Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: #WHY THE IRS SCANDAL SHOULD LEAD TO OBAMA'S IMPEACHME NT
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Zepp
May 22, 2013, 3:41:34 PM5/22/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:52:34 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj2a2$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
>
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:14:58 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>
>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj0d3$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 11:28:44 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>
>>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knimcv$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:12:28 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Zepp" lied when he wrote in message
>>>> news:kniih6$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>>> Protesting the Patriot Act. I even got stalked by one of the right
>>>>> wing dirtbags here for doing so.
>>>>
>>>> Name that bastard, and WIN A NEW CAR!
>>>
>>> Sure. Kurt Nicklas.
>>>
>>> ####
>>>
>>> WOW!
>>> Now all you have to do is PROVE IT!
>>> Also, define "stalked"... you retard!
>>>
>>> That new car will await thee!
>>
>> Next time you see him, ask Kurtsie, bubbles.
>>
>> ####
>>
>> You're lying again, you retard!
>> That's why YOU can't answer, you retard!
>> It really IS as simple as that... you retard!
>> You really are a known retard, you retard!
>> I don't know your imaginary friends, you retard!
>> Cough the proven facts up, you retard!
>> Are YOU AFRAID to provide proof, you retard?
>>
>> Or are you a retard, you retard?
>
> Well, bubbles, I don't really have to prove anything to you, do I?
>
> Of course, I have publicly accused Kurt of committing what, these days
> and under the laws of his own state, is a felony.
>
>
> ####
> Of course you did lie.
> That's what makes you a retard!
> That's what YOU what you are.
> A little accuser without a fact to back it up!
>
> On the other hand, I have PROOF THAT you and DuDu molest little boys in
> the 5 to 9 year old range.
Run along, child. You're obviously a really nasty little troll. Go
bother someone your own age at the local kindegarten.
> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj2a2$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
>
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:14:58 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>
>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj0d3$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 11:28:44 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>
>>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knimcv$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:12:28 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Zepp" lied when he wrote in message
>>>> news:kniih6$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>>> Protesting the Patriot Act. I even got stalked by one of the right
>>>>> wing dirtbags here for doing so.
>>>>
>>>> Name that bastard, and WIN A NEW CAR!
>>>
>>> Sure. Kurt Nicklas.
>>>
>>> ####
>>>
>>> WOW!
>>> Now all you have to do is PROVE IT!
>>> Also, define "stalked"... you retard!
>>>
>>> That new car will await thee!
>>
>> Next time you see him, ask Kurtsie, bubbles.
>>
>> ####
>>
>> You're lying again, you retard!
>> That's why YOU can't answer, you retard!
>> It really IS as simple as that... you retard!
>> You really are a known retard, you retard!
>> I don't know your imaginary friends, you retard!
>> Cough the proven facts up, you retard!
>> Are YOU AFRAID to provide proof, you retard?
>>
>> Or are you a retard, you retard?
>
> Well, bubbles, I don't really have to prove anything to you, do I?
>
> Of course, I have publicly accused Kurt of committing what, these days
> and under the laws of his own state, is a felony.
>
>
> ####
> Of course you did lie.
> That's what makes you a retard!
> That's what YOU what you are.
> A little accuser without a fact to back it up!
>
> On the other hand, I have PROOF THAT you and DuDu molest little boys in
> the 5 to 9 year old range.
Run along, child. You're obviously a really nasty little troll. Go
bother someone your own age at the local kindegarten.
Ivan Bodley
May 22, 2013, 3:45:56 PM5/22/13
to
"Zepp" wrote in message news:knj61r$pbb$4...@dont-email.me...
On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:46:56 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj2ok$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
>
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:07:42 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>
>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj0f6$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 11:32:25 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>
>>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knij3v$pbb$7...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 23:07:48 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <knhk4h$4ou$1...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 20:40:54 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > In article <CqWmt.8668$bK1....@newsfe11.iad>,
>>>>> > Tom McDonald <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> On 5/21/2013 9:41 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>> >> > Tom McDonald <kil...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>> >> > news:reUmt.11860$v46....@newsfe13.iad:
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >> On 5/21/2013 7:17 PM, Jason wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> <snip>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> >>> Good point. I hope they have a congressional investigation
>>>>> >> >>> about the AP scandal. It's just as serious as the IRS
>>>>> >> >>> scandal.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> Someone should write letters to Holder and Obama and remind
>>>>> >> >>> them that the constitution mentions freedom of the press.
>>>>> >> >>> Perhaps they have forgotten about what they learned about the
>>>>> >> >>> constitution.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >> Your problem there is that your guy, Bush2, pushed through the
>>>>> >> >> laws that make what happened to the AP entirely legal. You
>>>>> >> >> knew that it was legal, right?
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > So I assume your take is that since Bush did it, it makes it
>>>>> >> > alright for Obama to do it? No chance that both of them are
>>>>> >> > wrong?
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> No, my take is that just about all of the laws passed in the
>>>>> >> hysteria about terrorism, especially those that restrict
>>>>> >> constitutional rights,
>>>>> >> are wrong, cowardly and un-American. This is an example of how we
>>>>> >> gave up freedom for almost-certainly-illusory security.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Whether it's a Democratic or a Republican administration doing
>>>>> >> it,
>>>>> >> I think it's wrong. Period.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > And the Patriot Act really needs to be repealed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Absolutely.
>>>>
>>>> But it's been in effect for, what 11-12 years already. So I have no
>>>> sympathy for anybody just discovering how vile it is now that we have
>>>> a black President.
>>>>
>>>> I was railing against it since before they passed it. I'm really sick
>>>> of all the cowards who demanded to have their civil rights taken away
>>>> all of a suddent complaining about it.
>>>
>>> Are you out of your mind? I've been fighting the Patriot Act since its
>>> inception.
>>>
>>> #####
>>>
>>> Define how and by what measures that YOU personally have been fighting
>>> the USA's Patriot Act, you retard.
>>
>> Speaking out it publicly, sometimes at some personal risk.
>>
>> You?
>>
>> ###
>> AND YOU can't document ONE SINGLE METHOD OR TIME WHEN ASKED, you lying
>> retard!
>> I never said I did ,or tried or wanted to, you retard!
>
> I don't need to, bubbles.
>
> I notice you couldn't even answer if you opposed the Patriot Act or not.
> You're not in any real position to question me, are you?
>
> ###
>
> I am for certain parts of it, you retard.
> YOU said that YOU WERE STALKED BY THOSE HERE, YOU LYING RETARD!
Of course you are, you little fascist.
So tell us, bubbles, when are you going to work up enough intelligence to
fix your newsreader?
###
My "newsreader" works perfectly.
You are responding to it without a problem, right?
Dudu is ignoring me without a problem, right?
Why are YOU and DuDu molesting little boys still, and WHAT DID YOU DO WITH
"LOOKOUT"?
RD Sandman
May 22, 2013, 4:02:04 PM5/22/13
to
linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
news:DuGdnX9XgJd3gADM...@giganews.com:
> RD Sandman wrote:
>> linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
>> news:h96dneash8Z8lwDM...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> >Zepp wrote:
>>>> >>Maybe the House GOP could stop fucking around with mindless
>>>> >>Obamacare votes and vote to repeal the act.
>>> >
>>> >It takes a veto-proof majority in both Houses to repeal the act,
>>> >but what they CAN do is simply not pass the bill to fund it.
>> Which just means that it will go off budget, it will still draw funds
>> (borrowed) and increase the debt.
>
> That's not how it works. The government can's spend a single penny
> that doesn't track back to a bill that was passed by the legislature
> and signed by the President.
>
What I am saying is that it will get done....the Republicans would
probably get overridden in the House (too many congressmen would heed the
call of their public), the Senate is a wrap and so is Obama. It would
not be in the budget and would therefore not be in the budget with money
set aside for it.
Of course, if public sentiment were *truly* in favor of repeal (I don't
think it is) then the gambit you propose would work.
--
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman
You can be young without money, but you
can't be old without it.
news:DuGdnX9XgJd3gADM...@giganews.com:
> RD Sandman wrote:
>> linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
>> news:h96dneash8Z8lwDM...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> >Zepp wrote:
>>>> >>Maybe the House GOP could stop fucking around with mindless
>>>> >>Obamacare votes and vote to repeal the act.
>>> >
>>> >It takes a veto-proof majority in both Houses to repeal the act,
>>> >but what they CAN do is simply not pass the bill to fund it.
>> Which just means that it will go off budget, it will still draw funds
>> (borrowed) and increase the debt.
>
> That's not how it works. The government can's spend a single penny
> that doesn't track back to a bill that was passed by the legislature
> and signed by the President.
>
What I am saying is that it will get done....the Republicans would
probably get overridden in the House (too many congressmen would heed the
call of their public), the Senate is a wrap and so is Obama. It would
not be in the budget and would therefore not be in the budget with money
set aside for it.
Of course, if public sentiment were *truly* in favor of repeal (I don't
think it is) then the gambit you propose would work.
