormon? Or would you just give
up on politics this year and not vote at all? I'm honestly curious..I
could use the data point for my hypothesis.
snip
fasgnadh
Jan 29, 2012, 2:40:38 AM1/29/12
to
On 29/01/2012 12:11 PM, Logan Sacket wrote:
> I've already determined what he is. The question is how much has it
> cost him to sell his soul.
Wouldn't it cost the buyer, not the seller?
> I've already determined what he is. The question is how much has it
> cost him to sell his soul.
BTW, what is the going rate for a Soul these days?
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
...........................................................
...........................................................
...........................................................
---------
alt.atheism FAQ:
http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest
http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
fasgnadh
Jan 29, 2012, 3:24:50 AM1/29/12
to
than what they profess to believe?
In the last Federal election in Oz I voted for the mild
atheist, the other major party had a professional Christian
as their leader, but their beliefs wasn't the basis for my
vote, it was their policies. The Catholic has previously
declared "Climate Change is Crap", and is a reactionary,
(eg runs a fear campaign on 2000 boat refugees, when previous
PM's including one from his party) took in up to 20,000 in
the wake of the Vietnam war with none of the current hysteria).
The atheist is our first woman PM, has a government cobbled
together with independents to get a slim majority, and is not doing
well in the polls.
We have been a multicultural, multi-ethnic, multi-faith society
for a long time and it seems to work.
The major parties have gay MP's, and most people don't
pay much attention to religious affiliation, or lack of it.
We can't pretend there is no racism, the indigenous,
who only gained the right to own property
and have a bank account in living memory,
are still economically disadvantaged,
with the resulting alcohol and drug problems.
I've invited doornocking Mormon's and JW's
in for a chat, after all the Mormon's are guests
in my country, and it's hospitable to make them
welcome when they are far from home.
In both cases we got on fine, they were polite,
and friendly, and we agreed to disagree. ;-)
JW's have my respect because they were staunch in
WWII Europe, and thus ended up in the death camps
with the Jews, when many others went quiet to survive.
Frankly I find the JW theology to be simplistic, and the
Mormon's .. well clearly Jesus had to visit the States
if he hadn't been born there! B^]
But they have better family values than Bikie gangs and
the permanently drugged.
> -Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
> aa#2015/Member, Knights of BAAWA!
you support the policy of killing theists, including
genocide of men, women and children:
# From: Steve Knight <skni...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <p8mrb5lvaf0cj5bp1...@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Not satisfied with murder, Steve favours the GENOCIDE
of 1,600,000 Muslim men, women and children for believing
in different God's to Dawkin's:
# From: Steve Knight <skni...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
# Message-ID: <8t6ve5hs41qn3a2rv...@4ax.com>
# Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:58:18 -0800
#
# On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:22:32 +0200, "Katrina"
# <blondes_g...@yahoo.com> wrote:
#
# >Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
#
# It is the most foul, disgusting filth on Earth.
# The sooner we nuke you fuckers, the better.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
I couldn't possibly vote for people who spout such vile hate speech,
and apparently neither can most people, including a majority
of Americans;
# Atheists Identified as America’s Most Distrusted Minority"
# - American Sociological Association, ASA NEWS
#
# "A survey by sociologists at the University of Minnesota
# found that atheists are “America’s most distrusted minority.”
#
# "From a telephone sampling of more than 2,000 households,
# university researchers found that Americans rate atheists
# below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and
# other minority groups in “sharing their vision of
# American society.”
#
# Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are
# least willing to allow their children to marry.
#
# Even though atheists are few in number, not formally
# organized and relatively hard to publicly identify,
# they are seen as a threat to the American way of life
# by a large portion of the American public.
#
# Many of the study’s respondents associated atheism with
# an array of moral indiscretions ranging from criminal
# behavior to rampant materialism and cultural elitism.
#
# Edgell believes a fear of moral decline and resulting
# social disorder is behind the findings.
# “Americans believe they share more than rules and
# procedures with their fellow citizens—they share an
# understanding of right and wrong,” she said. “Our
# findings seem to rest on a view of atheists as
# self-interested individuals who are not concerned
# with the common good.”
Message has been deleted
Flint
Jan 29, 2012, 1:57:46 PM1/29/12
to
he'd be opening the door on his own involvement with Jeremiah Wright
all over again.
My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint
him as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
--
MFB
DanielSan
Jan 29, 2012, 4:20:22 PM1/29/12
to
misrepresentations of what Wright said inflated beyond all recognition
is something that Obama should avoid.
> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
"evil".
Logan Sacket
Jan 29, 2012, 7:17:36 PM1/29/12
to
On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 18:40:38 +1100, fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>On 29/01/2012 12:11 PM, Logan Sacket wrote:
>
>> I've already determined what he is. The question is how much has it
>> cost him to sell his soul.
I almost missed your comment cause you top posted.
>Wouldn't it cost the buyer, not the seller?
It's an exchange deal. Not even taxed - for now.
IOW, Obama sells his soul for Power and Money.
>
>BTW, what is the going rate for a Soul these days?
Eternity
wrote:
>On 29/01/2012 12:11 PM, Logan Sacket wrote:
>
>> I've already determined what he is. The question is how much has it
>> cost him to sell his soul.
>Wouldn't it cost the buyer, not the seller?
IOW, Obama sells his soul for Power and Money.
>
>BTW, what is the going rate for a Soul these days?
Logan Sacket
Jan 29, 2012, 7:19:15 PM1/29/12
to
On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 13:57:46 -0500, Flint <age...@section31.org>
wrote:
Yep that goes without saying.
Even though Obama himslef is now one of the 1%.
wrote:
Even though Obama himslef is now one of the 1%.
Logan Sacket
Jan 29, 2012, 7:21:34 PM1/29/12
to
call it out-of -context? Seriously?
>> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
>> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
>> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
>
>We'll see, but I doubt he'd ever use (or even believes) that 1%ers are
>"evil".
him re-elected, he will certainly use class warfare.
As a uniter, of course.
DanielSan
Jan 29, 2012, 7:26:07 PM1/29/12
to
Have you ever listened to them? Sure, they're bombastic. Sure, they're
fire and brimstone. But I've heard this from black and white churches
alike.
I haven't heard any hate coming from Wright.
>
>>> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
>>> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
>>> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
>>
>> We'll see, but I doubt he'd ever use (or even believes) that 1%ers are
>> "evil".
>
> Of course he knows they are no more evil than the 99%, but if it gets
> him re-elected, he will certainly use class warfare.
> As a uniter, of course.
their weight. Time to get the 1% in line and at least have them pull
their weight as well; they've been skating for far too long.
� R. L. Measures.
Jan 30, 2012, 10:28:46 AM1/30/12
to
In article <4f299d1e...@news.eternal-september.org>,
logan....@gmail.com wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:00:23 -0800, r...@somis.org (� R. L. Measures.)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <4f261305...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>logan....@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (� R. L. Measures.)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <BrednQ2jB5YzXb_S...@giganews.com>, John Manning
>>>><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
>>>>>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>>>>>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>>>>>
>>>>>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
>>>>> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
>>>>> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
>>>>> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
>>>>> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
>>>>> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
>>>>> problematic."
