the Obama years
JTEM
My predictions for the Obama years....
School vultures...errr... vouchers. The Reich has
wanted these for decades.
Healthcare reform. Even an empty suit couldn't fail
to pass SOMETHING regarding healthcare reform.
A stronger dollar. A little deficit reduction will easily
take care of that, as would interest rates HIGHER
than inflation.
The last time I was in a local bank -- like yesterday --
they were advertising a 2.4% rate on CDs... when
inflation is running over 3%.
So if you buy dollars you're guaranteed to lose money
every month....
The sky-high food prices hit here.
They're already way up. When Bush first stole office,
for example, milk was still about $2 a gallon... just
under for, say, 1%.
It's doubled in price.
Oh, I know, prices change from region to region, but
that's what we've seen here. Milk prices have doubled
since Bush stole office.
Those food riots in places like Haiti? They're not really
about shortages, they're about prices.
Trouble in Africa, most likely some kinf of invented
crisis.
I'm NOT saying that Obama will order up a crisis, and
then try to take advantage of it. More than likely he'll
simply wait for something, and then order up the media
to play it like it was a slow news day and the problem
in Africa is a fat intern.
Douglas Berry
carved the following into the hard stone of alt.atheism
>My predictions for the Obama years....
>
>School vultures...errr... vouchers. The Reich has
>wanted these for decades.
And he's against them
http://pewforum.org/religion08/compare.php?Issue=Education
In a February 2008 interview Obama said that he supports charter
schools "as a way to foster competition in the public school system."
However, he said, he remains skeptical of private school voucher
programs because they could lead to "further stratification of the
schools … without any net improvement." Obama's campaign later
clarified his stance, issuing a release saying that "Senator Obama has
always been a critic of vouchers. … Throughout his career, he has
voted against voucher proposals and voiced concern for siphoning off
resources from our public schools." Obama personally believes in both
evolution and the biblical story of creation and says, "I don't think
science generally is incompatible with Christian faith."
>A stronger dollar. A little deficit reduction will easily
>take care of that, as would interest rates HIGHER
>than inflation.
>
>The last time I was in a local bank -- like yesterday --
>they were advertising a 2.4% rate on CDs... when
>inflation is running over 3%.
>
>So if you buy dollars you're guaranteed to lose money
>every month....
You've wandered back into the Bush years.
>Those food riots in places like Haiti? They're not really
>about shortages, they're about prices.
Actually, they're about shortages. Haiti is the poorest nation in the
Western Hemisphere, and cannot afford to import the food it needs. The
shelves are empty in the stores, and the government is failing to
distribute aid in a timely manner.
>Trouble in Africa, most likely some kinf of invented
>crisis.
So, Darfur, Zimbabwe, the continental AIDS crisis, Namibia, etc aren't
crises already?
>I'm NOT saying that Obama will order up a crisis, and
>then try to take advantage of it. More than likely he'll
>simply wait for something, and then order up the media
>to play it like it was a slow news day and the problem
>in Africa is a fat intern.
Africa has enough problems that need addressing right now, thank you.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a
stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as
good as dead: his eyes are closed." - Albert Einstein
V
I feel sorry for Obama or who ever gets in.
And if the roof doesn't fall on him or her, the next pres wills surely
get hit with it.
And what do we do when things go bad? They blame it all on the pres.
Like he or she can pull crude and NG out their ass?
Sure oil goes up and down with the BS they hand us. Some of the BS is
just greedy excuses. Other times the BS is not BS and based in truth.
But, no matter how we cut it, fossil fuels are a non renewable
resource and we are using 31 billion barrels a year of crude
worldwide...and usage will only gets worse as time goes
by....'Chindia' is just starting out!
Maybe I should not feel too bad for politicians. After all they are
ego based power hungry individuals. I imagine they all know about peak
oil. They probably view it as a game of musical chairs. Give me power
for a day and I only hope the roof falls in on the next guy and the
music wont stop on my presidency.
Nothing they can do anyway. To do anything substantive would cause a
financial and population backlash of unimaginable proportions.
And what we could do, even with drastic measures, would not cure the
problem, but only slow things down. WE CAN'T CHANGE....IT IS ALL WE
KNOW!
We have the tiger by the tail, we CAN'T let go and all hell is going
to break loose soon
When the subject turns to sustainability...lets be honest, we only pay
it lip service.