--
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman
You can be young without money, but you
can't be old without it.
Steve
May 22, 2013, 4:11:14 PM5/22/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:57:35 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:12:28 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>
>> "Zepp" lied when he wrote in message news:kniih6$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>> Protesting the Patriot Act. I even got stalked by one of the right
>>> wing dirtbags here for doing so.
>>
>> Name that bastard, and WIN A NEW CAR!
>
>Sure. Kurt Nicklas.
Zepp imagines that having his history posted on Usenet is stalking.
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:12:28 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>
>> "Zepp" lied when he wrote in message news:kniih6$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>> Protesting the Patriot Act. I even got stalked by one of the right
>>> wing dirtbags here for doing so.
>>
>> Name that bastard, and WIN A NEW CAR!
>
>Sure. Kurt Nicklas.
Steve
May 22, 2013, 4:11:14 PM5/22/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 18:20:53 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:14:58 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>
>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj0d3$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 11:28:44 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>
>>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knimcv$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:14:58 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>
>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj0d3$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 11:28:44 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>
>>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knimcv$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:12:28 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Zepp" lied when he wrote in message
>>>> news:kniih6$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>>> Protesting the Patriot Act. I even got stalked by one of the right
>>>>> wing dirtbags here for doing so.
>>>>
>>>> Name that bastard, and WIN A NEW CAR!
>>>
>>> Sure. Kurt Nicklas.
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Zepp" lied when he wrote in message
>>>> news:kniih6$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>>> Protesting the Patriot Act. I even got stalked by one of the right
>>>>> wing dirtbags here for doing so.
>>>>
>>>> Name that bastard, and WIN A NEW CAR!
>>>
>>> Sure. Kurt Nicklas.
>>>
>>> ####
>>>
>>> WOW!
>>> Now all you have to do is PROVE IT!
>>> Also, define "stalked"... you retard!
>>>
>>> That new car will await thee!
>>
>> Next time you see him, ask Kurtsie, bubbles.
>>
>> ####
>>
>> You're lying again, you retard!
>> That's why YOU can't answer, you retard!
>> It really IS as simple as that... you retard!
>> You really are a known retard, you retard!
>> I don't know your imaginary friends, you retard!
>> Cough the proven facts up, you retard!
>> Are YOU AFRAID to provide proof, you retard?
>>
>> Or are you a retard, you retard?
>
>Well, bubbles, I don't really have to prove anything to you, do I?
>
>Of course, I have publicly accused Kurt of committing what, these days
>and under the laws of his own state, is a felony. And he's mindful of
>>>
>>> WOW!
>>> Now all you have to do is PROVE IT!
>>> Also, define "stalked"... you retard!
>>>
>>> That new car will await thee!
>>
>> Next time you see him, ask Kurtsie, bubbles.
>>
>> ####
>>
>> You're lying again, you retard!
>> That's why YOU can't answer, you retard!
>> It really IS as simple as that... you retard!
>> You really are a known retard, you retard!
>> I don't know your imaginary friends, you retard!
>> Cough the proven facts up, you retard!
>> Are YOU AFRAID to provide proof, you retard?
>>
>> Or are you a retard, you retard?
>
>Well, bubbles, I don't really have to prove anything to you, do I?
>
>Of course, I have publicly accused Kurt of committing what, these days
>the fact that I'm passing along posts by him and others that result from
>his stalking activities to the proper authorities.
<LOL> I'm sure they get a good laugh out of Zepp's pathetic
whining....
Here Zepp makes fun of religion while his wife and mother practice it...
"So we're supposed to depend on people who derive their morality from
and invisible and silent sky muffin? No thank you."
Greywolf Zepp Jamieson Juun 28, 2005
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/06319443a904c577?hl=en&
"my mum-in-law is a Baptist, but a very mellow one."
--Greywolf Jamieson AKA PJWolf Sep 11 1996
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.wicca/msg/380435b09d17fce4?
"I'd been drawn toward Wicca for many years, then one night She
pretty much came up and tapped me on the shoulder and said hello.
Not literally, but that's how it felt. I believe in the Goddess
and the God because I have felt Their touch... "
Greywolf Jamieson Aug 12 1996,
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.wicca/msg/c7ca14e74a59cfb6?hl=en&
"Me, I'm a crazed Wiccan werewolf, mad drummer,
semi-Rastafarian dreamer..."
Greywolf Jamieson Sep 27 1996
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.horror.werewolves/msg/cc46da8df540cd5d?hl=en&
Scout
May 22, 2013, 8:56:09 PM5/22/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:hlwdjsd2-F24A0E...@news.giganews.com...
> In article <knhkg6$4ou$1...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 22:11:13 -0700, Jason wrote:
>>
>> > In article <knhh7i$4ou$1...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>> >> > the
>> >> > AP to give the federal government their phone records? yes or no
>> >>
>> >> He didn't force AP to do anything. He just simply took the records
>> >> without subpoena or AP's knowledge.
>> >>
>> >> And yes, I think he violated the Constitution.
>> >
>> > Thanks--we are in total agreement. It was a violation of the
>> > constitution.
>> > I suggest that people write letters to Holder and Obama and advise them
>> > that the constitution grants freedom of the press.
>>
>> Agreed. There's also the little matter of the Fourth Amendment, which is
>> supposed to protect the rest of us from this sort of crap.
>
>
> Patriot Act trumps everything else. All the government has to do is
> invoke the word "terrorism" and they can do anything they want. Where
> have you been?
So you're saying the 4th Amendment no longer applies because the government
says so?
Scout
May 22, 2013, 8:56:56 PM5/22/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> In article
> <Jason-21051...@66-53-210-190.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
>> In article <hlwdjsd2-26694D...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > In article
>> > <Jason-21051...@66-53-210-190.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
>> > Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> >
>> > > In article <reUmt.11860$v46....@newsfe13.iad>, Tom McDonald
>> > > > > In article <knh1p0$slt$2...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >> On Tue, 21 May 2013 16:45:13 -0700, Jason wrote:
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>> In article <kQRmt.10662$T62....@newsfe08.iad>, Tom McDonald
>> > > > >>> <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>>> On 5/21/2013 3:57 PM, Jason wrote:
>> > > > >>>>> In article <jUQmt.8178$kj3....@newsfe16.iad>, Tom McDonald
>> > > > >>>>> <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>> On 5/21/2013 3:27 PM, Jason wrote:
>> > > > >>>>>>> In article <QJPmt.17551$nm....@newsfe14.iad>, Tom McDonald
>> > > > >>>>>>> <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>> On 5/21/2013 1:37 PM, Jason wrote:
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>> <snip off-topic chatter>
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>>> What is your opinion about what you learn at this
>> > > > >>>>>>>>> website?
>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>> <http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/top-white-house-aides-obam
>> > > > >>> a-
>> > > > >> irs-audit-article-1.1349333>
>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>> "The Tea Party, The IRS �'Scandal�' �- And The Actual
>> > > > >>>>>>>> Facts
>> Of The
>> > > > >>>>>>>> Case"
>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>> http://www.nationalmemo.com/the-tea-party-the-irs-scandal-and-the-
>> > > > >> actual-facts-of-the-case/
>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>> Or:
>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/pj8j7hy
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>> I don't believe the Huffington Post is a conservative
>> organization:
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>> <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/20/white-house-irs-
>> > > > >> probe_n_3307928.html>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>> Nice. The site you link to shows that no one near Obama knew
>> > > > >>>>>> of
>> > > > >>>>>> the
>> > > > >>>>>> practice until nearly a year after it had ended. Not much of
>> > > > >>>>>> a
>> > > > >>>>>> scandal there, especially since the IRS quite appropriately
>> > > > >>>>>> scrutinized all new groups coming out of the woodwork after
>> > > > >>>>>> Citizens' United. That most of the groups were conservative
>> > > > >>>>>> to
>> > > > >>>>>> reactionary says more about where the power of money lies in
>> > > > >>>>>> the
>> > > > >>>>>> US
>> > > > >>>>>> than it does about our tax system.
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> There will be at least one major lawsuit against the IRS
>> > > > >>>>> related
>> > > > >>>>> to
>> > > > >>>>> this issue. A lady was interviewed on Fox News about an hour
>> ago. She
>> > > > >>>>> works for a tea party organization and that tea party group
>> > > > >>>>> was
>> > > > >>>>> harrassed by the IRS for over a year. She said she plans to
>> > > > >>>>> file
>> > > > >>>>> a
>> > > > >>>>> lawsuit against the IRS after the news reports indicated the
>> > > > >>>>> IRS
>> > > > >>>>> targeted conservative groups.
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> There was a story in today's newspaper that was written by
>> > > > >>>>> Anita
>> > > > >>>>> Kumar and Kevin G. Hall. They both are employed by McClathy
>> > > > >>>>> Newspapers.
