Goodbye Ole Mitt

[marcus]

Goodbye Ole Mitt, I will miss you. Your Dudley Do-Right jaw. Your
constant lying, being against something before you were for it, then
being for something before you were against it, using the race card,
turning a blind eye to your party's war against women, Latinos, gays,
and the middle class.

Yes, I shall miss you Ole Mitt. Now it's off to the Caymans, or your
house with elevators for cars, or that house in California bigger than
a Home Dept.

Walk steady Ole Mitt as you find your way along the path to the
dustbin of History.

And oh, btw, Mitt, don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way
out.

[marcus]

[MWB]

Keep talking


GO FUCK YOURSELF MARCUS


Mark

[Lanskee Shuru]

On Thursday, November 8, 2012 9:49:30 PM UTC-5, marcus wrote:
> Goodbye Ole Mitt, I will miss you. Your Dudley Do-Right jaw. Your constant lying, being against something before you were for it, then being for something before you were against it, using the race card, turning a blind eye to your party's war against women, Latinos, gays, and the middle class. Yes, I shall miss you Ole Mitt. Now it's off to the Caymans, or your house with elevators for cars, or that house in California bigger than a Home Dept. Walk steady Ole Mitt as you find your way along the path to the dustbin of History. And oh, btw, Mitt, don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out.

You're not living in the real world; both "parties" have been pandering to the Spanish-in-America since the 1960s, esp. since the 1986 Amnesty Act. The borders are wide open and we can't even buy a pair of gloves made in USA.

Shipping in immigrants while shipping out the jobs is the new America, the permanent America, the gangster rap America. POTUS makes no 'dif-fran-ce'.

Tres chic, oui?!

[Scott Brady]

On Thursday, November 8, 2012 8:49:30 PM UTC-6, marcus wrote:
> Goodbye Ole Mitt, I will miss you.

Fuck you.

> Your Dudley Do-Right jaw.

Fuck him.

> Your constant lying, being against something before you were for it, then
> being for something before you were against it, using the race card,
> turning a blind eye to your party's war against women, Latinos, gays,
> and the middle class.

Fuck them.

> Yes, I shall miss you Ole Mitt.

Who gives a fuck?

> Now it's off to the Caymans, or your house with elevators for cars, or that
> house in California bigger than a Home Dept.

What the fuck?

> Walk steady Ole Mitt as you find your way along the path to the
> dustbin of History.

Fuck off.

> And oh, btw, Mitt, don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way
> out.

GO FUCK YOURSELF

[Sarah Ehrett]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 23:50:39 -0800 (PST), Scott Brady <sbra...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>> Now it's off to the Caymans, or your house with elevators for cars, or that
>> house in California bigger than a Home Dept.
>
>What the fuck?

Had Obama lost he and Michele would have been off to their $35K house in
Hawaii. I'd love to know how a community organizer, small time
politician, 4 year POTUS managed to save enough to pay for a $35K house in
Hawaii?

[Sarah Ehrett]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 11:19:24 -0500, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 23:50:39 -0800 (PST), Scott Brady <sbra...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>> Now it's off to the Caymans, or your house with elevators for cars, or that
>>> house in California bigger than a Home Dept.
>>
>>What the fuck?

Damn spell-check..... It should read Obama's $35,000,000 house.

Thirty Five MILLION. And what has he done to earn any of it?

>Had Obama lost he and Michele would have been off to their $35 million house in

>Hawaii. I'd love to know how a community organizer, small time

>politician, 4 year POTUS managed to save enough to pay for a $35 million house in
>Hawaii?

[leno...@yahoo.com]

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/11/10/you_cant_call_p.html

Libertarian columnist Amy Alkon quotes Matt Taibbi and asks if her readers agree with him:

"......Similarly, the fact that so many Republicans this week think that all Hispanics care about is amnesty, all women want is abortions (and lots of them) and all teenagers want is to sit on their couches and smoke tons of weed legally, that tells you everything you need to know about the hopeless, anachronistic cluelessness of the modern Republican Party. A lot of these people, believe it or not, would respond positively, or at least with genuine curiosity, to the traditional conservative message of self-reliance and fiscal responsibility.

"But modern Republicans will never be able to spread that message effectively, because they have so much of their own collective identity wrapped up in the belief that they're surrounded by free-loading, job-averse parasites who not only want to smoke weed and have recreational abortions all day long, but want hardworking white Christians like them to pay the tab. Their whole belief system, which is really an endless effort at congratulating themselves for how hard they work compared to everyone else (by the way, the average 'illegal,' as Rush calls them, does more real work in 24 hours than people like Rush and me do in a year), is inherently insulting to everyone outside the tent - and you can't win votes when you're calling people lazy, stoned moochers."