>>>>>
>>>>�� another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
>>>>evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
>>>>male - who's paid up of course - becomes God (with a capital G) after
>On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:00:23 -0800, r...@somis.org (� R. L. Measures.)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <4f261305...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>logan....@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (� R. L. Measures.)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <BrednQ2jB5YzXb_S...@giganews.com>, John Manning
>>>><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
>>>>>poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>>>>>net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>>>>>
>>>>>First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
>>>>> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
>>>>> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
>>>>> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
>>>>> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
>>>>> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
>>>>> problematic."
>>>>>
>>>>�� another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
>>>>evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
>>>>impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
>>>>in Mormon Heaven.
>>>
>>>I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
>>>go into his religion to defeat him?
>>
>>�� it would be a mistake to criticize the wacky religion Romney was
born into.
>
>Likely so.
>In comparison to Rev Wright's religion, he might be opening a can of
>worms where he can't stand the heat.
�� excellent point. That can might even turn out to be a Pandora's box.
>>>>in Mormon Heaven.
>>>
>>>I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
>>>go into his religion to defeat him?
>>
>>�� it would be a mistake to criticize the wacky religion Romney was
born into.
>
>Likely so.
>In comparison to Rev Wright's religion, he might be opening a can of
>worms where he can't stand the heat.
sully
Jan 30, 2012, 5:20:01 PM1/30/12
to
On Jan 28, 5:11 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 14:00:37 -0800 (PST), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>
my question was meant to be very specific. How
would you judge how far Obama goes into
Mitt's religion to defeat him.
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 14:00:37 -0800 (PST), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>
would you judge how far Obama goes into
Mitt's religion to defeat him.
Message has been deleted
Loirbaj
Jan 30, 2012, 6:06:53 PM1/30/12
to
Any Republican wins hands-down against
Obama who is a miserable failure in every
known sense.
Obama who is a miserable failure in every
known sense.
Loirbaj
Jan 30, 2012, 6:10:17 PM1/30/12
to
Any Republican wins hands-down against
Obama who is a miserable failure in every
known sense.
Christopher A. VIRGIL Tunnel Lee said,
Obama who is a miserable failure in every
known sense.
Mitt Romney big mistake was even going to
Korea, and when he came back and said
'he was brainwashed' there, that hurts him.
BroilJAB said,
That was his brother, and in Weimar Germany
in 1926, I remember because I heard him
in Brussels.
Logan Sacket
Jan 30, 2012, 6:37:34 PM1/30/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:20:01 -0800 (PST), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I'm not going to judge him for going into Romney's religion at all.
Politicians lie and distort all the time, but in Mormonism, you don't
have to make things up. There is enough damaging material there to
sink anyone running for office if you really pull out the stops.
All I'm saying is that it open up the door for Romney to strike back
with just as much damage.
wrote:
Politicians lie and distort all the time, but in Mormonism, you don't
have to make things up. There is enough damaging material there to
sink anyone running for office if you really pull out the stops.
All I'm saying is that it open up the door for Romney to strike back
with just as much damage.
Logan Sacket
Jan 30, 2012, 6:40:35 PM1/30/12
to
On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:26:07 -0800, DanielSan
Then you are not listening.
what he says and what he does are seldom the same, especially since he
is not one of the 1%.
>
>> As a uniter, of course.
>
>Of course. We're all in this together. The 99% is more than pulling
>their weight. Time to get the 1% in line and at least have them pull
>their weight as well; they've been skating for far too long.
Un Huh,
>
>>
>>>> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
>>>> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
>>>> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
>>>
>>> We'll see, but I doubt he'd ever use (or even believes) that 1%ers are
>>> "evil".
>>
>> Of course he knows they are no more evil than the 99%, but if it gets
>> him re-elected, he will certainly use class warfare.
>
>Like what? Making the 1% pay at least the same percentage as the 99%?
I have no problem with that. You might want to talk to Obama though,
>>
>>>> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
>>>> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
>>>> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
>>>
>>> We'll see, but I doubt he'd ever use (or even believes) that 1%ers are
>>> "evil".
>>
>> Of course he knows they are no more evil than the 99%, but if it gets
>> him re-elected, he will certainly use class warfare.
>
>Like what? Making the 1% pay at least the same percentage as the 99%?
what he says and what he does are seldom the same, especially since he
is not one of the 1%.
>
>> As a uniter, of course.
>
>Of course. We're all in this together. The 99% is more than pulling
>their weight. Time to get the 1% in line and at least have them pull
>their weight as well; they've been skating for far too long.
DanielSan
Jan 30, 2012, 7:32:00 PM1/30/12
to
>>
>>>
>>>>> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
>>>>> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
>>>>> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
>>>>
>>>> We'll see, but I doubt he'd ever use (or even believes) that 1%ers are
>>>> "evil".
>>>
>>> Of course he knows they are no more evil than the 99%, but if it gets
>>> him re-elected, he will certainly use class warfare.
>>
>> Like what? Making the 1% pay at least the same percentage as the 99%?
>
> I have no problem with that. You might want to talk to Obama though,
> what he says and what he does are seldom the same, especially since he
> is not one of the 1%.
in the 1%.
But, remember: Obama is part of the executive branch. He is not part of
the legislative branch.
>
>>
>>> As a uniter, of course.
>>
>> Of course. We're all in this together. The 99% is more than pulling
>> their weight. Time to get the 1% in line and at least have them pull
>> their weight as well; they've been skating for far too long.
>
> Un Huh,
Jeanne Douglas
Jan 31, 2012, 12:19:06 AM1/31/12
to
In article
<d3ad6aa8-6630-4a1f...@dp8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Except for his long list of accomplishments.
And GEORGE Romney??? Seriously??? The man has been dead for 16 years.
--
JD
"the lybian lier"
<d3ad6aa8-6630-4a1f...@dp8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
And GEORGE Romney??? Seriously??? The man has been dead for 16 years.
--
JD
"the lybian lier"
Don Martin
Jan 31, 2012, 9:12:44 AM1/31/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:19:06 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlw...@NOSPAMpacbell.net>
wrote:
Who could tell?
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
wrote:
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
SkyEyes
Feb 1, 2012, 4:02:32 AM2/1/12
to
You must be sundowning.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
Logan Sacket
Feb 2, 2012, 7:05:15 PM2/2/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:32:00 -0800, DanielSan
For crying out loud.
No one has to post it. Everyone who is paying attention already knows
it.
>>>>>> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
>>>>>> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
>>>>>> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
>>>>>
>>>>> We'll see, but I doubt he'd ever use (or even believes) that 1%ers are
>>>>> "evil".
>>>>
>>>> Of course he knows they are no more evil than the 99%, but if it gets
>>>> him re-elected, he will certainly use class warfare.