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> The story clearly states that senior aides to Obama knew a
>> > > > >>>>> month
>> > > > >>>>> ago
>> > > > >>>>> about the IRS scandal. They all have stated that they did not
>> > > > >>>>> tell
>> > > > >>>>> Obama about the IRS scandal in order to shield him from the
>> > > > >>>>> scandal.
>> > > > >>>>> This may be the same story that was in today's newspaper:
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>> <http://www.centredaily.com/2013/05/20/3623214/white-house-more-top-
>> > > > >> aides-knew.html>
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>> Again, if you're looking to pin something on Obama in this
>> mess, there
>> > > > >>>> really is nothing to see here, no matter how hard you try to
>> > > > >>>> spin
>> > > > >>>> it.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> The investigations have not yet been finished.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> Clinton claimed that he did not have sex with that women. He
>> > > > >>> lied.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> So what? He wasn't under oath, and everyone lies about sex.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> I seem to recall that Nixon claimed that he had nothing to do
>> > > > >>> with
>> > > > >>> the
>> > > > >>> Watergate breakin. He resigned when it was determined that he
>> > > > >>> knew
>> > > > >>> all
>> > > > >>> about it.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >> There's a bit of a difference between participating in a felony
>> and lying
>> > > > >> about it under oath, and lying about banging a willing adult
>> > > > >> female.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>> Was Obama told about the IRS scandal? At present, he claims he
>> > > > >>> did
>> > > > >>> not
>> > > > >>> know about the scandal until he read about in the newspaper.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Quite probably true. And even worse for you bozos, we still
>> > > > >> don't
>> > > > >> even
>> > > > >> know if a scandal occurred.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Why don't you focus on the AP scandal? There's a better
>> > > > >> likelihood
>> > > > >> of
>> > > > >> presidential involvement there, and what in the old United
>> > > > >> States
>> > > > >> would
>> > > > >> have been an egregious violation of AP reporters' 1st and 4th
>> > > > >> amendment
>> > > > >> rights.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> The White House first said that only the chief White House
>> lawyer named
>> > > > >>> Kathryn Ruemmier was the only one in the White House that knew
>> about the
>> > > > >>> IRS scandal last month. Her official title is "White House
>> > > > >>> Counsel".
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> It was a total lie.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> The newspaper story mentioned above clearly states that senior
>> aides to
>> > > > >>> Obama knew about the IRS scandal last month.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> You are an intelligent person. Therefore, answer this simple
>> > > > >>> question:
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> If Chief Counsel Kathryn Ruemmier and the senior aides to Obama
>> > > > >>> knew
>> > > > >>> about the IRS crisis last month, do you believe that it is
>> possible that
>> > > > >>> some of them may have told Obama about the IRS crisis?
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> One other question:
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> If you was a high ranking employee of a large company and knew
>> > > > >>> about a
>> > > > >>> scandal related to the company, would you keep the scandal a
>> > > > >>> secret
>> > > > >>> or
>> > > > >>> let your top boss know about the scandal?
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> I will answer the last question first: I would tell my top
>> > > > >>> boss.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Good point. I hope they have a congressional investigation about
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > AP
>> > > > > scandal. It's just as serious as the IRS scandal.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Someone should write letters to Holder and Obama and remind them
>> that the
>> > > > > constitution mentions freedom of the press. Perhaps they have
>> > > > > forgotten
>> > > > > about what they learned about the constitution.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > Your problem there is that your guy, Bush2, pushed through the laws
>> > > > that
>> > > > make what happened to the AP entirely legal. You knew that it was
>> > > > legal,
>> > > > right?
>> > >
>> > > Bush2 is OLD NEWS.
>> > > > > Good point. I hope they have a congressional investigation about
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > AP
>> > > > > scandal. It's just as serious as the IRS scandal.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Someone should write letters to Holder and Obama and remind them
>> that the
>> > > > > constitution mentions freedom of the press. Perhaps they have
>> > > > > forgotten
>> > > > > about what they learned about the constitution.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > Your problem there is that your guy, Bush2, pushed through the laws
>> > > > that
>> > > > make what happened to the AP entirely legal. You knew that it was
>> > > > legal,
>> > > > right?
>> > >
>> >
>> > Now we know the latest talking point Jason's puppet masters are telling
>> > him to use when Dubya's brought up.
>> >
>> > No, Bush is NOT old news. It's his law for as long as it's on the
>> > books.
>> >
>> >
>> > > Holder is Obama's best friend. He is the one that
>> > > required the AP to give the federal government their phone records.
>> >
>> > No, he isn't.
>>
>> Whom is guilty?
>
> Nobody, since what was done was legal.
Show that it complies with the 4th Amendment.
You mistake legal with something that only has the form of law.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 9:00:19 PM5/22/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> In article <knhk4h$4ou$1...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 20:40:54 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>
>> > In article <CqWmt.8668$bK1....@newsfe11.iad>,
>
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 20:40:54 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>
>> > Tom McDonald <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 5/21/2013 9:41 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> >> > Tom McDonald <kil...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> >> > news:reUmt.11860$v46....@newsfe13.iad:
>> >> >
>> >
>> >> On 5/21/2013 9:41 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> >> > Tom McDonald <kil...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> >> > news:reUmt.11860$v46....@newsfe13.iad:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On 5/21/2013 7:17 PM, Jason wrote:
>> >>
>> >> <snip>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >>> Good point. I hope they have a congressional investigation about
>> >> >>> the AP scandal. It's just as serious as the IRS scandal.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Someone should write letters to Holder and Obama and remind them
>> >> >>> that the constitution mentions freedom of the press. Perhaps they
>> >> >>> have forgotten about what they learned about the constitution.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >> Your problem there is that your guy, Bush2, pushed through the laws
>> >> >> that make what happened to the AP entirely legal. You knew that it
>> >> >> was legal, right?
>> >> >
>> >> >>> Good point. I hope they have a congressional investigation about
>> >> >>> the AP scandal. It's just as serious as the IRS scandal.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Someone should write letters to Holder and Obama and remind them
>> >> >>> that the constitution mentions freedom of the press. Perhaps they
>> >> >>> have forgotten about what they learned about the constitution.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >> Your problem there is that your guy, Bush2, pushed through the laws
>> >> >> that make what happened to the AP entirely legal. You knew that it
>> >> >> was legal, right?
>> >> >
>> >> > So I assume your take is that since Bush did it, it makes it alright
>> >> > for Obama to do it? No chance that both of them are wrong?
>> >> >
>> >> No, my take is that just about all of the laws passed in the hysteria
>> >> about terrorism, especially those that restrict constitutional rights,
>> >> are wrong, cowardly and un-American. This is an example of how we gave
>> >> up freedom for almost-certainly-illusory security.
>> >>
>> >> Whether it's a Democratic or a Republican administration doing it, I
>> >> think it's wrong. Period.
>> >
>> >> > for Obama to do it? No chance that both of them are wrong?
>> >> >
>> >> No, my take is that just about all of the laws passed in the hysteria
>> >> about terrorism, especially those that restrict constitutional rights,
>> >> are wrong, cowardly and un-American. This is an example of how we gave
>> >> up freedom for almost-certainly-illusory security.
>> >>
>> >> Whether it's a Democratic or a Republican administration doing it, I
>> >> think it's wrong. Period.
>> >
>> > And the Patriot Act really needs to be repealed.
>>
>> Absolutely.
>
> But it's been in effect for, what 11-12 years already. So I have no
> sympathy for anybody just discovering how vile it is now that we have a
> black President.
A moment ago you were telling us how what was done doesn't matter because it
>>
>> Absolutely.
>
> But it's been in effect for, what 11-12 years already. So I have no
> sympathy for anybody just discovering how vile it is now that we have a
> black President.
was legal....now you're saying it was vile.
Maybe you should make up your mind and stick to it.
Apparently now that we have a black President, you're all for it.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 9:02:18 PM5/22/13
to
"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5mdpp81tqd0aml6ja...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 05:04:02 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 14:59:44 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 20 May 2013 07:03:14 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:44:31 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 20 May 2013 04:55:49 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 18:48:20 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Two words. Constitutional Republic.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>No disputing that. And also a representative democracy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope. And that you're too stupid to understand the difference is
>>>>>>> telling.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>
>>>>> Two words. Constitutional Republic.
>>>>
>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>
>>> "You're my bitch."
>>>
>>>
>>> [chuckle]
>>
>>Yes, we know what your vision for America is.
>
> Oh, pray, favor us with your opinion.
>
>>Now: what does the
>>Constitution say?
>
> That's easy. The Constitution describes how our government is set up
> and functions. I can go into more detail when you're sober.
>
> Um, you didn't know that?
How could he when he seems unable to make it past the first three words.
Indeed it's not even clear if he knows what they are since he has to keep
asking for someone to tell them what they are.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 9:05:32 PM5/22/13
to
> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knj0d3$pbb$3...@dont-email.me...
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 11:28:44 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>
>> "Zepp" wrote in message news:knimcv$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:12:28 -0400, Ivan Bodley wrote:
>>
>>> "Zepp" lied when he wrote in message news:kniih6$pbb$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Protesting the Patriot Act. I even got stalked by one of the right
>>>> wing dirtbags here for doing so.