(snip)

Lenona.

[Scott Brady]

On Saturday, November 10, 2012 12:07:50 PM UTC-6, leno...@yahoo.com wrote:
> http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/11/10/you_cant_call_p.html

> Libertarian columnist Amy Alkon quotes Matt Taibbi and asks if her readers agree with him:

> "......Similarly, the fact that so many Republicans this week think that all Hispanics care about is amnesty, all women want is abortions (and lots of them) and all teenagers want is to sit on their couches and smoke tons of weed legally, that tells you everything you need to know about the hopeless, anachronistic cluelessness of the modern Republican Party. A lot of these people, believe it or not, would respond positively, or at least with genuine curiosity, to the traditional conservative message of self-reliance and fiscal responsibility.

Does this guy ever to Rush Limbaugh?

> "But modern Republicans will never be able to spread that message effectively, because they have so much of their own collective identity wrapped up in the belief that they're surrounded by free-loading, job-averse parasites who not only want to smoke weed and have recreational abortions all day long, but want hardworking white Christians like them to pay the tab. Their whole belief system, which is really an endless effort at congratulating themselves for how hard they work compared to everyone else (by the way, the average 'illegal,' as Rush calls them, does more real work in 24 hours than people like Rush and me do in a year), is inherently insulting to everyone outside the tent - and you can't win votes when you're calling people lazy, stoned moochers."

He obviously does, since he's able to quote him at such length.

[BobF]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:21:07 -0600, "News" <m...@sb.net> shouted from the
highest rooftop:

> Actually, I can answer your question easily: Obama/Biden/Democrats
>don't give much to charitible organizations, compared to all other normal
>people.

I was just about to ask how much YOU give to charitable organizations
and then I noticed "normal." So I'll rephrase the question and ask
what the hell would a loony dork like YOU know about what "normal
people" do or don't do???

********

>Does anybody know if Roy has ever had a job
>or been employable?

Yes, I think I know the answer to your nosy question: Yes.
I hope that answers your nosy question, Miss Karen.

>This group (and others) seems to be very
>important to him for expressing himself and interacting with others,
>regardless of what he gets back in return.

Regardless? Shows you how little you truly know about me!
I have high standards, so I must get back a high amount of return.
It's not the weird(er) people on this ng, it's the subject matter
(same as for the other ng's I frequent) and getting the first crack (sorry
for the crack, Bill S.!) at seeing which prominent (and sometimes
not-so-prominent) people left us for the next world.

>He is so fixated on various statistics...most of which are meaningless to
>others.

Can you name one? You mean like OPS, in the baseball world?

You have your statistics that interest you, and I have mine, and
if they are the same so be it.
If not, so what???
SABR is probably more demanding, fixated, obsessive, and
statistically-oriented than even moi.
(and I don't belong to SABR)
If you don't know what SABR is, look it up in your Funk &
Wagnells!

>He might have a form of autism. Keith Obermann does. He's obsessive, too.

ROTFL at the K.O. analogy.
I've heard the term 'Asperger syndrome' recently mentioned to me.
A very high quality autistic person. ;-D They lack some
nonverbal communication skills.
Unlike some lower quality un-autistic (guessing) people, such as
TdFuckcrapola and E.L of NYC., for the lowest of the low. You can't tell
the difference between those two, they are interchangeable people.
BTW, I missed being a MENSA member by *thismuch* on the IQ level.
Also, despite the tendency for many AS people to have physical
clumsiness, I enjoyed athletics such as softball, battleball (aka,
dodgeball), and other sports when in school. I could hit (softball) very
well, I could run in above-average speed, and I could play the OF (sometimes
played at 3b) and made some good catches, although my throwing arm wasn't
all that strong. A "Rick Ankiel" arm strength, I'm not.
And my vocabulary and math skills are much, much higher than yours,
of that I'm certain.
So there!

- From "The Sayings of Roy"

[Sarah Ehrett]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:21:07 -0600, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:

>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:movs985cq0fm8aqhh...@4ax.com...

>> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 11:19:24 -0500, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 23:50:39 -0800 (PST), Scott Brady
>>><sbra...@hotmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Now it's off to the Caymans, or your house with elevators for cars, or
>>>>> that
>>>>> house in California bigger than a Home Dept.
>>>>
>>>>What the fuck?
>>
>> Damn spell-check..... It should read Obama's $35,000,000 house.
>

> ROTFL!
> I was about to post on your previous post on his $35K house.
> (Since when is a $35K house extravagant? LOL)

I know. :)

> Did you know Jay Leno's show sometimes has hilarious examples of
>spell-checking apps that make mincemeat of the poster's actual texting
>letters?

I don't watch Leno but I can imagine! Some forums I'm on are filled with
texters and sometimes you need a code book to decipher what they're trying
to say/write. My BIL does hiring for a large corporation and he's told us
about some funny memo's, obviously written by texters, that have crossed
his desk.

>> Thirty Five MILLION. And what has he done to earn any of it?
>>
>>>Had Obama lost he and Michele would have been off to their $35 million
>>>house in
>>>Hawaii. I'd love to know how a community organizer, small time
>>>politician, 4 year POTUS managed to save enough to pay for a $35 million
>>>house in Hawaii?
>

> Naw, it was $35,000. <g>

HEY! LOL!

> Actually, I can answer your question easily: Obama/Biden/Democrats
>don't give much to charitible organizations, compared to all other normal
>people.

> [because Obama/Biden/Democrats only believe in GOVERNMENT "charities")

Well yeah your comments on giving to charity notwithstanding, how does
Obama come up with $ 35 million to buy a house? Taxpayers? His slush
fund? Campaign contributions? Democratic party?

It makes you wonder how he can criticize Romney for being wealthy all the
while owning a $35 Million dollar house. In Hawaii no less!

[Cobbie]

On Nov 10, 7:21 pm, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes

>      ROTFL!
>      I was about to post on your previous post on his $35K house.
>      (Since when is a $35K house extravagant? LOL)

When it represents a quarter of your lifetime earnings?



"I'll bet only 10% of all workers make as much as $150K in their
lifetimes, and that counts inflationary wages of the past 41 years."


News, 25 September 2012

[marcus]

On Nov 9, 8:30 am, Terry del Fuego <t_del_fu...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:49:32 -0800 (PST), marcus <marcus...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >And oh, btw, Mitt, don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way
> >out.
>

> One really good way to be better than the whining sore losers is to
> refuse to be a sore winner.

"Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside and it is ragin’
It’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’"

OK, the American people won last Tuesday. Now, it's time for Obama
not to repeat what he did during most of his first term...he can not
be conciliatory, or offer an olive branch in compromise. He's got a
mandate, and he OWES...BIG TIME the folks, who re-elected him, Labor,
Gays, Latinos, the 99%, and Labor, a seat at the table. Republicans
do not understand compromise, it didn't work from 2009-2012. Obama
must be ruthless. The Republicans are down. Now is the time to roll
over them, bulldozer style, and pass progressive legislation. Don't
wait for inaugeration day. The times they are a changin' right now.
Make Boehner, Cantor, and McConnell know the taste of dirt.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <5LSdnVW1k5q2jD7N...@earthlink.com>,
News <m...@sb.net> blubbered:
...
>The American people lost last Tuesday, no matter which Big Government goon
>was elected.

Words for you to put into your Google: Frying pan fire

--
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
~ Epicurus

[marcus]

On Nov 13, 10:34 pm, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>
> The American people lost last Tuesday, no matter which Big Government goon
> was elected.

> But, The Petraeus Affair (cover-up) may prove Obummer's undoing, just as
> Watergate was Nixon's.
> Even if Obummer survives in office for his entire term, he could be severely
> weakened, only with a shell of a president's powers (as we see it today) ,
> and unable to do additional harm with his Big Government schemes
> neutralized. That's the best hope America has to survive as an economic
> power.

There is no cover-up by the Obama Administration. Two horny generals,
at least one loony woman out of the two woman involved, and an FBI
agent who tried to get sexually involved with one of the women, think
they are starring in an episode of Melrose Place.

What I find most interesting is that two Republican
congressman(including Eric Cantor) knew about this before the
election, and did not use it against the Obama campaign.

Perhaps that was the whole idea, to deliberately wait until after the
election, and make it seem like there was a cover-up(where none
existed) to embarass Obama has starts his second term.

Comparing this incident to Watergate is wholly absurd.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <174e4527-4e35-48aa...@v3g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
marcus <marc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...