>>>
>>> Like what? Making the 1% pay at least the same percentage as the 99%?
>>
>> I have no problem with that. You might want to talk to Obama though,
>> what he says and what he does are seldom the same, especially since he
>> is not one of the 1%.
>
>Actually, according to his most recent tax return, he is most definitely
>in the 1%.
>
>But, remember: Obama is part of the executive branch. He is not part of
>the legislative branch.
>
>>
>>>
>>>> As a uniter, of course.
>>>
>>> Of course. We're all in this together. The 99% is more than pulling
>>> their weight. Time to get the 1% in line and at least have them pull
>>> their weight as well; they've been skating for far too long.
>>
>> Un Huh,
>
>Yep.
Yep, tax the 1% another 50%. Do you have any idea how long that would
run the govenment? Hours, days, weeks, months? Hint, it isnt weeks
or months..
No one has to post it. Everyone who is paying attention already knows
it.
>>>>>> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
>>>>>> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
>>>>>> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
>>>>>
>>>>> We'll see, but I doubt he'd ever use (or even believes) that 1%ers are
>>>>> "evil".
>>>>
>>>> Of course he knows they are no more evil than the 99%, but if it gets
>>>> him re-elected, he will certainly use class warfare.
>>>
>>> Like what? Making the 1% pay at least the same percentage as the 99%?
>>
>> I have no problem with that. You might want to talk to Obama though,
>> what he says and what he does are seldom the same, especially since he
>> is not one of the 1%.
>
>Actually, according to his most recent tax return, he is most definitely
>in the 1%.
>
>But, remember: Obama is part of the executive branch. He is not part of
>the legislative branch.
>
>>
>>>
>>>> As a uniter, of course.
>>>
>>> Of course. We're all in this together. The 99% is more than pulling
>>> their weight. Time to get the 1% in line and at least have them pull
>>> their weight as well; they've been skating for far too long.
>>
>> Un Huh,
>
>Yep.
run the govenment? Hours, days, weeks, months? Hint, it isnt weeks
or months..
DanielSan
Feb 2, 2012, 11:59:35 PM2/2/12
to
>
>>>>>>> My guess is that Obama would more than likely attempt to attack Romney
>>>>>>> on Bain, and attempt to paint him as a vulture capitalist and paint him
>>>>>>> as one of those 'evil 1%ers'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We'll see, but I doubt he'd ever use (or even believes) that 1%ers are
>>>>>> "evil".
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course he knows they are no more evil than the 99%, but if it gets
>>>>> him re-elected, he will certainly use class warfare.
>>>>
>>>> Like what? Making the 1% pay at least the same percentage as the 99%?
>>>
>>> I have no problem with that. You might want to talk to Obama though,
>>> what he says and what he does are seldom the same, especially since he
>>> is not one of the 1%.
>>
>> Actually, according to his most recent tax return, he is most definitely
>> in the 1%.
>>
>> But, remember: Obama is part of the executive branch. He is not part of
>> the legislative branch.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> As a uniter, of course.
>>>>
>>>> Of course. We're all in this together. The 99% is more than pulling
>>>> their weight. Time to get the 1% in line and at least have them pull
>>>> their weight as well; they've been skating for far too long.
>>>
>>> Un Huh,
>>
>> Yep.
>
> Yep, tax the 1% another 50%. Do you have any idea how long that would
> run the govenment? Hours, days, weeks, months? Hint, it isnt weeks
> or months..
the government?
Oh, right. No one.
Logan Sacket
Feb 3, 2012, 5:39:37 PM2/3/12
to
On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:59:35 -0800, DanielSan
I never said they were. The point being that you can tax the rich all
you want, but in the end, it won't make any noticable difference in
revenue and it can only hurt the working class.
That is called class warefare and income distribution, or theft.
you want, but in the end, it won't make any noticable difference in
revenue and it can only hurt the working class.
That is called class warefare and income distribution, or theft.
Loirbaj
Feb 3, 2012, 6:05:48 PM2/3/12
to
I know George Romney, I served with
George Romney, and YOU are no
George Romney
George Romney, and YOU are no
George Romney
DanielSan
Feb 4, 2012, 5:26:19 AM2/4/12
to
> That is called class warefare and income distribution, or theft.
from the poor to the rich it's......capitalism?
By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
Loirbaj
Feb 4, 2012, 6:17:58 AM2/4/12
to
As the economy melts toward implosion
George Romney wins hands down.
George Romney wins hands down.
Logan Sacket
Feb 4, 2012, 2:12:51 PM2/4/12
to
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 02:26:19 -0800, DanielSan
Sure you might be able to run the goverment for about four days, is
that noticible?
Taxes? What?
>By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
Democrats to create it.
that noticible?
>
>> That is called class warefare and income distribution, or theft.
>
>So, when it goes from the rich to the poor, it's theft, but when it goes
>from the poor to the rich it's......capitalism?
What is going from the poor to the rich?
>> That is called class warefare and income distribution, or theft.
>
>So, when it goes from the rich to the poor, it's theft, but when it goes
>from the poor to the rich it's......capitalism?
Taxes? What?
>By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
Democrats to create it.
DanielSan
Feb 4, 2012, 3:29:04 PM2/4/12
to
>>
>>> That is called class warefare and income distribution, or theft.
>>
>> So, when it goes from the rich to the poor, it's theft, but when it goes
>>from the poor to the rich it's......capitalism?
>
> What is going from the poor to the rich?
> Taxes? What?
and you use the money the poor makes to subsidize things like oil
companies....
>
>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>
> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
> Democrats to create it.
Logan Sacket
Feb 5, 2012, 6:36:42 PM2/5/12
to
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 12:29:04 -0800, DanielSan
Excuse me but we have a progressive tax system in the united states.
Who is poor that you know that pays any federal taxes?
>>
>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>
>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>> Democrats to create it.
>
>No, it isn't.
Head in the sand again, eh?
Who is poor that you know that pays any federal taxes?
>>
>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>
>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>> Democrats to create it.
>
>No, it isn't.
DanielSan
Feb 5, 2012, 9:23:39 PM2/5/12
to
>
>
>>>
>>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>>
>>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>>> Democrats to create it.
>>
>> No, it isn't.
>
> Head in the sand again, eh?
happening, but it isn't Obama and the Democrats doing it.
Just Wondering
Feb 6, 2012, 2:01:20 PM2/6/12
to
On 2/5/2012 7:23 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>
> Most poor pay federal taxes.
>
I know people who make under $25K a year who, because of "income
>
> Most poor pay federal taxes.
>
credits" receive thousands of dollars more in tax REFUNDS than was
withheld. In other words, rather than paying federal taxes, they
RECEIVE money through the tax system.
Logan Sacket
Feb 6, 2012, 6:02:28 PM2/6/12
to
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 18:23:39 -0800, DanielSan
None that I know of. They may pay it, but they get it all back, and
in some cases, more than they paid in.
Under Obama, 1 in 15 people now live in poverty, the highest
percentage ever. I get that.