>>>
>>> Name that bastard, and WIN A NEW CAR!
>>
>> Sure. Kurt Nicklas.
>>
>> ####
>>
>> WOW!
>> Now all you have to do is PROVE IT!
>> Also, define "stalked"... you retard!
>>
>> That new car will await thee!
>
> Next time you see him, ask Kurtsie, bubbles.
prosecution (Zepp) failed to provide any support for his case.
Jason
May 22, 2013, 9:11:35 PM5/22/13
to
In article <knjp8j$qi5$1...@dont-email.me>, "Scout"
It's my guess that Holder would answer that question by saying that the
4th Amendment no longer apples.
Holder totally ignored the 4th Amendment when he tapped the phone lines of
the AP reporters.
Obama should fire Holder but it's my guess that Obama will not fire Holder
since Holder is Obama's lap dog.
4th Amendment no longer apples.
Holder totally ignored the 4th Amendment when he tapped the phone lines of
the AP reporters.
Obama should fire Holder but it's my guess that Obama will not fire Holder
since Holder is Obama's lap dog.
Jason
May 22, 2013, 9:13:29 PM5/22/13
to
Zepp
May 22, 2013, 9:50:01 PM5/22/13
to
pretty funny chasing him around with it, though.
So. there is the statement of intent for the constitution, and it is
formed by "We, the People". Establishing that the People are sovereign
in America. Not the government, certainly no church, and no
aristocracy. The People.
With me so far?
Zepp
May 22, 2013, 9:57:00 PM5/22/13
to
>
> Maybe you should make up your mind and stick to it.
>
> Apparently now that we have a black President, you're all for it.
Oh, right. You have no ethics of your own.
> Maybe you should make up your mind and stick to it.
>
> Apparently now that we have a black President, you're all for it.
Zepp
May 22, 2013, 9:58:41 PM5/22/13
to
bear--especially since there's twelve of you.
You sort of remind me of an old Batman comic I read when I was a kid, and
the Joker cloned himself a dozen times so he could have a jury to convict
Batman.
Jeanne Douglas
May 22, 2013, 10:09:55 PM5/22/13
to
In article
<Jason-22051...@66-53-220-130.stkn.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Since the provisions of the Patriot Act that break the 4th Amendment
have never been found unconstitutional, they are the law of the land.
So no law was broken.
If you want us to think you actually care about the Constitution you
would have been protesting the 4th Amendment for the last 10 years. You
would be DEMANDING that the Act be repealed.
I'm not seeing those protests and that demand, so your complaints are
nothing but hypocrisy.
> Obama should fire Holder but it's my guess that Obama will not fire Holder
> since Holder is Obama's lap dog.
Holder is nobody's lap dog. Why would you say such a vile and disgusting
thing?
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
<Jason-22051...@66-53-220-130.stkn.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
have never been found unconstitutional, they are the law of the land.
So no law was broken.
If you want us to think you actually care about the Constitution you
would have been protesting the 4th Amendment for the last 10 years. You
would be DEMANDING that the Act be repealed.
I'm not seeing those protests and that demand, so your complaints are
nothing but hypocrisy.
> Obama should fire Holder but it's my guess that Obama will not fire Holder
> since Holder is Obama's lap dog.
thing?
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Jeanne Douglas
May 22, 2013, 10:11:31 PM5/22/13
to
In article <8C5nt.3601$Ju6....@newsfe22.iad>,
Tom McDonald <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> First, do you think the Patriot Act provision under which this was made
> legal is constitutional? Yes or no.
Until the courts say it's unconstitutional, it IS constitutional.
Tom McDonald <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> legal is constitutional? Yes or no.
Until the courts say it's unconstitutional, it IS constitutional.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 10:59:28 PM5/22/13
to
"Jason" <Ja...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Jason-22051...@66-53-220-130.stkn.mdsg-pacwest.com...
him what those words are again.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 11:01:12 PM5/22/13
to
"Jason" <Ja...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Jason-22051...@66-53-220-130.stkn.mdsg-pacwest.com...
involved and/or informed before or during F&F.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 11:02:12 PM5/22/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
Interesting since you said it was vile earlier.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 11:02:54 PM5/22/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
courts rule it as such.
Kurt Nicklas
May 22, 2013, 11:50:08 PM5/22/13
to
On May 21, 12:32 pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2013 08:34:49 -0700, Kurt Nicklas wrote:
> > On May 19, 4:59 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooo.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 19 May 2013 12:50:34 -0600, deep wrote:
> >> >On Sun, 19 May 2013 18:39:56 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>
> >> >>On Sun, 19 May 2013 12:24:34 -0600, deep wrote:
>
> >> >>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 18:10:24 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
>
> >> >>>>> Poor Zepp. He thinks the first three words define the
> >> >>>>> Constitution.
>
> >> >>>>No, I think they define the nature of America.
>
> >> >>> The purpose of America.
>
> >> >>Indeed so. The Preamble is the Statement of Intent for the
> >> >>Constitution.
>
> >> >Exactly. It was intended to protect and serve The People. Too bad it
> >> >has failed us so miserably. Or actually, we've failed us. We have
> >> >nobody to blame but ourselves for letting the oligarchy to take over
> >> >our once great republic.
>
> >> What's with your use of "we" and "us" Jamieson. Are you trying to
> >> prtend that you're a citizen again?
>
> > I'm waiting for Wordsong to leave the country. They'll never let him
> > back in and he knows it.
>
> Yes, that would be your vision for America: anyone who dissents from you
> in any way would be permanently exiled.
It has nothing to do with my opinions, Wordsong, but everything to do
with your actions.
> In the name of freedom, of course.
You're not a citizen. You have no rights.
> On Tue, 21 May 2013 08:34:49 -0700, Kurt Nicklas wrote:
> > On May 19, 4:59 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooo.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 19 May 2013 12:50:34 -0600, deep wrote:
> >> >On Sun, 19 May 2013 18:39:56 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>
> >> >>On Sun, 19 May 2013 12:24:34 -0600, deep wrote:
>
> >> >>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 18:10:24 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
>
> >> >>>>> Poor Zepp. He thinks the first three words define the
> >> >>>>> Constitution.
>
> >> >>>>No, I think they define the nature of America.
>
> >> >>> The purpose of America.
>
> >> >>Indeed so. The Preamble is the Statement of Intent for the
> >> >>Constitution.
>
> >> >Exactly. It was intended to protect and serve The People. Too bad it
> >> >has failed us so miserably. Or actually, we've failed us. We have
> >> >nobody to blame but ourselves for letting the oligarchy to take over
> >> >our once great republic.
>
> >> What's with your use of "we" and "us" Jamieson. Are you trying to
> >> prtend that you're a citizen again?
>
> > I'm waiting for Wordsong to leave the country. They'll never let him
> > back in and he knows it.
>
> Yes, that would be your vision for America: anyone who dissents from you
> in any way would be permanently exiled.
It has nothing to do with my opinions, Wordsong, but everything to do
with your actions.
> In the name of freedom, of course.
You're not a citizen. You have no rights.
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 1:54:14 AM5/23/13
to
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 1:55:47 AM5/23/13
to
That's why it would be nice if the idiots in Congress exercised a little
bit of restraint and common sense sometimes.
Jason
May 23, 2013, 3:43:03 AM5/23/13
to
justify the bugging of the phone lines of AP reporters.
Jason
May 23, 2013, 3:44:49 AM5/23/13
to
In article <hlwdjsd2-149560...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
Because it's true. Otherwise, Obama would fire him for violating the 4th
Amendment which is far more important than the Patriot Act.
Amendment which is far more important than the Patriot Act.
Jason
May 23, 2013, 3:47:17 AM5/23/13
to
In article <knk0j2$mk4$1...@dont-email.me>, "Scout"
You may be correct. Holder may know lots of secrets about Obama. There is
a rumor that Obama visiting a famous gay club in Chicago before he became
president. Holder may know the details of Obama's visit to that gay club.
a rumor that Obama visiting a famous gay club in Chicago before he became
president. Holder may know the details of Obama's visit to that gay club.
Jeanne Douglas
May 23, 2013, 3:50:41 AM5/23/13
to
> That's why it would be nice if the idiots in Congress exercised a little
> bit of restraint and common sense sometimes.
Jason
May 23, 2013, 3:53:05 AM5/23/13
to
recently violated the 4th Amendment by tapping the phone lines of various
AP reporters.
Jeanne Douglas
May 23, 2013, 4:54:17 AM5/23/13
to
In article
<Jason-23051...@67-150-173-65.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Nope. What he did is legal according to the Patriot Act. Until the
Supreme Court declares the Act unconstituttional it is the law of the
land.
Why won't you admit that you're a hypocrite who supported the Patriot
Act until something came up that you thought you could use as a weapon
against the President?