We talk of living in a sustainable world, yet our actions betray our
true feelings. All we have to do is to look at the stock market to
see what happens when growth declines even a little.
Even if a company yields stable earning, but does not grow its
earnings it is looked down upon. Stability and balance is part of a
sustainable footprint, yet we shun such balance.
A good book that discusses concepts of sustainability is: 'Peak
Everything' by Richard Heinberg
America is built on debt and spending.
Without compulsive spending and conspicuous consumption we would fail
as a country.
70% of our 'economic heath,' better termed as 'economic sickness' is
based on consumer spending. When the consumer can't compulsively spend
any longer our economy collapses...we are not a healthy country.
Even if we did find out how to burn water for energy, petrochemicals
make up a large portion of crude's importance to mankind. Roughly 9%
of every barrel of crude goes to petrochemical use. If we stopped
burning crude this instant, we would still suck the wells dry, albeit
not as quickly, just from petrochemical use.
Some work has been done with making plastics from corn, but it can't
touch the variety of plastic and rubber products that crude produces.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/plastic.html
So even if we all stop driving we will just be postponing the
inevitable that our artificial way of living is going to change in the
not so distant future.
A partial list of products made from crude:
Solvents Diesel Motor Oil Bearing Grease
Ink Floor Wax Ballpoint Pens Football Cleats
Upholstery Sweaters Boats Insecticides
Bicycle Tires Sports Car Bodies Nail Polish Fishing lures
Dresses Tires Golf Bags Perfumes
Cassettes Dishwasher Tool Boxes Shoe Polish
Motorcycle Helmet Caulking Petroleum Jelly Transparent Tape
CD Player Faucet Washers Antiseptics Clothesline
Curtains Food Preservatives Basketballs Soap
Vitamin Capsules Antihistamines Purses Shoes
Dashboards Cortisone Deodorant Footballs
Putty Dyes Panty Hose Refrigerant
Percolators Life Jackets Rubbing Alcohol Linings
Skis TV Cabinets Shag Rugs Electrician's Tape
Tool Racks Car Battery Cases Epoxy Paint
Mops Slacks Insect Repellent Oil Filters
Umbrellas Yarn Fertilizers Hair Coloring
Roofing Toilet Seats Fishing Rods Lipstick
Denture Adhesive Linoleum Ice Cube Trays Synthetic Rubber
Speakers Plastic Wood Electric Blankets Glycerin
Tennis Rackets Rubber Cement Fishing Boots Dice
Nylon Rope Candles Trash Bags House Paint
Water Pipes Hand Lotion Roller Skates Surf Boards
Shampoo Wheels Paint Rollers Shower Curtains
Guitar Strings Luggage Aspirin Safety Glasses
Antifreeze Football Helmets Awnings Eyeglasses
Clothes Toothbrushes Ice Chests Footballs
Combs CD's Paint Brushes Detergents
Vaporizers Balloons Sun Glasses Tents
Heart Valves Crayons Parachutes Telephones
Enamel Pillows Dishes Cameras
Anesthetics Artificial Turf Artificial limbs Bandages
Dentures Model Cars Folding Doors Hair Curlers
Cold cream Movie film Soft Contact lenses Drinking Cups
Fan Belts Car Enamel Shaving Cream Ammonia
Refrigerators Golf Balls Toothpaste Gasoline
From this list we can see that we are still massively depend on crude
for our non sustainable lifestyle.
There is no replacement for crude...crude is in the details of our
life.
We got other problems right in line with peak oil. NG and crude are
right in bed with each other.
Have you ever thought about how much of our life is dependent on
natural gas for cooking, heating and hot water?
We will run out of natural gas, just as we deplete our crude supplies
in the near future.
Natural gas is a raw material in many of our products we depend on.
Almost all the helium we produce comes from natural gas.
Propane, synthetic fertilizers, ammonia?
They are totally dependent on natural gas.
Our population boom was fueled by synthetic fertilizers made from
natural; gas. Once the gas dries up so does the fertilizer and a
shortage of fertilizer equals a shortage of food.
Natural; gas is also used as an energy source to produce steel, glass,
paper, clothing, brick, electricity
http://www.amazon.com/High-Noon-Natural-Gas-Energy/dp/1931498539
Yes, lots of things in store for our future presidents.
JTEM
> JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
> >My predictions for the Obama years....