But, 47 percent of Americans do not pay federal income tax.
>>>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>>>
>>>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>>>> Democrats to create it.
>>>
>>> No, it isn't.
>>
>> Head in the sand again, eh?
>
>Nah, just not seeing things that aren't there. Class warfare is
>happening, but it isn't Obama and the Democrats doing it.
It is pitting one class against anohter. That's class warefare.
in some cases, more than they paid in.
Under Obama, 1 in 15 people now live in poverty, the highest
percentage ever. I get that.
But, 47 percent of Americans do not pay federal income tax.
>>>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>>>
>>>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>>>> Democrats to create it.
>>>
>>> No, it isn't.
>>
>> Head in the sand again, eh?
>
>Nah, just not seeing things that aren't there. Class warfare is
>happening, but it isn't Obama and the Democrats doing it.
Logan Sacket
Feb 6, 2012, 6:03:33 PM2/6/12
to
plainolamerican
Feb 6, 2012, 6:06:29 PM2/6/12
to
On Jan 27, 9:20 am, John Manning <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
> poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
> net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
> First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> problematic."
>
> "He's already in a bad position. George W. Bush, John McCain, and
> The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
> poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
> net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
> First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> problematic."
>
> Bob Dole were all in primary fights and ALL were a net-POSITIVE at
> this time in the election cycle.
>
> "In the past 20 years in the poll, no one who went on to be the
> major party nominee of either party with a net-negative at this
> point - except John Kerry, and we all know how that turned
> out. Clearly, Romney is looking like he's getting his momentum
> back, but he has fundamental problems for the general. The primary
> has done him no good."
>
> Links here:http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/01/27/gop_primary_has_hurt_rom...
>
> INTRADE: Barack Obama to be re-elected President in 2012 -- 54.9%
> Mitt Romney to be elected President in 2012 -- 40.0%
> Newt Gingrich to be elected President in 2012 -- 1.8%
>
> http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/?eventId=84326
GOP Primary Has Hurt Romney
---
what? did they wrinkle his magic underwear?
DanielSan
Feb 6, 2012, 7:33:15 PM2/6/12
to
DanielSan
Feb 6, 2012, 7:54:44 PM2/6/12
to
> Under Obama, 1 in 15 people now live in poverty, the highest
> percentage ever. I get that.
> But, 47 percent of Americans do not pay federal income tax.
>
>
>>>>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>>>>> Democrats to create it.
>>>>
>>>> No, it isn't.
>>>
>>> Head in the sand again, eh?
>>
>> Nah, just not seeing things that aren't there. Class warfare is
>> happening, but it isn't Obama and the Democrats doing it.
>
> It is pitting one class against anohter. That's class warefare.
DanielSan
Feb 6, 2012, 7:55:15 PM2/6/12
to
John Manning
Feb 7, 2012, 8:23:55 AM2/7/12
to
and I’ll show you a moron who watches Fox News."
~~ Helen Philpot
http://margaretandhelen.wordpress.com/2012/02/02/the-race-for-respect/
L.Roberts
Feb 7, 2012, 9:05:42 AM2/7/12
to
On Jan 28, 7:07 pm, "H.E. Eickleberry" <xeicklebo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/28/2012 6:50 PM, panamfl...@hotmail.com rade wrote:
> >>> <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > since Romney's is giving him so many problems in the primaries? I
> > really can't see Southern Baptists& such voting for Obama..but I can
> > sure see them staying home on election day.
>
> What makes you think that the problem is limited to "Southern Baptists?"
>
> All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
> Reformationists, Evangelicals, etc, etc--know that the Mormons are a cult.
>
> Romney has yet to have any success outside of the Northeast, where the
> motley liberal mutts live.
>
> Ike
>
> --http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.htmlhttp://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The Catholic Church is the mother of all other so-called xian
churches, that none of them like her (and that she abhors them)
doesn't mean they aren't chipettes off the old blockette.
The Catholic Church is the mother cult, all the rest her little
bastards. Neither the old whore herself nor any of her little bastards
could survive for long were they to have their own Bibles shoved down
their throats.
L.Roberts
Atheist Bastard #13
> On 1/28/2012 6:50 PM, panamfl...@hotmail.com rade wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 10:24 am, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> In article<BrednQ2jB5YzXb_SnZ2dnUVZ_vOdn...@giganews.com>, John Manning
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 10:24 am, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
> >>>> The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
> >>>> poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
> >>>> net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
> >>>> First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> >>>> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> >>>> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> >>>> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> >>>> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> >>>> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> >>>> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> >>>> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> >>>> problematic."
>
> >>> €€ another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
> >>> evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
> >>> male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
> >>> impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
> >>> in Mormon Heaven.
>
> >> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
> >> go into his religion to defeat him?
>
> > Just a thought..would religion actually become *less* of an issue,
> >>>> The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
> >>>> poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
> >>>> net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>
> >>>> First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>
> >>>> (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the face.
> >>>> That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- very
> >>>> conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feels there's a
> >>>> viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that person;
> >>>> we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>
> >>>> (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford a long
> >>>> primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be very
> >>>> problematic."
>
> >>> €€ another problem for Romney is that there are a good many Southern
> >>> evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Mormon
> >>> male - who's paid up of course - becaome a God (with a capital G) after
> >>> impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yonder
> >>> in Mormon Heaven.
>
> >> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
> >> go into his religion to defeat him?
>
> > since Romney's is giving him so many problems in the primaries? I
> > really can't see Southern Baptists& such voting for Obama..but I can
> > sure see them staying home on election day.
>
> What makes you think that the problem is limited to "Southern Baptists?"
>
> All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
> Reformationists, Evangelicals, etc, etc--know that the Mormons are a cult.
>
> Romney has yet to have any success outside of the Northeast, where the
> motley liberal mutts live.
>
> Ike
>
> --http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.htmlhttp://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The Catholic Church is the mother of all other so-called xian
churches, that none of them like her (and that she abhors them)
doesn't mean they aren't chipettes off the old blockette.
The Catholic Church is the mother cult, all the rest her little
bastards. Neither the old whore herself nor any of her little bastards
could survive for long were they to have their own Bibles shoved down
their throats.
L.Roberts
Atheist Bastard #13
Logan Sacket
Feb 7, 2012, 7:01:47 PM2/7/12
to
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:54:44 -0800, DanielSan
Huh?
Are you another victum of the public school system?
>> Under Obama, 1 in 15 people now live in poverty, the highest
>> percentage ever. I get that.
>> But, 47 percent of Americans do not pay federal income tax.
>
>And since the federal income tax is less than half of all federal taxes....
Isn't that what we have been talking about all this time; Federal
Taxes?
>>>>>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>>>>>> Democrats to create it.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it isn't.
>>>>
>>>> Head in the sand again, eh?
>>>
>>> Nah, just not seeing things that aren't there. Class warfare is
>>> happening, but it isn't Obama and the Democrats doing it.