<Jason-23051...@67-150-173-65.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Supreme Court declares the Act unconstituttional it is the law of the
land.
Why won't you admit that you're a hypocrite who supported the Patriot
Act until something came up that you thought you could use as a weapon
against the President?
Jeanne Douglas
May 23, 2013, 4:55:27 AM5/23/13
to
Even if that ridiculous rumor were true, what difference would it make?
Jeanne Douglas
May 23, 2013, 4:56:30 AM5/23/13
to
You can't support a law and then turn against it when somebody you don't
like uses it.
Jeanne Douglas
May 23, 2013, 4:57:02 AM5/23/13
to
Steve
May 23, 2013, 6:48:26 AM5/23/13
to
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001426----000-.html
TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part II > § 1426
Citizenship denied alien relieved of service in Armed Forces because
of alienage
(a) Permanent ineligibility
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 405 (b) [1] but subject to
subsection (c) of this section, any alien who applies or has applied
for exemption or discharge from training or service in the Armed Forces
lieved or discharged from such training or service on such ground,
shall be permanently ineligible to become a citizen of the United States.
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 8:01:01 AM5/23/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:43:48 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 07:06:29 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>
>> Of COURSE you did.
>>
>> But that's OK, Obama is behind it now.
>
>And I oppose him for it.
Of COURSE you do, you racist.
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 07:06:29 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 13:51:34 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Patriot Act trumps everything else. All the government has to do is
>>>> invoke the word "terrorism" and they can do anything they want. Where
>>>> have you been?
>>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 13:51:34 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Patriot Act trumps everything else. All the government has to do is
>>>> invoke the word "terrorism" and they can do anything they want. Where
>>>> have you been?
>>>
>>>Protesting the Patriot Act. I even got stalked by one of the right wing
>>>dirtbags here for doing so.
>>
>> [chuckle]
>>>dirtbags here for doing so.
>>
>>
>> Of COURSE you did.
>>
>> But that's OK, Obama is behind it now.
>
>And I oppose him for it.
Of COURSE you do, you racist.
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 8:01:44 AM5/23/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 16:44:09 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 07:19:28 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:14:02 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 22 May 2013 05:14:54 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 16:38:09 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 08:33:01 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:24:44 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 05:01:10 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:18:23 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then why do we have the other 4540 words?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [chuckle]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>We can get to that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> IOW, you don't know.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sad, really.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No, "sad, really" is just two words.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>But we aren't talking about [..]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> .. your inability to comprehend the Constitution?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sadly, we are.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was three little words.
>>>>>
>>>>>Poor Klod.
>>>>
>>>> Poor, stoned little Zepp.
>>>>
>>>> Can't figure out HOW he's going to explain how the government of the
>>>> US is described in three words.
>>>
>>>Could you tell us what those three words are?
>>
>> I could.
>
>No, you apparently can't.
>>
>> Why can't you tell us how three words define the government?
>>
>> ANSWER: You can't.
>
>Sure I can.
Apparently you can't.
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 07:19:28 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:14:02 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 22 May 2013 05:14:54 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 16:38:09 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 08:33:01 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:24:44 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 05:01:10 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:18:23 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then why do we have the other 4540 words?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [chuckle]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>We can get to that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> IOW, you don't know.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sad, really.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No, "sad, really" is just two words.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>But we aren't talking about [..]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> .. your inability to comprehend the Constitution?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sadly, we are.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was three little words.
>>>>>
>>>>>Poor Klod.
>>>>
>>>> Poor, stoned little Zepp.
>>>>
>>>> Can't figure out HOW he's going to explain how the government of the
>>>> US is described in three words.
>>>
>>>Could you tell us what those three words are?
>>
>> I could.
>
>No, you apparently can't.
>>
>> Why can't you tell us how three words define the government?
>>
>> ANSWER: You can't.
>
>Sure I can.
Apparently you can't.
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 8:02:18 AM5/23/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 16:45:03 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>Tell us what the first three words are. You claim America is not a
>democracy. You are lying.
I've already proven it's not.
>Tell us what the first three words are. You claim America is not a
>democracy. You are lying.
I've already proven it's not.
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 8:03:08 AM5/23/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 21:02:18 -0400, "Scout"
I wonder why they needed the other 4000+ words, then?
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:5mdpp81tqd0aml6ja...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 05:04:02 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 14:59:44 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 20 May 2013 07:03:14 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:44:31 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, 20 May 2013 04:55:49 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>
>
>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:5mdpp81tqd0aml6ja...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 05:04:02 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 14:59:44 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 20 May 2013 07:03:14 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:44:31 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, 20 May 2013 04:55:49 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 18:48:20 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Two words. Constitutional Republic.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>No disputing that. And also a representative democracy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope. And that you're too stupid to understand the difference is
>>>>>>>> telling.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Two words. Constitutional Republic.
>>>>>
>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>
>>>> "You're my bitch."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [chuckle]
>>>
>>>Yes, we know what your vision for America is.
>>
>> Oh, pray, favor us with your opinion.
>>
>>>Now: what does the
>>>Constitution say?
>>
>> That's easy. The Constitution describes how our government is set up
>> and functions. I can go into more detail when you're sober.
>>
>> Um, you didn't know that?
>
>How could he when he seems unable to make it past the first three words.
>
>Indeed it's not even clear if he knows what they are since he has to keep
>asking for someone to tell them what they are.
>
He's not very bright. He keeps claiming they "define the government."
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Two words. Constitutional Republic.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>No disputing that. And also a representative democracy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope. And that you're too stupid to understand the difference is
>>>>>>>> telling.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Two words. Constitutional Republic.
>>>>>
>>>>>Three little words, Klod.
>>>>
>>>> "You're my bitch."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [chuckle]
>>>
>>>Yes, we know what your vision for America is.
>>
>> Oh, pray, favor us with your opinion.
>>
>>>Now: what does the
>>>Constitution say?
>>
>> That's easy. The Constitution describes how our government is set up
>> and functions. I can go into more detail when you're sober.
>>
>> Um, you didn't know that?
>
>How could he when he seems unable to make it past the first three words.
>
>Indeed it's not even clear if he knows what they are since he has to keep
>asking for someone to tell them what they are.
>
I wonder why they needed the other 4000+ words, then?
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 9:57:21 AM5/23/13
to
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 10:45:22 AM5/23/13
to
the same time.
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 10:52:06 AM5/23/13
to
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 10:53:39 AM5/23/13
to
opposite for the past ten years. What changed?
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 11:01:55 AM5/23/13
to
You've already made an utter fool of yourself. Do you wish to be
considered a liar, too?
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 11:04:59 AM5/23/13
to
More of that conservative courage. You're great at bluster, but don't
even have enough sense to slink away quietly when you're bested.
Well, let's ask another question you can noisily run away from:
In America, who has sovereignty?
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 11:05:34 AM5/23/13
to
strutter like yourself.
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 11:12:37 AM5/23/13
to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 14:45:22 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 23 May 2013 05:02:18 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 16:45:03 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Tell us what the first three words are. You claim America is not a
>>>democracy. You are lying.
>>
>> I've already proven it's not.
>
>No
Yes.
>On Thu, 23 May 2013 05:02:18 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 16:45:03 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Tell us what the first three words are. You claim America is not a
>>>democracy. You are lying.
>>
>> I've already proven it's not.
>
>No
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 11:14:12 AM5/23/13
to
obviously retarded.................
And it doesn't describe the type of government, as you falsely
claimed. It doesn't describe a democracy, as you claimed.
Otherwise, I could write this:
"__ ___ ______ of the United States, hereby declare our King to be
Klaus Schadenfruede and his descendants, may he be fruitful and
multiply. His word shall be law, and the law shall be his word."
According to you, because I started it off with the Three Magical
Words, that's a democracy.
See how stupid you look now?
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 11:15:04 AM5/23/13
to
government.
>More of that conservative courage.
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 11:16:44 AM5/23/13
to
Are.
Racist.
I forget with your limited attention span everything needs to be
presented on its most simple terms.
Meanwhile, your hero Obama is trampling rights and assassinating
Americans without due process.
And you're "protesting."
"Laugh laugh laugh laugh."
�Lee Harrison 1957-2012, RIP
Ivan Bodley
May 23, 2013, 11:39:20 AM5/23/13
to
"Zepp" wrote in message news:knlb12$2jr$1...@dont-email.me...
http://twitpic.com/4cac3k
Mine were :
1) Us
2) these
3) Eat.
All on the top line... with the latter looking down.
RD Sandman
May 23, 2013, 11:44:54 AM5/23/13
to
Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
news:hlwdjsd2-149560...@news.giganews.com:
> In article
> <Jason-22051...@66-53-220-130.stkn.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
>> In article <knjp8j$qi5$1...@dont-email.me>, "Scout"
>> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>> > "Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:hlwdjsd2-F24A0E...@news.giganews.com...