>
> >School vultures...errr... vouchers. The Reich has
> >wanted these for decades.
>
> And he's against them
He also talks about "reforming" NAFTA, even though his
campaign was in secret contact with the Canadians,
telling them that it was nothing more than election year
posturing.
And he lied about Rezko and the Rev. Wright, too.
Did you know that Obama FAVORS giving states the
power to keep out natural gas terminals if they don't
want one? That what he told Oregon's voters anyway.
Only problem is, Obama voted FOR Bush's bill which
stripped the states of their voice in the siting process.
So he's on record lying about his finances... lying about
the people around him... lying about his policy positions...
Please, you're wasting your time. Someone has to
already be fooled by Obama in order to be fooled by
you now.
Go preach to the converted.
JTEM
P.S.
Douglas Berry <penguin_...@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
> >The last time I was in a local bank -- like yesterday --
> >they were advertising a 2.4% rate on CDs... when
> >inflation is running over 3%.
>
> >So if you buy dollars you're guaranteed to lose money
> >every month....
>
> You've wandered back into the Bush years.
What part of "like yesterday" did you have trouble understanding?
Damn, there should be an I.Q. test for voters...
Douglas Berry
carved the following into the hard stone of alt.atheism
>
>> JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
>
>> >My predictions for the Obama years....
>>
>> >School vultures...errr... vouchers. The Reich has
>> >wanted these for decades.
>>
>> And he's against them
>
Stop.
Why did you remove the link and the quote? Afraid of the facts? Afraid
of being shown, once again, that you are a liar?
JTEM
> Why did you remove the link and the quote?
I explained why. I don't accept the word of a documented liar
as "Evidence." You, on the other hand, mistaken the word of
a documented liar as fact.
Here. I'll quote you doing exactly that:
> Afraid of the facts?
The quote amounts to the words of a documented liar. The link
was the URL to the page where you cut & pasted the words of
a documented liar from.
What "facts" are you pretending to have introduced here?
Why are you so emotionally disturbed that you can't see any of
this yourself?
Obama has already cost you more than any normal, decent
human being should ever be willing to pay. Get out NOW, before
it costs you even more.
DanielSan
One link for you, JTEM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_the_messenger
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I was against gay marriage until I realized *
* that I didn't have to have one." *
* --James Carville *
****************************************************
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Bill Baker
news:<8ed32911-523b-4ddd...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>...
> My predictions for the Obama years....
And we all know how your predictions go.
You predicted a win for the Republicans in 2006.
You said that Bush had made Osama bin Laden "disappear."
--
Bushism 2-21:
"I don't think we need to be subliminable about the differences between our
views on prescription drugs."
--Orlando, Florida; September 12, 2000
DanielSan
> On Saturday 17 May 2008 05:31 pm JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<8ed32911-523b-4ddd...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>...
>
>> My predictions for the Obama years....
>
> And we all know how your predictions go.
>
> You predicted a win for the Republicans in 2006.
>
> You said that Bush had made Osama bin Laden "disappear."
>
I'm wondering what'll happen if Barack Obama wins the presidency. What
do you think JTEM'll do in January?
JTEM
> One link for you, JTEM:
Really, why? What significants are you mistakenly
attributing to it?
Obama has lied about his policy stance -- a fact I know
all too well, seeing how I've established it with cites --
so there's no way a normal person can accept Obama's
word on his policy position.
JTEM
> > My predictions for the Obama years....
>
> And we all know how your predictions go.
Really? Do tell...
> You predicted a win for the Republicans in 2006.
Nope.
> You said that Bush had made Osama bin Laden "disappear."
Huh? Quote me.
JTEM
> I'm wondering what'll happen if Barack Obama wins the presidency.
Oh, you don't have to wonder. Just look at "Fred Stone."
There's your answer.
Kenny McCormack
DanielSan
You'll turn into Fred Stone?
DanielSan
>>> The quote amounts to the words of a documented liar.
>>>
>
> Really, why?
You attacked the citer, not the cite. What, on the cite, is wrong?
(And why do you snip the context and the links?)
Bill Baker
news:<77b0eb9b-a781-463b...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>...
> Bill Baker <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
>
>> > My predictions for the Obama years....
>>
>> And we all know how your predictions go.
>
> Really? Do tell...
>
>> You predicted a win for the Republicans in 2006.
>
> Nope.