>>
>> It is pitting one class against anohter. That's class warefare.
>
>That's what the right wing has been doing for 30 years.
Oh, did you ask Jessie Jackson or one of his types?
Are you another victum of the public school system?
>> Under Obama, 1 in 15 people now live in poverty, the highest
>> percentage ever. I get that.
>> But, 47 percent of Americans do not pay federal income tax.
>
>And since the federal income tax is less than half of all federal taxes....
Taxes?
>>>>>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>>>>>> Democrats to create it.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it isn't.
>>>>
>>>> Head in the sand again, eh?
>>>
>>> Nah, just not seeing things that aren't there. Class warfare is
>>> happening, but it isn't Obama and the Democrats doing it.
>>
>> It is pitting one class against anohter. That's class warefare.
>
>That's what the right wing has been doing for 30 years.
Logan Sacket
Feb 7, 2012, 7:03:03 PM2/7/12
to
laughing?
Logan Sacket
Feb 7, 2012, 7:05:35 PM2/7/12
to
in taxes just to keep the government from going after his money and
I'll show you a poor soul who was once rich.
DanielSan
Feb 7, 2012, 7:28:05 PM2/7/12
to
still owe money ($1).
>>> Under Obama, 1 in 15 people now live in poverty, the highest
>>> percentage ever. I get that.
>>> But, 47 percent of Americans do not pay federal income tax.
>>
>> And since the federal income tax is less than half of all federal taxes....
>
> Isn't that what we have been talking about all this time; Federal
> Taxes?
You're being very confusing. Federal income tax is a subset of all
federal taxes.
>
>>>>>>>> By the way, class warfare is a Marxist term, you Marxist.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't care who's term it is, it is being used by Obama and the
>>>>>>> Democrats to create it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it isn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Head in the sand again, eh?
>>>>
>>>> Nah, just not seeing things that aren't there. Class warfare is
>>>> happening, but it isn't Obama and the Democrats doing it.
>>>
>>> It is pitting one class against anohter. That's class warefare.
>>
>> That's what the right wing has been doing for 30 years.
>
> Oh, did you ask Jessie Jackson or one of his types?
Just Wondering
Feb 8, 2012, 5:39:29 AM2/8/12
to
seriously believes his nonsense.
DanielSan
Feb 8, 2012, 5:51:50 AM2/8/12
to
income spectrum do not pay a single dime if they get all that money back
in the form of credits and such?
Let's see if we can investigate that thinking, just a bit.
I pay $10 in.
I get $15 back.
You assert that I didn't pay anything in because I got my $10 back and
an additional $5, right? That is what you're asserting, isn't it?
So. I go to a bank and get a loan for $20,000. They give me $20,000.
I pay a certain amount each month and, at the end when I finally pay off
the loan, I have paid $22,500 back to them. They got all their money
back plus some.
Does that mean that they never extended a loan to me? Does that mean
that I never got any money from them?
Message has been deleted
Don Kresch
Feb 8, 2012, 8:53:04 AM2/8/12
to
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 02:51:50 -0800, DanielSan
<daniel...@gmail.com> scrawled in blood:
You'd be a net tax receiver.
>
>So. I go to a bank and get a loan for $20,000. They give me $20,000.
>I pay a certain amount each month and, at the end when I finally pay off
>the loan, I have paid $22,500 back to them. They got all their money
>back plus some.
How's that analogy applicable?
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in Slacklessness trying not to.
<daniel...@gmail.com> scrawled in blood:
>
>So. I go to a bank and get a loan for $20,000. They give me $20,000.
>I pay a certain amount each month and, at the end when I finally pay off
>the loan, I have paid $22,500 back to them. They got all their money
>back plus some.
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in Slacklessness trying not to.
• R. L. Measures.
Feb 8, 2012, 9:48:48 AM2/8/12
to
In article
<6507de19-bc5c-411d...@gi10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
"L.Roberts" <ozzca...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 28, 7:07=A0pm, "H.E. Eickleberry" <xeicklebo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 1/28/2012 6:50 PM, panamfl...@hotmail.com rade wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jan 28, 10:24 am, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (=95 R. L. Measures=
>.)
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >>> In article<BrednQ2jB5YzXb_SnZ2dnUVZ_vOdn...@giganews.com>, John Manni=
>ng
>> >>> <jrobe...@terra.com.br> =A0wrote:
>ace.
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- =
>very
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feel=
>s there's a
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that=
> person;
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>>
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford=
> a long
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be v=
>ery
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 problematic."
>>
>> >>> =80=80 =A0another problem for Romney is that there are a good many =
>=A0Southern
>> >>> evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Morm=
>on
>> >>> male - who's paid up of course =A0- =A0becaome a God (with a capital =
>G) after
>> >>> impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yon=
>der
>> >>> in =A0Mormon Heaven.
• Indeed. All Christian churches except possibly LdSism have a direct
connection to doctrines the Church of Rome invented in the 4th Century.
These doctrines converted the anti-sacrifice teaching of the itinerant
rabbi who supposedly founded Christianity into a sacrifice-based religion
that is based on pagan ritual-cannibalism / transubstantiation,
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
<6507de19-bc5c-411d...@gi10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
"L.Roberts" <ozzca...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 28, 7:07=A0pm, "H.E. Eickleberry" <xeicklebo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 1/28/2012 6:50 PM, panamfl...@hotmail.com rade wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jan 28, 10:24 am, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
>.)
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >>> In article<BrednQ2jB5YzXb_SnZ2dnUVZ_vOdn...@giganews.com>, John Manni=
>ng
>> >>> <jrobe...@terra.com.br> =A0wrote:
>>
>> >>>> The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
>> >>>> poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>> >>>> net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>>
>> >>>> First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>>
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right in the f=
>> >>>> The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal
>> >>>> poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>> >>>> net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>>
>> >>>> First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>>
>ace.
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 That hasn't changed. Any time base conservatives -- =
>very
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southerners, feel=
>s there's a
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 viable alternative to Romney, they rally around that=
> person;
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 we've seen this phenomenon for months. And...
>>
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot afford=
> a long
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 primary. If this thing goes to June, that would be v=
>ery
>> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 problematic."
>>
>> >>> =80=80 =A0another problem for Romney is that there are a good many =
>=A0Southern
>> >>> evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every Morm=
>on
>> >>> male - who's paid up of course =A0- =A0becaome a God (with a capital =
>G) after
>> >>> impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up yon=
>der
>> >>> in =A0Mormon Heaven.
>>
>> >> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
>> >> go into his religion to defeat him?
>>
>> > Just a thought..would religion actually become *less* of an issue,
>> > since Romney's is giving him so many problems in the primaries? I
>> > really can't see Southern Baptists& =A0such voting for Obama..but I can
>> >> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Obama
>> >> go into his religion to defeat him?
>>
>> > Just a thought..would religion actually become *less* of an issue,
>> > since Romney's is giving him so many problems in the primaries? I
>> > sure see them staying home on election day.