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> On Tue, 21 May 2013 22:11:13 -0700, Jason wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > In article <knhh7i$4ou$1...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com>
>> > >
>> > >> On Tue, 21 May 2013 22:11:13 -0700, Jason wrote:
>> > >>
>> > > Patriot Act trumps everything else. All the government has to do
>> > > is invoke the word "terrorism" and they can do anything they
>> > > want. Where have you been?
>> >
>> > > is invoke the word "terrorism" and they can do anything they
>> > > want. Where have you been?
>> >
>> > So you're saying the 4th Amendment no longer applies because the
>> > government says so?
>> >
>>
>> It's my guess that Holder would answer that question by saying that
>> the 4th Amendment no longer apples.
>>
>> Holder totally ignored the 4th Amendment when he tapped the phone
>> lines of the AP reporters.
>
> Since the provisions of the Patriot Act that break the 4th Amendment
> have never been found unconstitutional, they are the law of the land.
>
> So no law was broken.
>
> If you want us to think you actually care about the Constitution you
> would have been protesting the 4th Amendment for the last 10 years.
> You would be DEMANDING that the Act be repealed.
>
> I'm not seeing those protests and that demand, so your complaints are
> nothing but hypocrisy.
>
>> Obama should fire Holder but it's my guess that Obama will not fire
>> Holder since Holder is Obama's lap dog.
>
> Holder is nobody's lap dog. Why would you say such a vile and
> disgusting thing?
>
Because if he had said that Bush was Cheney's lapdog, you would be one of
>> > government says so?
>> >
>>
>> It's my guess that Holder would answer that question by saying that
>> the 4th Amendment no longer apples.
>>
>> Holder totally ignored the 4th Amendment when he tapped the phone
>> lines of the AP reporters.
>
> Since the provisions of the Patriot Act that break the 4th Amendment
> have never been found unconstitutional, they are the law of the land.
>
> So no law was broken.
>
> If you want us to think you actually care about the Constitution you
> would have been protesting the 4th Amendment for the last 10 years.
> You would be DEMANDING that the Act be repealed.
>
> I'm not seeing those protests and that demand, so your complaints are
> nothing but hypocrisy.
>
>> Obama should fire Holder but it's my guess that Obama will not fire
>> Holder since Holder is Obama's lap dog.
>
> Holder is nobody's lap dog. Why would you say such a vile and
> disgusting thing?
>
the first in line lapping it up?
--
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman
You can be young without money, but you
can't be old without it.
SaPeIsMa
May 23, 2013, 11:47:14 AM5/23/13
to
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:ch1fp8hulacbuqh41...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 04:41:50 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>> In article <kn7533$hkp$2...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 00:18:48 -0400, Scout wrote:
> ...
>>>> > No, actually most of it's from Obama's excessive spending.
>>>>
>>>> Prove it. I'm calling you a liar.
>>>
>>> What the hell excessive spending is he talking about?
>>
>>I suppose you think Trillion dollar deficits are typical and normal?
>>
> I suppose you think that the worst recession since the great depression
> is normal.
And I'll remind you that it was Democrat "social Spending" that stretched
out said Depression for at least another decade..
news:ch1fp8hulacbuqh41...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 04:41:50 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
>
>>
>>
>>"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:hlwdjsd2-A7D3FE...@news.giganews.com...
>>
>>
>>"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
>>> In article <kn7533$hkp$2...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 00:18:48 -0400, Scout wrote:
> ...
>>>> > No, actually most of it's from Obama's excessive spending.
>>>>
>>>> Prove it. I'm calling you a liar.
>>>
>>> What the hell excessive spending is he talking about?
>>
>>I suppose you think Trillion dollar deficits are typical and normal?
>>
> I suppose you think that the worst recession since the great depression
> is normal.
And I'll remind you that it was Democrat "social Spending" that stretched
out said Depression for at least another decade..
Steve
May 23, 2013, 11:57:04 AM5/23/13
to
election."
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson, 1996
http://www.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=4l6trj%24iq4%40news.snowcrest.net
"I will throw my vote away on a 3rd party candidate."
--Zepp Jamieson,2000/02/15
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=38a8c8d3.16637502%40news.snowcrest.net
"I can just as easily vote once now--in my local Congressional race"
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson, 1996
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.misc/msg/a6fa6287419ce925?hl=en&
"You just doubled the value of my vote."
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson, 2000/04/25
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3905050c.66719349%40news.snowcrest.net
"I -can- vote"
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson, 2000/04/25
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=4lmnit%24eiv%40news.snowcrest.net
[...] if we decide elections by square miles, my vote is worth
200 Los Angeles votes.
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson, 2000-12-18
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=tbit3tc60l1a6c1mj89b4o285anpe11kqa%404ax.com&oe=UTF-8
"Legal resident alien [David B.(Zepp) Jamieson,] a Canadian who has lived
in the United States for more than 30 years, said his status
changed dramatically with the Patriot Act."
http://www.mtshastanews.com/archives/index.inn?loc=detail&doc=/2003/June/04-1695-news11.txt
Legal resident aliens aren't allowed to vote, Jamieson.
Why were you lying and pretending to be a citizen?
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 12:08:40 PM5/23/13
to
Planning on your usual tactic of screaming victory as you run away?
SaPeIsMa
May 23, 2013, 1:13:29 PM5/23/13
to
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[remove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA1C95909B...@216.196.121.131...
I would be more apt to consider Holder as Obama's lick-spittle
But that's because I do like Shakespearian references.
news:XnsA1C95909B...@216.196.121.131...
But that's because I do like Shakespearian references.
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 1:11:40 PM5/23/13
to
>
> Otherwise, I could write this:
>
> "__ ___ ______ of the United States, hereby declare our King to be Klaus
> Schadenfruede and his descendants, may he be fruitful and multiply. His
> word shall be law, and the law shall be his word."
Sure, you can write it, but since the people of the United States don't
> Otherwise, I could write this:
>
> "__ ___ ______ of the United States, hereby declare our King to be Klaus
> Schadenfruede and his descendants, may he be fruitful and multiply. His
> word shall be law, and the law shall be his word."
go on to cede their sovereignty to some anonymous Usenet loser in the
real constitution, it has no bearing.
Tell you what, Klod: let's make it easier for you. We'll pretend that
you worked up the courage to actually type the words "We, the People".
(Oh, I hope I didn't frighten you, Klod!).
Go on to show where, in the Constitution, the People cede their
sovereignty to anyone else; government, church, corporations,
aristocrats, anything.
Steve
May 23, 2013, 2:12:21 PM5/23/13
to
>
>You sound a little desperate, Klod.
>
>Planning on your usual tactic of screaming victory as you run away?
Irony anyone?
>You sound a little desperate, Klod.
>
>Planning on your usual tactic of screaming victory as you run away?
Steve
May 23, 2013, 2:12:21 PM5/23/13
to
did?
He cannot, of course.. One of Porky Wordsong's favorite dishonest
tactics is to suggest someone prove something they never so much as
implied to exist. He does this in the hopes that it will distract
from his own stupidity.
--
"Bubbles, YOU'RE the one saying if we take money out of
general circulation, the economy will improve."
--David (Zepp) Jamieson stupidly claiming that corporate cash reserves "take money out of circulation"
.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/9d77036a53c7a52c?hl=en&dmode=source
Scout
May 23, 2013, 6:16:24 PM5/23/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> In article
> <Jason-23051...@67-150-173-65.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
>> In article <knkb13$rna$6...@dont-email.me>, Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 22 May 2013 23:02:54 -0400, Scout wrote:
>> >
>> > > "Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:hlwdjsd2-CFE2C0...@news.giganews.com...
>> > On Wed, 22 May 2013 23:02:54 -0400, Scout wrote:
>> >
>> > > "Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
>> > >> In article <8C5nt.3601$Ju6....@newsfe22.iad>,
>> > >>> made legal is constitutional? Yes or no.
>> > >>
>> > >> Until the courts say it's unconstitutional, it IS constitutional.
>> > >
>> > > Sorry, but Unconstitutionality dates from it's enactment...not when
>> > > the
>> > > courts rule it as such.
>> >
>> > It won't protect you until the court rules, though.
>> >
>> > That's why it would be nice if the idiots in Congress exercised a
>> > little
>> > bit of restraint and common sense sometimes.
>>
>> It would also be great if Holder had not had used the Patriot Act to
>> justify the bugging of the phone lines of AP reporters.
>
> Why wouldn't he use every law he's has at his disposal.
>
> You can't support a law and then turn against it when somebody you don't
> like uses it.
Whereas you do the exact opposite and claim it was vile under Bush and now
under Obama claim it's use was totally legal.
Scout
May 23, 2013, 6:19:01 PM5/23/13
to
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knldh0$b8g$1...@dont-email.me...
Free Lunch
May 23, 2013, 6:51:03 PM5/23/13
to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 10:47:14 -0500, "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism:
Please provide your evidence to back up this claim. I am not aware of
any economic evidence that supports it.
wrote in alt.atheism:
any economic evidence that supports it.