>There is no cover-up by the Obama Administration. Two horny generals,
>at least one loony woman out of the two woman involved, and an FBI
>agent who tried to get sexually involved with one of the women, think
>they are starring in an episode of Melrose Place.

Well put. This is sig material.

>What I find most interesting is that two Republican
>congressman(including Eric Cantor) knew about this before the
>election, and did not use it against the Obama campaign.
>
>Perhaps that was the whole idea, to deliberately wait until after the
>election, and make it seem like there was a cover-up(where none
>existed) to embarass Obama has starts his second term.

Quite so.

>Comparing this incident to Watergate is wholly absurd.

Indeed. But we've already established that these people are just plain
crazy. There's no other way to put it.

--
Just for a change of pace, this sig is *not* an obscure reference to
comp.lang.c...

[BobF]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:10:04 -0600, "News" <m...@sb.net> shouted from the
highest rooftop:

Mr "Lack Of Self-Awareness" strikes again:

> You are so naive!

* * * * * * *

Disagree with me all you want, but keep it civil and not
personal.
That's not too much to ask.

- from The Sayings of Roy

[marcus]

On Nov 14, 3:10 pm, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>

> "marcus" <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:174e4527-4e35-48aa...@v3g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...

> On Nov 13, 10:34 pm, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> The American people lost last Tuesday, no matter which Big Government
> >> goon
> > was elected.
> > But, The Petraeus Affair (cover-up) may prove Obummer's undoing, just as
> > Watergate was Nixon's.
> > Even if Obummer survives in office for his entire term, he could be
> > severely
> > weakened, only with a shell of a president's powers (as we see it today) ,
> > and unable to do additional harm with his Big Government schemes
> > neutralized. That's the best hope America has to survive as an economic
> >> power.
> >There is no cover-up by the Obama Administration.
>

>    You are so naive!
>    If you believe for one minute Obummer didn't know about Petraeus and
> those women until Thu. Nov. 8, you're hallucinating.

>
> > Two horny generals,
> >at least one loony woman out of the two woman involved, and an FBI
> >agent who tried to get sexually involved with one of the women, think
> >they are starring in an episode of Melrose Place.
>

>      You are Lost in Space.

>
> >What I find most interesting is that two Republican
> >congressman(including Eric Cantor) knew about this before the
> >election, and did not use it against the Obama campaign.
>

>      Duh, you think Obummer also didn't know about it?
>      Bwahahahahahaha!

>
> >Perhaps that was the whole idea, to deliberately wait until after the
> >election, and make it seem like there was a cover-up(where none
> >existed) to embarass Obama has starts his second term.
>

>      Nope. Obummer did it to himself. He didn't need any help.

>
> >Comparing this incident to Watergate is wholly absurd.
>

>      Nobody died in Watergate. 4 died in Benghazi.

For years, I thought many people here were way too severe in their
assessment of your posts.

As of this post, they've won me over to their side.

[marcus]

On Nov 15, 3:21 pm, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "marcus" <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>

> news:a21e5a59-a62f-477a...@g14g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...

> ---
>
> Too bad for them and for you.
> Truth hurts.
> Keep believing in your government fairy tales.

This coming from someone who believes in libertarianism.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <2682247a-aad0-43f1...@o8g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
marcus <marc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...

>This coming from someone who believes in libertarianism.

But who has not yet (as far as we know) moved to that Libertarian paradise,
Somalia. Just think how happy Roy would be there! No government! No gun
control! Every man for himself!

Of course, living in StL, Somalia might be a step UP for him...

--
People who say they'll vote for someone else because Obama couldn't solve
all of Bush's messes are like people complaining that he couldn't cure cancer,
so they'll go and vote for cancer.

[Loon Rockwell]

On 11/15/2012 2:21 PM, News wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes

>
> Too bad for them and for you.
> Truth hurts.
> Keep believing in your government fairy tales.
>

Keep up the obsessive, annoying off-topic BS in the obits group, idiot.

[Scott Brady]

On Thursday, November 15, 2012 2:53:24 PM UTC-6, Kenny McCormack wrote:

> But who has not yet (as far as we know) moved to that Libertarian paradise,
> Somalia. Just think how happy Roy would be there! No government! No gun
> control! Every man for himself!

You are confusing, perhaps deliberately, libertarianism with anarchy--the absence of laws or government.

Libertarians very much believe in government as the final, impartial arbiter of disputes, keeper of peace and protector of individual rights. They also believe this form of government is impossible in the absence of a civil society.

I don't know what you believe in.