>>
>> What makes you think that the problem is limited to "Southern Baptists?"
>>
>> All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
>> Reformationists, Evangelicals, etc, etc--know that the Mormons are a cult=
>>
>> What makes you think that the problem is limited to "Southern Baptists?"
>>
>> All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
>.
>>
>> Romney has yet to have any success outside of the Northeast, where the
>> motley liberal mutts live.
>>
>> Ike
>>
>> --http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.htmlhttp://www.facebook.com/home.ph=
>>
>> Romney has yet to have any success outside of the Northeast, where the
>> motley liberal mutts live.
>>
>> Ike
>>
>p#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657...- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>The Catholic Church is the mother of all other so-called xian
>churches, that none of them like her (and that she abhors them)
>doesn't mean they aren't chipettes off the old blockette.
>
>The Catholic Church is the mother cult, all the rest her little
>bastards. ...
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>The Catholic Church is the mother of all other so-called xian
>churches, that none of them like her (and that she abhors them)
>doesn't mean they aren't chipettes off the old blockette.
>
>The Catholic Church is the mother cult, all the rest her little
• Indeed. All Christian churches except possibly LdSism have a direct
connection to doctrines the Church of Rome invented in the 4th Century.
These doctrines converted the anti-sacrifice teaching of the itinerant
rabbi who supposedly founded Christianity into a sacrifice-based religion
that is based on pagan ritual-cannibalism / transubstantiation,
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
DanielSan
Feb 8, 2012, 12:40:07 PM2/8/12
to
Just Wondering
Feb 8, 2012, 5:15:36 PM2/8/12
to
$10 in and get $15 back. They pay ZERO in and get $15 back.
DanielSan
Feb 8, 2012, 5:24:53 PM2/8/12
to
Just Wondering
Feb 8, 2012, 5:44:13 PM2/8/12
to
Don Kresch
Feb 8, 2012, 6:58:39 PM2/8/12
to
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:40:07 -0800, DanielSan
Thought about it. How's that analogy applicable?
DanielSan
Feb 8, 2012, 7:45:08 PM2/8/12
to
DanielSan
Feb 8, 2012, 7:55:36 PM2/8/12
to
It'll help:
Don Kresch
Feb 8, 2012, 8:09:30 PM2/8/12
to
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:55:36 -0800, DanielSan
DanielSan
Feb 8, 2012, 8:22:55 PM2/8/12
to
Don Kresch
Feb 8, 2012, 9:12:13 PM2/8/12
to
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:22:55 -0800, DanielSan
No, you haven't. Lying won't help you.
DanielSan
Feb 8, 2012, 9:15:13 PM2/8/12
to
"Does that mean that they never extended a loan to me? Does that mean
that I never got any money from them?"
Don Kresch
Feb 8, 2012, 10:01:29 PM2/8/12
to
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:15:13 -0800, DanielSan
No, you haven't.
btw: what you keep putting back doesn't show that the analogy
is applicable, so you clearly haven't told me how it's applicable.
btw: what you keep putting back doesn't show that the analogy
is applicable, so you clearly haven't told me how it's applicable.
DanielSan
Feb 8, 2012, 10:04:42 PM2/8/12
to
doesn't show how that analogy is applicable when it's clear that you
just don't understand it.
Keep snipping, Don. It shows how cowardly you are.
SkyEyes
Feb 9, 2012, 12:38:59 AM2/9/12
to
> <6507de19-bc5c-411d-b502-40e30be85...@gi10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Actually, R.L., I'm not sure that's true. I believe the Copts of
Egypt and Ethiopian Christians are totally separate from the RCC and
its teachings, and I'm not sure that the Greek Orthodox would fall
under the RCC mantle, either.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
Egypt and Ethiopian Christians are totally separate from the RCC and
its teachings, and I'm not sure that the Greek Orthodox would fall
under the RCC mantle, either.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
Just Wondering
Feb 9, 2012, 4:54:18 AM2/9/12
to
system. They have nothing to do with any "federal taxes" except the
income tax. In fact, they don't even exist outside of the federal income
tax system. Just like deductions and exemptions, they are part of the
formula used to calculate a person's income tax liability. Their sole
purpose is to calculate how much a taxpayer owes in income taxes.
These people pay nothing whatsoever into the income tax system and yet
get an income tax refund.
DanielSan
Feb 9, 2012, 4:57:53 AM2/9/12
to
pay absolutely zero? Where is your evidence of this?
Just Wondering
Feb 9, 2012, 5:23:24 AM2/9/12
to
way for a large portion of people in the lower income brackets.
> Where is your evidence of this?
better than to even ask. I am personally acquainted with such people.
This includes a someone personally known to me who received an income
tax refund this year of over $5,000 on a gross income of under $18,000.
This person did NOT, as you put it, "pay into the system."
For undeniable proof, all you have to do is get an IRS 1040 form and
instruction booklet, and fill out the form according to IRS rules.
You'll quickly discover for yourself that, say, a single parent of five
children making $16,000 a year qualifies under the current tax code for
a nice income tax refund even if he/she had no income tax withheld and
never owed a cent in income taxes. The net effect is a redistribution
of money earned by people in the middle income brackets to people in the
lower income brackets.
DanielSan
Feb 9, 2012, 5:36:51 AM2/9/12
to
did pay into the system, even if they got a tax refund at the end of the
fiscal year.
> For undeniable proof, all you have to do is get an IRS 1040 form and
> instruction booklet, and fill out the form according to IRS rules.
> You'll quickly discover for yourself that, say, a single parent of five
> children making $16,000 a year qualifies under the current tax code for
> a nice income tax refund even if he/she had no income tax withheld and
> never owed a cent in income taxes. The net effect is a redistribution of
> money earned by people in the middle income brackets to people in the
> lower income brackets.
income brackets" get that $5,000 check?
Just Wondering
Feb 9, 2012, 6:06:40 AM2/9/12
to
>> For undeniable proof, all you have to do is get an IRS 1040 form and
>> instruction booklet, and fill out the form according to IRS rules.
>> You'll quickly discover for yourself that, say, a single parent of five
>> children making $16,000 a year qualifies under the current tax code for
>> a nice income tax refund even if he/she had no income tax withheld and
>> never owed a cent in income taxes. The net effect is a redistribution of
>> money earned by people in the middle income brackets to people in the
>> lower income brackets.
>
> And now what do you think will happen when those "people in the lower
> income brackets" get that $5,000 check?
Multiply it by a million, and the federal deficit grows by $5 billion.
Don Kresch
Feb 9, 2012, 8:53:04 AM2/9/12
to
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:04:42 -0800, DanielSan
Keep lying, Danny; it shows how cowardly you are.
DanielSan
Feb 9, 2012, 2:54:13 PM2/9/12
to
not pay any federal income tax? Where is you evidence of this?
>
>>> For undeniable proof, all you have to do is get an IRS 1040 form and
>>> instruction booklet, and fill out the form according to IRS rules.