Jason
May 23, 2013, 7:47:15 PM5/23/13
to
We both know how Holder would answer that question. He would choose the
Patriot Act as his answer.
Tom McDonald
May 23, 2013, 7:46:59 PM5/23/13
to
Democrats mostly ran the country during the 30's, and those were the
Depression years. Other than that, I can't think of why anyone would say
Democratic social spending did anything but help the economy. It
certainly went a long way to keeping us from going fascist or communist
during that time.
Zepp
May 23, 2013, 8:26:07 PM5/23/13
to
Pauls, and that's about it.
Jason
May 23, 2013, 11:19:50 PM5/23/13
to
Fox News reported yesterday that a lady named CINDY THOMAS is the IRS
supervisor that was in charge of the IRS agents that targeted conservative
organizations. It appears that the liberal news media is not mentioning
Cindy Thomas in very many of their news reports. She should be fired ASAP.
<http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3022854/posts?page=9>
Jeanne Douglas
May 24, 2013, 12:26:34 AM5/24/13
to
In article
<Jason-23051...@67-150-126-52.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Why weren't you complaining about the Patriot Act when Bush was
President and doing far worse things with it?
Your hypocrisy on this issue completely negates ANY complaint you have.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
<Jason-23051...@67-150-126-52.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
President and doing far worse things with it?
Your hypocrisy on this issue completely negates ANY complaint you have.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Jeanne Douglas
May 24, 2013, 12:27:36 AM5/24/13
to
In article <t87tp89s4i035jarb...@4ax.com>,
Of course there's none. This is the right-wing's absolutely worst
attempt to re-write history.
attempt to re-write history.
Jason
May 24, 2013, 2:03:36 AM5/24/13
to
In article <hlwdjsd2-CBFF39...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
That is old news and we are now discussing the latest news. You remind me
of Obama--he blames Bush2 for every crisis that happens.
of Obama--he blames Bush2 for every crisis that happens.
Jeanne Douglas
May 24, 2013, 2:03:16 AM5/24/13
to
In article
<Jason-23051...@66-53-217-232.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Why are you trying to destroy this woman's life?
<Jason-23051...@66-53-217-232.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Jason
May 24, 2013, 2:39:25 AM5/24/13
to
In article <hlwdjsd2-99A331...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
Because she screwed up.
When Rush Limbaugh screwed up by having his maid obtain prescription pain
medications to treat back pain, did you go after Rush Limbaugh for
screwing up?
Cindy Thomas also screwed up. The IRS agents that worked under her
targeted conservative organizations such as Tea Party organizations.
When Rush Limbaugh screwed up by having his maid obtain prescription pain
medications to treat back pain, did you go after Rush Limbaugh for
screwing up?
Cindy Thomas also screwed up. The IRS agents that worked under her
targeted conservative organizations such as Tea Party organizations.
Jeanne Douglas
May 24, 2013, 6:05:21 AM5/24/13
to
In article
<Jason-23051...@67-150-127-203.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Is that any excuse to DESTROY HER LIFE? Nobody was anything more than
inconvenienced because those applications were not necessary.
<Jason-23051...@67-150-127-203.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
inconvenienced because those applications were not necessary.
Jeanne Douglas
May 24, 2013, 6:06:41 AM5/24/13
to
In article
<Jason-23051...@67-150-127-203.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Fuck you, asshole.
You NEVER said one word against Bush for doing exactly the same things
you are now trying to use against Obama. That is hypocrisy of the 1st
rank, and you should be ashamed of yourself for being such a horrible,
immoral person.
<Jason-23051...@67-150-127-203.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
You NEVER said one word against Bush for doing exactly the same things
you are now trying to use against Obama. That is hypocrisy of the 1st
rank, and you should be ashamed of yourself for being such a horrible,
immoral person.
Free Lunch
May 24, 2013, 8:21:46 AM5/24/13
to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 23:39:25 -0700, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:
Rush Limbaugh engaged in criminal activity. You made excuses for his
crimes. You don't care that he is a drug addict because he says the evil
things you want to hear.
>Cindy Thomas also screwed up. The IRS agents that worked under her
>targeted conservative organizations such as Tea Party organizations.
So you claim, but have no evidence to back it. Why are you so proud to
support evil?
alt.atheism:
crimes. You don't care that he is a drug addict because he says the evil
things you want to hear.
>Cindy Thomas also screwed up. The IRS agents that worked under her
>targeted conservative organizations such as Tea Party organizations.
support evil?
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 24, 2013, 8:37:11 AM5/24/13
to
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 24, 2013, 8:38:50 AM5/24/13
to
I wrote it. Therefore, according to YOU, THAT is what it means. YOU
claimed those three words tell us what kind of government we have,
remember?
Can you put down the fucking bong for just a minute?
ROFLMAO
Jason
May 24, 2013, 2:52:37 PM5/24/13
to
In article <hlwdjsd2-689AED...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
<http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1487307_The_six_Cincinnati_IRS_workers_named_.html>
I just googled "Cindy Thomas IRS supervisor should be fired" and got
millions of hits. Yes, I did use quote marks.
The IRS agents targeted conservative organizations.
I believe that was a violation of the IRS rules. She should be fired if
she allowed the IRS agents that worked for her to violate IRS rules.
You have had jobs. Would you have been fired if you intentionly violated
very important rules?
I just googled "Cindy Thomas IRS supervisor should be fired" and got
millions of hits. Yes, I did use quote marks.
The IRS agents targeted conservative organizations.
I believe that was a violation of the IRS rules. She should be fired if
she allowed the IRS agents that worked for her to violate IRS rules.
You have had jobs. Would you have been fired if you intentionly violated
very important rules?
Jason
May 24, 2013, 2:55:28 PM5/24/13
to
In article <eomup8htnn0ui6jdb...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
The IRS spokesman has admitted that the IRS targeted conservative
organizations. That's good enough for me. Is it good enough for you?
organizations. That's good enough for me. Is it good enough for you?
RD Sandman
May 24, 2013, 2:56:25 PM5/24/13
to
Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
news:Jason-23051...@66-53-217-232.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:
Why? Because FOX said so? Why not let it all play out THEN critique it?
--
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman
You can be young without money, but you
can't be old without it.
news:Jason-23051...@66-53-217-232.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:
--
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman
You can be young without money, but you
can't be old without it.
RD Sandman
May 24, 2013, 2:58:19 PM5/24/13
to
Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
news:hlwdjsd2-CBFF39...@news.giganews.com:
RD Sandman
May 24, 2013, 2:59:58 PM5/24/13
to
Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
news:hlwdjsd2-370EEB...@news.giganews.com:
let Obama slide on. Pointing at others for the same behaviour does not
forgive either side.
Scout
May 24, 2013, 3:42:52 PM5/24/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:hlwdjsd2-370EEB...@news.giganews.com...
Scout
May 24, 2013, 3:48:56 PM5/24/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
fired. She should be fired.
>Nobody was anything more than
> inconvenienced because those applications were not necessary.
Does that include the consequences of LEAKED confidential information to
opposition groups?
Sorry, but having her life 'destroyed" is the least that should happen. If I
had anything to say about it not only would she be fired outright, but she
would be facing both criminal and civil suits for her violations of the 1974
Privacy Act at the very least.
However, I'm willing to listen to your reasons for why such actions should
not be taken against her.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
I suggest you make them good ones.
Jason
May 24, 2013, 4:05:44 PM5/24/13
to
In article <knog0h$4dj$1...@dont-email.me>, "Scout"
It's possible that Cindy Thomas (IRS supervisor) was following
instructions she received from her bosses in the White House. Read this:
I read one report indicating that some liberal democrat members of
Congress that were upset about tea party group's influence told Obama and
his top aides that they should send the IRS after the tea party groups.
That leads me to believe that it is possible that the IRS supervisors such
as Cindy Thomas were following orders passed down from their bosses in the
White House.
<http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?51624-Schumer-Democrats-Urged-IRS-to-Target-Tea-Party-Groups-in-2012>
instructions she received from her bosses in the White House. Read this:
I read one report indicating that some liberal democrat members of
Congress that were upset about tea party group's influence told Obama and
his top aides that they should send the IRS after the tea party groups.
That leads me to believe that it is possible that the IRS supervisors such
as Cindy Thomas were following orders passed down from their bosses in the
White House.
<http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?51624-Schumer-Democrats-Urged-IRS-to-Target-Tea-Party-Groups-in-2012>
Jason
May 24, 2013, 4:08:04 PM5/24/13
to
Tom McDonald
May 24, 2013, 4:09:26 PM5/24/13
to
On 5/24/2013 1:52 PM, Jason wrote:
<snip>
> I just googled "Cindy Thomas IRS supervisor should be fired" and got
> millions of hits. Yes, I did use quote marks.
"No results found for "Cindy Thomas IRS supervisor should be fired"."
"Results for Cindy Thomas IRS supervisor should be fired (without quotes):"
Without the quotes, you get millions of hits--about 13.7 million hits.
With the quotes, you get nothing.
Learn how to do a google search, and how to report the results.