To your credit, you did use enough weasel words to avoid making an outright
prediction, but your "short answer" to whether the Democrats would take the
majority in 2006 was "no."
>> You said that Bush had made Osama bin Laden "disappear."
>
> Huh? Quote me.
"You'e asking for an answer that assumes Bin Laden is
alive & free.
"He's not. They got him a while ago. They're just trying
to avoid making a martyr out of him. A Bin Laden that
slowly slips away & vanishes is a Bin Laden that can
be forgotten. A dead Bin Laden is a martyr. "
--JTEM, 8/14/2006
news:1155548307.0...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
--
Bushism 9-9/10:
"There's no such thing as legacies. At least, there is a legacy, but I'll
never see it."
--To Catholic leaders; Washington, D.C.; January 31, 2001
Mark K. Bilbo
> Douglas Berry <penguin_...@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
>
>> JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
>
>>> My predictions for the Obama years....
>>> School vultures...errr... vouchers. The Reich has
>>> wanted these for decades.
>> And he's against them
>
> He also talks about "reforming" NAFTA, even though his
> campaign was in secret contact with the Canadians,
> telling them that it was nothing more than election year
> posturing.
According to the Conservative Harper government who had a memo
*describing* what an Obama staffer allegedly said.
But, then, you take everything people on the right say as gospel truth...
Mark K. Bilbo
> JTEM wrote:
>> DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm wondering what'll happen if Barack Obama wins the presidency.
>>
>> Oh, you don't have to wonder. Just look at "Fred Stone."
>>
>> There's your answer.
>>
>
> You'll turn into Fred Stone?
You mean he hasn't?
JTEM
> He just did.
.....make up a bunch of bullshit.
Of course, there's no limit to the amount of bullshit that you
seem eager to lick up.
Enjoy!
JTEM
> To your credit, you did
Granting you absolutely NO credit, we still don't see the post. Go
ahead, offer up a direct link.
> >> You said that Bush had made Osama bin Laden "disappear."
>
> > Huh? Quote me.
>
> "You'e asking for an answer that assumes Bin Laden is
> alive & free.
>
> "He's not. They got him a while ago. They're just trying
> to avoid making a martyr out of him. A Bin Laden that
> slowly slips away & vanishes is a Bin Laden that can
> be forgotten. A dead Bin Laden is a martyr. "
So, in other words, you're taking a post where I'm yanking on
people's legs, pretending to channel Nostradamous & posting
patented "Nostradamousized" text (run through the Babelfish
online translator until it was suitably incomprehensable), and
you're pretending it was serious.
Put another way: You are forced by the qualtity of the candidate
that you support to stoop to lying.
Ironically, the "Nostradamous" thing was to prove a point. Namely,
that so many of the so-called "Skeptics" simply auto-reject every
claim. Seems that you're claiming that the exact opposite is the
opposite, and YOU accepted every clain at face value...
.....or, like I said, Obama is so shitty that you're forced to
stooping
to *Anything*, no matter how low, in order to justify your support of
him.
Wouldn't it be easier to simply support someone else?
I mean, when you've already reached the level of the Bushbots, and
the PRIMARIES aren't over yet. it sure looks to thinking people like
you need to dump the guy.
JTEM
"Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
> According to the Conservative Harper government
So now you suddenly LOVE conspiracy theories.
Like I said, if it wasn't for double standards you people would
have no standards at all....
Congratulations on your public support of the "Family
Values" candidate.
JTEM
"Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
> DanielSan wrote:
> > You'll turn into Fred Stone?
> You mean he hasn't?
"Fred" defended a Florida debacle, too. You guys have *So*
*Much* in common....
Of course, "Fred's" insanity started AFTER the election, so
you're more advanced them him.
Mark K. Bilbo
> "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
>> According to the Conservative Harper government
>
> So now you suddenly LOVE conspiracy theories.
No, idiot.
> Like I said, if it wasn't for double standards you people would
> have no standards at all....
>
> Congratulations on your public support of the "Family
> Values" candidate.
You don't know who or what I support. You never have. You're too
mentally fucked up.
DanielSan
There are no debacles so far. The rules were not played by in Florida
in 2000. The rules are played by now.
JTEM
> There are no debacles so far.
An overt attempt to steal Indiana by Obama... no
investigation... no investigation into any other
potential "irregularities" by the Obama camp...
Disenfranchising Folirda... Disenfranchising
Michigan... Disenfranchising Nevada & Texas to
a lesser extent... the overt media bias for Obama...
JTEM
> JTEM wrote:
> > "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
> >> According to the Conservative Harper government
>
> > So now you suddenly LOVE conspiracy theories.
>
> No, idiot.
Today is my day for irony...
You claim that the conservative Canadian government had
it out for the conservative -- "Family Values" -- Obama, so
it invented a conversation with his campaign & leaked it...
That IS a conspiracy theory.
No, wait. I'm serious, you fucking idiot.
Then again, your only regret is that you have but one brain
to give up for Obama....
"Fred" felt the same way about Bush, only it took him a
bit longer.
Congratulations.
DanielSan
> DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There are no debacles so far.
>
> An overt attempt to steal Indiana by Obama... no
> investigation... no investigation into any other
> potential "irregularities" by the Obama camp...
.........where?
I've looked and could not find it.
> Disenfranchising Folirda... Disenfranchising
> Michigan...
Those aren't debacles.
> Disenfranchising Nevada & Texas to
> a lesser extent...
Neither are these.
> the overt media bias for Obama...
And neither is that, though I haven't seen any kind of media bias FOR Obama.
Douglas Berry
carved the following into the hard stone of alt.atheism
>
>> Why did you remove the link and the quote?
>
>I explained why. I don't accept the word of a documented liar
>as "Evidence." You, on the other hand, mistaken the word of
>a documented liar as fact.
Did you read either? Want more? Senator Obama opposses school
vouchers.
You lied.
>Here. I'll quote you doing exactly that:
>
>> Afraid of the facts?
>
>The quote amounts to the words of a documented liar. The link
>was the URL to the page where you cut & pasted the words of
>a documented liar from.
Really? Perhaps you can cite where I've been "documented" as a liar.
Google references, please.
>What "facts" are you pretending to have introduced here?
That Obama is against school vouchers, which is the exact opposite of
what you claim.
>Why are you so emotionally disturbed that you can't see any of
>this yourself?
I'm not. I'm actually quite stable for a combat veteran.
>Obama has already cost you more than any normal, decent
>human being should ever be willing to pay. Get out NOW, before
>it costs you even more.
OK, what exactly has he cost me?
You are so twisted by Hillary losing. I really think you're on the
verge of a breakdown.
Bill Baker
news:<711c9fe0-f2fc-4b85...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>...
> Bill Baker <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
>
>> To your credit, you did
>
> Granting you absolutely NO credit, we still don't see the post. Go
> ahead, offer up a direct link.
You know exactly where to find it. I have no obligation to show you your
own posts.
>> >> You said that Bush had made Osama bin Laden "disappear."
>>
>> > Huh? Quote me.
>>
>> "You'e asking for an answer that assumes Bin Laden is
>> alive & free.
>>
>> "He's not. They got him a while ago. They're just trying
>> to avoid making a martyr out of him. A Bin Laden that
>> slowly slips away & vanishes is a Bin Laden that can
>> be forgotten. A dead Bin Laden is a martyr. "
>
> So, in other words, you're taking a post where I'm yanking on
> people's legs,
So how are we to know you're not yanking on our legs now?
--
Bushism 2-13:
"I have a different vision of leadership. A leadership is someone who
brings people together." --Bartlett, Tennessee; August 18, 2000
JTEM
> You attacked the citer, not the cite.
What the fuck, are you honestly this retarded?
As I further clarified in my followup -- which you not
only saw you quoted -- it has been established WITH
CITES that Obama lies about his policy positions.
For that blaringly obvious reason, a claim based on
a stated Obama policy position is meaningless.
....fucking idiot.
JTEM
Bill Baker <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
> JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote
> > Granting you absolutely NO credit, we still don't see the
> > post. Go ahead, offer up a direct link.
>
> You know exactly where to find it.
Find... what? How can I find a post that exists only in your
mind?
Oops. I suppose it is the very nature of a lunatic to not
know they are a lunatic... even AFTER getting caught
misrepresenting a post of mine.
Then again, if you had a leg to stand on I suppose you
wouldn't have to stoop to this shit...
DanielSan
Cites that don't say what you want them to say.
Mark K. Bilbo
> "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
>> JTEM wrote:
>
>>> "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>>>> According to the Conservative Harper government
>>> So now you suddenly LOVE conspiracy theories.
>> No, idiot.
>
> Today is my day for irony...
>
> You claim that the conservative Canadian government had
> it out for the conservative
No, idiot.
Bill Baker
news:<f09065ad-a37d-4881...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>...
>
> Bill Baker <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
>
>> JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote
>
>> > Granting you absolutely NO credit, we still don't see the
>> > post. Go ahead, offer up a direct link.
>>
>> You know exactly where to find it.
>
> Find... what?
Your post.
--
Bushism 5-16:
"This has been tough weeks in that country."
--Washington, D.C.; April 13, 2004
JTEM
> > What the fuck, are you honestly this retarded?
>
> > As I further clarified in my followup -- which you not
> > only saw you quoted -- it has been established WITH
> > CITES that Obama lies about his policy positions.
> > For that blaringly obvious reason, a claim based on
> > a stated Obama policy position is meaningless.
>
> > ....fucking idiot.
>
> Cites that don't say what you want them to say.
Which cites in particular, and what do I want them to say?
Well, retard? Go on. Pretend you're a man and answer.
Or, be a man and admit that Obama isn't worth the lying...
DanielSan
They're your cites. YOU back them up.
JTEM
> JTEM wrote:
> > DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Cites that don't say what you want them to say.
>
> > Which cites in particular, and what do I want them to say?
> > Well, retard? Go on. Pretend you're a man and answer.
> > Or, be a man and admit that Obama isn't worth the lying...
> They're your cites. YOU back them up.
Which cites do you want me to back up... with cites?
You have yet to tell me.
Seriously, retard, are you being PAID to say this stupid things?
Is that why you so willingly disgrace yourself? For money?
JTEM
> JTEM wrote:
> > DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Cites that don't say what you want them to say.
>
> > Which cites in particular, and what do I want them to say?
> > Well, retard? Go on. Pretend you're a man and answer.
> > Or, be a man and admit that Obama isn't worth the lying...
> They're your cites. YOU back them up.
Again, which cites do you want me to bqack up... with cites?
Why are you pretending this is so difficult? It's not. You can
cut & paste, can't you? Even sub-standard trolls can do that!
Simply cut & paste the cites you want me to back up with
cites. Oh. It would also help if you explained the problem that
you're imagining.
JTEM
Don't pussy out on me now, the way you did with your past
opinion on Obama. You're pretending that Obama (the
conservative "Family Values" candidate) was targeted by
Canada's conservative government.
Or do you mean that the Canadian are "conservative" in the
same sense as Obama is a pro-business "conservative.
Because, as we all know, we've suffered from a real shortage
of pro-business conservatives these last 7 years...
JTEM
> JTEM wrote:
> > An overt attempt to steal Indiana by Obama... no
> > investigation... no investigation into any other
> > potential "irregularities" by the Obama camp...
>
> .........where?
>
> I've looked and could not find it.
Instead of searching, you could have just read my replies
back when the scandal first hit, and you were pretending
you couldn't find any information. Here, I'll repost some
of the URLs for you... though we both know you'll only
pretend that you haven't seen them, again:
http://www.youtube.com/v/A5goTs_Bp8I&hl=en
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hqW0RRWaY4daEG167CZIwy5UXgHQD90H2GNG0
First you check out those two, then you move on to this
one, which establishes what the Mayor of Gary promised
a month before the election...
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/06/gary_mayor_predicts_possible_i.html
: "They are going to point at Indiana and say Hillary
: Clinton is leading by one point but Gary ain't come
: in yet."
That, a whole month before election night... and election
night which he couldn't explain why the vote totals were
being kept under wraps.
JTEM
> Your post.
The one I posted in reply to your confesion of rape,
arson & pety theft? That post?
Because if that isn't the one, I don't know what one
you're talking about.
You could always make this easier and simply post
a URL.
Too long? Go to Google and type in "tinyurl." You'll
find a way to make it smaller.... matching the intellect
of an Obama supporter.
towelie
That's pathetic. Your "proof" is about as plausible as the xers' "proof"
about ridiculous stories like the flood myth.
DanielSan
> DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> JTEM wrote:
>
>>> DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Cites that don't say what you want them to say.
>>> Which cites in particular, and what do I want them to say?
>>> Well, retard? Go on. Pretend you're a man and answer.
>>> Or, be a man and admit that Obama isn't worth the lying...
>
>> They're your cites. YOU back them up.
>
> Which cites do you want me to back up... with cites?
These that you're referencing:
"As I further clarified in my followup -- which you not only saw you
quoted -- it has been established WITH CITES that Obama lies about his
policy positions. For that blaringly obvious reason, a claim based on a
stated Obama policy position is meaningless.
>
> You have yet to tell me.
>
> Seriously, retard, are you being PAID to say this stupid things?
> Is that why you so willingly disgrace yourself? For money?
>
Exposing your hypocrisy is something I do for free.
DanielSan
I recently had newsgroup problems and have lost all newsgroup headers
prior to May 19. I do not have the original message with the cites
referenced. And, no, I'm not going to search Google Groups.
DanielSan
> DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> JTEM wrote:
>
>>> An overt attempt to steal Indiana by Obama... no
>>> investigation... no investigation into any other
>>> potential "irregularities" by the Obama camp...
>> .........where?
>>
>> I've looked and could not find it.
>
> Instead of searching, you could have just read my replies
> back when the scandal first hit, and you were pretending
> you couldn't find any information. Here, I'll repost some
> of the URLs for you... though we both know you'll only
> pretend that you haven't seen them, again:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/v/A5goTs_Bp8I&hl=en
Again, I can't find any irregularities there. All I see is crying about
the "time it took" to get the absentee ballots counted.
>
> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hqW0RRWaY4daEG167CZIwy5UXgHQD90H2GNG0
Nor here.
>
> First you check out those two, then you move on to this
> one, which establishes what the Mayor of Gary promised
> a month before the election...
>
> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/06/gary_mayor_predicts_possible_i.html
>
> : "They are going to point at Indiana and say Hillary
> : Clinton is leading by one point but Gary ain't come
> : in yet."
>
> That, a whole month before election night... and election
> night which he couldn't explain why the vote totals were
> being kept under wraps.
So, there's a deadline to reveal the vote totals?
Mark K. Bilbo
> "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
>>> You claim that the conservative Canadian government
>>> had it out for the conservative
>> No, idiot.
>
> Don't pussy out on me now, the way you did with your past
> opinion on Obama. You're pretending that Obama (the
> conservative "Family Values" candidate) was targeted by
> Canada's conservative government.
Pay attention for once.
You're hell bent on accepting *hearsay*. You were not there, you were
not party to whatever conversation actually took place, you are relying
on a memo allegedly reporting what someone said. It's no better than
"Jesus is real because the New Testament says so".
You're hell bent on believing what a Conservative government says. You
dismiss what actual, oh I don't know, "liberals" say about just about
everything and accept as gospel what the right has to say.
This is suspicious behavior in someone who claims to be a Democrat.
You love to ignore that the man who claims the Obama camp said this
*ALSO* claims the Hillary camp said similar things. You called Mickey a
"liar" because she brought this one up.
Never *mind* that the aid to Harper has said this about BOTH candidates.
You accept only the one story but not the other.
No, no conspiracy is necessary. But opposition parties *in* *Canada*
were after the Harper government for what *they* perceived as an attempt
to interfere in the US election and prejudice it in favor of the
conservatives down here. This is no Big Bad Conspiracy. It's what we
call "dirty politics".
You don't seem to like that I've actually gone and watched clips from
the sniping up there. Damn those intertubes!
> Or do you mean that the Canadian are "conservative" in the
> same sense as Obama is a pro-business "conservative.
>
> Because, as we all know, we've suffered from a real shortage
> of pro-business conservatives these last 7 years...
<snork>
The DLC which the Clintons built is pro-business and conservative. I
don't care *what* Hillary says now, the truth is Bill pushed NAFTA and
she approved and sung its praises.
I remember Clinton fast tracking NAFTA. He pushed hard as he could to
get it. The one we have. Right now.
Why should I buy any of this? You've got hearsay from a bunch of
conservatives who are pro-NAFTA. Big whoopee. And you, yourself, bitch
about Obama being "pro-business" and "conservative" when Hillary's DLC.
I mean, sheesh...
Bill Baker
news:<36841514-2914-40ab...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>...
> Bill Baker <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
>
>> Your post.
>
> The one I posted
Yes, the one you posted.
--
Bushism 1-11:
"I talked about making the death tax permanent so that Rolf can pass his
assets from--to a family member if he so chooses."
--After meeting with small-business owners; O'Fallon, MO; March 18, 2002