>>> You'll quickly discover for yourself that, say, a single parent of five
>>> children making $16,000 a year qualifies under the current tax code for
>>> a nice income tax refund even if he/she had no income tax withheld and
>>> never owed a cent in income taxes. The net effect is a redistribution of
>>> money earned by people in the middle income brackets to people in the
>>> lower income brackets.
>>
>> And now what do you think will happen when those "people in the lower
>> income brackets" get that $5,000 check?
>
> Then the federal government winds up owing the Chinese another $5,000.
> Multiply it by a million, and the federal deficit grows by $5 billion.
DanielSan
Feb 9, 2012, 3:28:58 PM2/9/12
to
said shows that you are far out of your league.
DanielSan
Feb 9, 2012, 4:07:15 PM2/9/12
to
> qualifies under the current tax code for
> a nice income tax refund even if he/she had no income tax withheld and
> never owed a cent in income taxes. The net effect is a redistribution of
> money earned by people in the middle income brackets to people in the
> lower income brackets.
Don Kresch
Feb 9, 2012, 6:22:23 PM2/9/12
to
On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:28:58 -0800, DanielSan
No, it does not. Your continual desire to lie and say that it
does shows how cowardly you are.
does shows how cowardly you are.
DanielSan
Feb 9, 2012, 6:24:45 PM2/9/12
to
Don Kresch
Feb 9, 2012, 7:38:46 PM2/9/12
to
On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:24:45 -0800, DanielSan
>(pouting snipped)
Poor cowardly Danny.
Poor cowardly Danny.
Just Wondering
Feb 9, 2012, 7:52:38 PM2/9/12
to
>> qualifies under the current tax code for
>> a nice income tax refund even if he/she had no income tax withheld and
>> never owed a cent in income taxes. The net effect is a redistribution of
>> money earned by people in the middle income brackets to people in the
>> lower income brackets.
>
> We're not talking about refunds. It's about federal income taxes.
excusable. But if you have, how did you get to be so stupid as think
income tax refunds have nothing to do with income taxes?
DanielSan
Feb 9, 2012, 8:37:39 PM2/9/12
to
On 2/9/2012 4:52 PM, Just Wondering wrote:
> On 2/9/2012 2:07 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>> On 2/9/2012 2:23 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>> On 2/9/2012 2:57 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>> On 2/9/2012 1:54 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>> On 2/8/2012 5:45 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Are you asserting that people on the lower end of the income spectrum
>>>> pay absolutely zero?
>>>
>>> I can't speak for each and every person, but it absolutely works that
>>> way for a large portion of people in the lower income brackets.
>>>
>>>> Where is your evidence of this?
>>>
>>> You must not know any poor people with families, or you would know
>>> better than to even ask. I am personally acquainted with such people.
>>> This includes a someone personally known to me who received an income
>>> tax refund this year of over $5,000 on a gross income of under $18,000.
>>> This person did NOT, as you put it, "pay into the system."
>>>
>>> For undeniable proof, all you have to do is get an IRS 1040 form and
>>> instruction booklet, and fill out the form according to IRS rules.
>>> You'll quickly discover for yourself that, say, a single parent of five
>>> children making $16,000 a year
>>
>> Now you're down to $16,000/year?
>
> Now you've definitely stooped to trolling.
Just trying to keep you in line. ;)
> On 2/9/2012 2:07 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>> On 2/9/2012 2:23 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>> On 2/9/2012 2:57 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>> On 2/9/2012 1:54 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>> On 2/8/2012 5:45 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Are you asserting that people on the lower end of the income spectrum
>>>> pay absolutely zero?
>>>
>>> I can't speak for each and every person, but it absolutely works that
>>> way for a large portion of people in the lower income brackets.
>>>
>>>> Where is your evidence of this?
>>>
>>> You must not know any poor people with families, or you would know
>>> better than to even ask. I am personally acquainted with such people.
>>> This includes a someone personally known to me who received an income
>>> tax refund this year of over $5,000 on a gross income of under $18,000.
>>> This person did NOT, as you put it, "pay into the system."
>>>
>>> For undeniable proof, all you have to do is get an IRS 1040 form and
>>> instruction booklet, and fill out the form according to IRS rules.
>>> You'll quickly discover for yourself that, say, a single parent of five
>>> children making $16,000 a year
>>
>> Now you're down to $16,000/year?
>
> Now you've definitely stooped to trolling.
>
>>> qualifies under the current tax code for
>>> a nice income tax refund even if he/she had no income tax withheld and
>>> never owed a cent in income taxes. The net effect is a redistribution of
>>> money earned by people in the middle income brackets to people in the
>>> lower income brackets.
>>
>> We're not talking about refunds. It's about federal income taxes.
>
> Have you ever seen a 1040 form?
> If not, maybe your ignorance is
> excusable. But if you have, how did you get to be so stupid as think
> income tax refunds have nothing to do with income taxes?
through 77. Shouldn't be too hard to point it out.
• R. L. Measures.
Feb 10, 2012, 8:22:53 AM2/10/12
to
In article
<0f102831-d6f8-44ba...@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Feb 8, 7:48=A0am, r...@somis.org (=95 R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>> In article
>> <6507de19-bc5c-411d-b502-40e30be85...@gi10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "L.Roberts" <ozzcat2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >On Jan 28, 7:07=3DA0pm, "H.E. Eickleberry" <xeicklebo...@gmail.com> wrot=
>sures=3D
>> >.)
>> >> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>> In article<BrednQ2jB5YzXb_SnZ2dnUVZ_vOdn...@giganews.com>, John Ma=
>nni=3D
>> >ng
>> >> >>> <jrobe...@terra.com.br> =3DA0wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>> The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journa=
>n the f=3D
>> >ace.
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 That hasn't changed. Any time base conser=
>vatives -- =3D
>> >very
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southe=
>rners, feel=3D
>> >s there's a
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 viable alternative to Romney, they rally =
>around that=3D
>> > person;
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 we've seen this phenomenon for months. An=
>d...
>>
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot=
> afford=3D
>> > a long
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 primary. If this thing goes to June, that=
> would be v=3D
>> >ery
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 problematic."
>>
>> >> >>> =3D80=3D80 =3DA0another problem for Romney is that there are a goo=
>d many =3D
>> >=3DA0Southern
>> >> >>> evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every M=
>orm=3D
>> >on
>> >> >>> male - who's paid up of course =3DA0- =3DA0becaome a God (with a c=
>apital =3D
>> >G) after
>> >> >>> impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up =
>yon=3D
>> >der
>> >> >>> in =3DA0Mormon Heaven.
>>
>> >> >> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Ob=
>ult=3D
>.ph=3D
since 1054CE -- but both still teach that Jesus was a perfect sacrifice.
>Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
>BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
>EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
>skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
>skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
<0f102831-d6f8-44ba...@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Feb 8, 7:48=A0am, r...@somis.org (=95 R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>> In article
>> <6507de19-bc5c-411d-b502-40e30be85...@gi10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "L.Roberts" <ozzcat2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>e:
>> >> On 1/28/2012 6:50 PM, panamfl...@hotmail.com rade wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Jan 28, 10:24 am, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
>> >> >> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:29:36 -0800, r...@somis.org (=3D95 R. L. Mea=
>> >> On 1/28/2012 6:50 PM, panamfl...@hotmail.com rade wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Jan 28, 10:24 am, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
>sures=3D
>> >.)
>> >> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>> In article<BrednQ2jB5YzXb_SnZ2dnUVZ_vOdn...@giganews.com>, John Ma=
>nni=3D
>> >ng
>> >> >>> <jrobe...@terra.com.br> =3DA0wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>> The most interesting finding in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journa=
>l
>> >> >>>> poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>> >> >>>> net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>>
>> >> >>>> First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>>
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 (1) he has a conservative problem staring him right i=
>> >> >>>> poll is that the Republican presidential candidates are in
>> >> >>>> net-negative territory when it comes to favorability.
>>
>> >> >>>> First Read: "Romney was exposed in two ways in the poll -
>>
>n the f=3D
>> >ace.
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 That hasn't changed. Any time base conser=
>vatives -- =3D
>> >very
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 conservative voters, Tea Partiers, Southe=
>rners, feel=3D
>> >s there's a
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 viable alternative to Romney, they rally =
>around that=3D
>> > person;
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 we've seen this phenomenon for months. An=
>d...
>>
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 (2) "The primary has done damage to Romney. He cannot=
> afford=3D
>> > a long
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 primary. If this thing goes to June, that=
> would be v=3D
>> >ery
>> >> >>>> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 problematic."
>>
>> >> >>> =3D80=3D80 =3DA0another problem for Romney is that there are a goo=
>d many =3D
>> >=3DA0Southern
>> >> >>> evangelicals who realize that Mormon doctrine teaches that every M=
>orm=3D
>> >on
>> >> >>> male - who's paid up of course =3DA0- =3DA0becaome a God (with a c=
>apital =3D
>> >G) after
>> >> >>> impregnating his Celestial wives a certain number of times way up =
>yon=3D
>> >der
>> >> >>> in =3DA0Mormon Heaven.
>>
>> >> >> I've been wondering, if Romney gets the nomination, how far will Ob=
>ama
>> >> >> go into his religion to defeat him?
>>
>> >> > Just a thought..would religion actually become *less* of an issue,
>> >> > since Romney's is giving him so many problems in the primaries? I
>> >> > really can't see Southern Baptists& =3DA0such voting for Obama..but =
>> >> >> go into his religion to defeat him?
>>
>> >> > Just a thought..would religion actually become *less* of an issue,
>> >> > since Romney's is giving him so many problems in the primaries? I
>I can
>> >> > sure see them staying home on election day.
>>
>> >> What makes you think that the problem is limited to "Southern Baptists=
>> >> > sure see them staying home on election day.
>>
>?"
>>
>> >> All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
>> >> Reformationists, Evangelicals, etc, etc--know that the Mormons are a c=
>>
>> >> All the historical churches in the world--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the
>ult=3D
>> >.
>>
>> >> Romney has yet to have any success outside of the Northeast, where the
>> >> motley liberal mutts live.
>>
>> >> Ike
>>
>> >> --http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.htmlhttp://www.facebook.com/home=
>>
>> >> Romney has yet to have any success outside of the Northeast, where the
>> >> motley liberal mutts live.
>>
>> >> Ike
>>
>.ph=3D
>> >p#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657...- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> >The Catholic Church is the mother of all other so-called xian
>> >churches, that none of them like her (and that she abhors them)
>> >doesn't mean they aren't chipettes off the old blockette.
>>
>> >The Catholic Church is the mother cult, all the rest her little
>> >bastards. ...
>>
>> =95 =A0Indeed. =A0All Christian churches except possibly LdSism have a di=
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> >The Catholic Church is the mother of all other so-called xian
>> >churches, that none of them like her (and that she abhors them)
>> >doesn't mean they aren't chipettes off the old blockette.
>>
>> >The Catholic Church is the mother cult, all the rest her little
>> >bastards. ...
>>
>rect
>> connection to doctrines the Church of Rome invented in the 4th Century.
>> These doctrines converted the anti-sacrifice teaching of the itinerant
>> rabbi who supposedly founded Christianity into a sacrifice-based religion
>> that is based on pagan ritual-cannibalism / transubstantiation,
>
>Actually, R.L., I'm not sure that's true. I believe the Copts of
>Egypt and Ethiopian Christians are totally separate from the RCC and
>its teachings, and I'm not sure that the Greek Orthodox would fall
>under the RCC mantle, either.
>
*** The Copts have been separate since 551CE and the Orthodox separate
>> connection to doctrines the Church of Rome invented in the 4th Century.
>> These doctrines converted the anti-sacrifice teaching of the itinerant
>> rabbi who supposedly founded Christianity into a sacrifice-based religion
>> that is based on pagan ritual-cannibalism / transubstantiation,
>
>Actually, R.L., I'm not sure that's true. I believe the Copts of
>Egypt and Ethiopian Christians are totally separate from the RCC and
>its teachings, and I'm not sure that the Greek Orthodox would fall
>under the RCC mantle, either.
>
since 1054CE -- but both still teach that Jesus was a perfect sacrifice.
>Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
>BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
>EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
>skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
>skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
Just Wondering
Feb 10, 2012, 1:04:02 PM2/10/12
to
do on your own.
Lines 60 (taxes owed), 71 (total tax payments made), 72 (amount
overpaid), and 73a (tax refund). Lines 61, 62, 68, and 69 report tax
payments the taxpayer actually made. Lines 63-67 and 70 are for
"credits" that the tax code includes as tax "payments" even though the
taxpayer actually did not pay any such tax payments. For lower tier
taxpayers with children, line 60 can be zero, lines 61, 62, 68 and 69
can be zero, and lines 64a and 65 can be substantial. This results in a
sizable income tax refund even though no taxes were owed and no payments
were made.
DanielSan
Feb 10, 2012, 1:53:04 PM2/10/12
to
> Lines 60 (taxes owed),
Line 60 is actually other taxes.
> 71 (total tax payments made),
> 72 (amount
> overpaid),
Line 72 is actually total payments. It seems you're a line off.
> and 73a (tax refund).
73/74a.
> Lines 61, 62, 68, and 69 report tax
> payments the taxpayer actually made. Lines 63-67 and 70 are for
> "credits" that the tax code includes as tax "payments" even though the
> taxpayer actually did not pay any such tax payments. For lower tier
> taxpayers with children, line 60 can be zero, lines 61, 62, 68 and 69
> can be zero, and lines 64a and 65 can be substantial. This results in a
> sizable income tax refund even though no taxes were owed and no payments
> were made.
Just Wondering
Feb 10, 2012, 6:06:00 PM2/10/12
to
I'm done feeding you, troll. 'Bye.
0 new messages