Then learn what google 'hits' mean. Hint: almost nothing.
<snip>
<snip>
> I just googled "Cindy Thomas IRS supervisor should be fired" and got
> millions of hits. Yes, I did use quote marks.
"Results for Cindy Thomas IRS supervisor should be fired (without quotes):"
Without the quotes, you get millions of hits--about 13.7 million hits.
With the quotes, you get nothing.
Learn how to do a google search, and how to report the results.
Then learn what google 'hits' mean. Hint: almost nothing.
<snip>
Zepp
May 24, 2013, 4:24:44 PM5/24/13
to
issue.
Tom McDonald
May 24, 2013, 4:34:14 PM5/24/13
to
On 5/24/2013 3:05 PM, Jason wrote:
<snip>
> It's possible that Cindy Thomas (IRS supervisor) was following
> instructions she received from her bosses in the White House. Read this:
>
> I read one report indicating that some liberal democrat members of
> Congress that were upset about tea party group's influence told Obama and
> his top aides that they should send the IRS after the tea party groups.
> That leads me to believe that it is possible that the IRS supervisors such
> as Cindy Thomas were following orders passed down from their bosses in the
> White House.
>
> <http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?51624-Schumer-Democrats-Urged-IRS-to-Target-Tea-Party-Groups-in-2012>
>
>
You didn't read the report if all you read was from the site you linked
to. Here is the site they took it from:
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/schumer-franken-irs-tea/2013/05/18/id/505157
Go there. Read what they wrote. Notice that the headline and first
paragraph are *not* supported by the rest of the article.
IOW they lied.
You may want to stop using this link, since it (yet again) proves you wrong.
<snip>
> It's possible that Cindy Thomas (IRS supervisor) was following
> instructions she received from her bosses in the White House. Read this:
>
> I read one report indicating that some liberal democrat members of
> Congress that were upset about tea party group's influence told Obama and
> his top aides that they should send the IRS after the tea party groups.
> That leads me to believe that it is possible that the IRS supervisors such
> as Cindy Thomas were following orders passed down from their bosses in the
> White House.
>
> <http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?51624-Schumer-Democrats-Urged-IRS-to-Target-Tea-Party-Groups-in-2012>
>
>
to. Here is the site they took it from:
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/schumer-franken-irs-tea/2013/05/18/id/505157
Go there. Read what they wrote. Notice that the headline and first
paragraph are *not* supported by the rest of the article.
IOW they lied.
You may want to stop using this link, since it (yet again) proves you wrong.
Tom McDonald
May 24, 2013, 4:34:56 PM5/24/13
to
Jason
May 24, 2013, 4:35:57 PM5/24/13
to
In article <2OPnt.707$Y_6...@newsfe01.iad>, Tom McDonald
I believe you. Google seems to work in a different way on my mac computer.
Google in some cases automatically removes the quote marks if no results
are found.
Google in some cases automatically removes the quote marks if no results
are found.
Free Lunch
May 24, 2013, 4:37:57 PM5/24/13
to
On Fri, 24 May 2013 13:35:57 -0700, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:
And it tells you that it did it. No, it does not behave differently on a
Mac. Stop making excuses.
alt.atheism:
Mac. Stop making excuses.
RD Sandman
May 24, 2013, 4:50:03 PM5/24/13
to
Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
news:Jason-24051...@67-150-127-72.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:
That is possible but keep in mind that Just Plain Politics is a political
blog that leans right. You would not accept blog opinions from the Huffy
Post or Daily Kos would you?
news:Jason-24051...@67-150-127-72.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:
blog that leans right. You would not accept blog opinions from the Huffy
Post or Daily Kos would you?
Jason
May 24, 2013, 4:57:21 PM5/24/13
to
In article <asjvp8dsve67lpnfi...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
Yes, it does but I don't always read those messages. I retried one such
search and did see the message that the quote marks had been removed. I
did not see those words during my first google search on that subject.
search and did see the message that the quote marks had been removed. I
did not see those words during my first google search on that subject.
Scout
May 24, 2013, 6:02:16 PM5/24/13
to
"Jason" <Ja...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Jason-24051...@67-150-127-72.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com...
punishment's levied assuming she supplies complete details and documentation
so that such superior can also be dealt with.
> I read one report indicating that some liberal democrat members of
> Congress that were upset about tea party group's influence told Obama and
> his top aides that they should send the IRS after the tea party groups.
> That leads me to believe that it is possible that the IRS supervisors such
> as Cindy Thomas were following orders passed down from their bosses in the
> White House.
>
> <http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?51624-Schumer-Democrats-Urged-IRS-to-Target-Tea-Party-Groups-in-2012>
sentence/fines assuming she can prove she was so ordered and by whom.
However, her career in the public sector should be over.
>
Free Lunch
May 24, 2013, 6:23:08 PM5/24/13
to
On Fri, 24 May 2013 13:57:21 -0700, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
So, once again, it is someone else's fault that you are lazy and don't
pay attention to anything.
pay attention to anything.
linuxgal
May 24, 2013, 8:12:30 PM5/24/13
to
Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> The economy needs to be infused with money. The infrastructure of this
> country is graded D+. Putting people to work puts lots of money into the
> economy. The only entity with the money to put all those people to work
> is the federal government.
Taking fiat markers from the people who produce real wealth and giving
them to consumers to purchase a diminishing store of that wealth leads
only to runaway inflation.
> The economy needs to be infused with money. The infrastructure of this
> country is graded D+. Putting people to work puts lots of money into the
> economy. The only entity with the money to put all those people to work
> is the federal government.
Taking fiat markers from the people who produce real wealth and giving
them to consumers to purchase a diminishing store of that wealth leads
only to runaway inflation.
linuxgal
May 24, 2013, 8:16:07 PM5/24/13
to
Zepp wrote:
> One reason there hasn't been a massive exodus from California despite the
> tax hikes is because the extra money floating around is causing the
> economy to take off, and if taxes are up, well, profits are up even
> more.
Money is an innovation to streamline what used to happen with pure
barter. It's just markers used in exchange for things and services of
real value. Inject money into an economy at the same time you penalize
the producers and you do not cause growth. This is basic common sense.
> One reason there hasn't been a massive exodus from California despite the
> tax hikes is because the extra money floating around is causing the
> economy to take off, and if taxes are up, well, profits are up even
> more.
Money is an innovation to streamline what used to happen with pure
barter. It's just markers used in exchange for things and services of
real value. Inject money into an economy at the same time you penalize
the producers and you do not cause growth. This is basic common sense.
RD Sandman
May 24, 2013, 8:30:24 PM5/24/13
to
linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in news:J-
qdndp4FdNOnD3Mn...@giganews.com:
Particularly when all that capital is from the private sector, not the
public one. Government is pure cost.
qdndp4FdNOnD3Mn...@giganews.com:
public one. Government is pure cost.
Zepp
May 24, 2013, 9:02:35 PM5/24/13
to
happy.
Maybe your economic reality doesn't match reality. Just the notion that
money does no more than "streamline barter" suggests it needs work.
Jason
May 24, 2013, 9:19:26 PM5/24/13
to
In article <knonqg$fr2$1...@dont-email.me>, "Scout"
Obama reminds me of Sgt. Schultz. Sgt. Schultz was in one of the
characters in the famous television show entitled Hogan's Heroes.
Sgt. Schultz's most famous words were:
I hear nothing. I see nothing.
Obama's most famous words are:
I hear nothing. I see nothing.
I did not know anything about the IRS scandal until I read about it in the
newspaper.
Several days later we found out that all of Obama's most important aides
knew all about the IRS scandal.
Beam me up Scotty.
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> Just following order is not a defense. It might result in a reduced
> sentence/fines assuming she can prove she was so ordered and by whom.
> However, her career in the public sector should be over.
> >
<http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/brian-walsh/2013/05/14/senate-democrats-pushed-for-irs-tea-party-snooping-before-criticizing-it>
> Just following order is not a defense. It might result in a reduced
> sentence/fines assuming she can prove she was so ordered and by whom.
> However, her career in the public sector should be over.
> >
Obama reminds me of Sgt. Schultz. Sgt. Schultz was in one of the
characters in the famous television show entitled Hogan's Heroes.
Sgt. Schultz's most famous words were:
I hear nothing. I see nothing.
Obama's most famous words are:
I hear nothing. I see nothing.
I did not know anything about the IRS scandal until I read about it in the
newspaper.
Several days later we found out that all of Obama's most important aides
knew all about the IRS scandal.
Beam me up Scotty.
Jason
May 24, 2013, 9:22:27 PM5/24/13
to
In article <l1qvp85u76nv69otk...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
Yes, I am lazy. What is your opinion about what you learn at this website:
<http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/brian-walsh/2013/05/14/senate-democrats-pushed-for-irs-tea-party-snooping-before-criticizing-it>
<http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/brian-walsh/2013/05/14/senate-democrats-pushed-for-irs-tea-party-snooping-before-criticizing-it>
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages