England vs Obama

[Ray Keller]

England vs Obama


One reason why England will not join us against Syria:

President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
Hillary Clinton.
By the way, former Secretary of State George Schultz went to the funeral.

The British took note of the fact that the Obama administration chose
not to send a single senior member of the Cabinet.
In fact, no actively serving, elected Democrat attended Lady
Thatchers funeral.

The Obama Administration did, however, send a formal delegation of 14
to the funeral of Socialist Dictator Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez,
who died last month.

Need any more RED flags???

Alot of people have no idea of whats going on.
They only get their news from newspapers and sympathetic TV networks .

[Guy Fawkes]

"Ray Keller" <Left...@desperate.com> wrote in news:tBAgu.183309$9P6.11603
@fx22.iad:

It's much simpler than that.

Would you do anything with this lieing sack of shit if your life depended
onit?

--
Republicans really aren't human beings, so there is no harm, no foul.

Kirby Grant - Nov 3, 2013

Telling us his views of the world.

[M.I.Wakefield]

"Guy Fawkes" wrote in message
news:XnsA276D3A135B53We...@78.46.70.116...

> "Ray Keller" <Left...@desperate.com> wrote in news:tBAgu.183309$9P6.11603
> @fx22.iad:
>
> >
> > England vs Obama
> >
> > One reason why England will not join us against Syria:
> >
> > President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
> > being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
> > representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
> > Hillary Clinton.
> > By the way, former Secretary of State George Schultz went to the
> > funeral.

As part of the official US delegation, along with James Baker, and the US
Ambassador and Chargé d'Affaires.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/thatcherfuneral.asp

> The Obama Administration did, however, send a formal delegation of 14
> to the funeral of Socialist Dictator Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez,
> who died last month.

Similar in make-up to the delegation to Thatcher's funeral.

> Need any more RED flags???

No ... but you should head down to the store and buy a clue.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:28:56 -0700, "Ray Keller"
<Left...@desperate.com> wrote:

>
>England vs Obama
>
>
>One reason why England will not join us against Syria:
>
> President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
>being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
>representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
>Hillary Clinton.

There was no invitation from "England" , or indeed Britain.

In all of the countries of the United Kingdom, England included,
ordinary folk held street parties to rejoice and celebrate her death.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 11/12/2013 8:54 PM, GOP_Decline_and_Fall wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:28:56 -0700, "Ray Keller"
> <Left...@desperate.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> England vs Obama
>>
>>
>> One reason why England will not join us against Syria:
>>
>> President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
>> being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
>> representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
>> Hillary Clinton.
>
> There was no invitation from "England" , or indeed Britain.

There *was*, of course, a pointed refusal by the Obama regime to send a
suitable high-level representative to Thatcher's funeral. By contrast,
numerous current and former heads of state and government attended
Ronald Reagan's funeral.

Obama the Small - that's what everyone was calling him for failing to
attend Thatcher's funeral, or send a suitable high-level representative.

[deep]

They were singing in the streets "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead". She
was an evil witch who helped the wealthy destroy the middle class.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

And so crazy after losing power, she was forbidden to attend
Conservative Party conferences or speak in public.


Document links Thatcher to US corruption probe

http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/oct_2005/document_links_thatcher_to_corruption_proble.html

A DOCUMENT linking Margaret Thatcher to a US corruption probe is so
explosive civil servants have been asked to ensure it remains
"sealed".

The 79-year-old former Premier is said to have met Congressman Tom
DeLay in Britain while he was on a suspected favours-for-freebies
scam.

In return for his free holiday, DeLay - who resigned as Republican
leader of Congress last week after being accused of laundering
political funds - allegedly backed legislation favourable to lobby
groups.

Disclosing that US authorities were seeking aid from UK counterparts,
a secret Home Office briefing says: "One visit to the UK involved a
meeting with Mrs Margaret Thatcher.

"Evidence is sought from her about that meeting and her involvement in
the alleged deception and violation of US criminal laws."

Police will "sensitively" investigate the meeting, which took place in
May 2000.

In the dossier headed "Secret...wider circulation strictly forbidden",
civil servants then warn ministers: "There would be considerable press
interest in this case if it were to become public knowledge.

"We have been asked by the US to keep this request 'sealed', which we
take to mean as confidential as possible. This has been relayed to the
Crown Office and Metropolitan Police.

"Our normal line is that we neither confirm nor deny the existence of
any request until it is in the public domain and there is no reason to
change that course of action here."

The revelations will be a body-blow to Lady Thatcher's reputation and
dash Tory morale on the opening day of its crucial party conference.

If Lady Thatcher is found to have been involved in the alleged scam
she could face a criminal probe in the US or even be banned from
travelling to the country.

Her spokesman confirmed police had been in contact about the DeLay
meeting. But he insisted there was no question of wrongdoing.

The document, leaked to the Mirror, informs ministers there has been
an official request for "mutual legal assistance" from the US
Department of Justice in Washington.

It said the request was part of a deception investigation "involving
high-profile American and UK-based individuals, including a leading
Congressman and former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher". At the
centre of the probe is high-profile lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is
already under investigation in the US.

The document says: "US officials are investigating whether Abramoff
was involved in obtaining legislative assistance from public officials
in exchange for arranging and underwriting trips to the UK."

Investigators are also probing whether the public officials filed
false reports relating to the trips.

The holidays involved playing golf at St Andrews in Scotland, dinner
with unnamed members of the Scottish Parliament, theatre trips in
London and luxury hotel accommodation.

Mr DeLay's staff also scheduled a meeting with Lady Thatcher.

The briefing adds that police investigating the meeting "have been
asked to handle these inquiries sensitively given the nature of the
individual concerned and the background to the request". Members of
the Scottish Parliament will be questioned concerning any contacts
they may have had with Abramoff, DeLay or members of their party.

Scottish police will collect hotel record, bills, invoices, and
statements.

Lady Thatcher's spokesman said last night: "An approach was made to
her office to confirm the bare details of the particular meeting. At
this stage we are expecting nothing further.

"Lady Thatcher met Mr DeLay as as one politician meeting another. It
was in no way a business meeting."

The Thatcher family's reputation has tarnished since she left office.

Her son Mark, 52, was fined £265,000 last year for helping to organise
an attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea.

There are also growing fears about the health of Lady Thatcher, who is
80 next Thursday.

Yesterday she was described as "increasingly forgetful and forbidden
to speak in public".

She has had a number of strokes and is said to have been badly shaken
by the collapse of her son's marriage.

Congressman DeLay, nicknamed The Hammer because of his tough-guy
reputation, denies criminal conspiracy relating to party funds.

Abramoff insists he is innocent of any wrongdoing concerning millions
of dollars in funding he received for helping Indian tribes set up
casinos in their tribal homelands.

A Home Office spokesman said: "We neither confirm nor deny receipt of
requests of legal assistance."

[eric h]

England would not let an issue of who attended whose funeral get in the way of a major policy division like going to war. Get real.

They're not joining in with the US to war on Syria because nobody in the US has made the decision to go to war with Syria.


The saber-rattling that Obama did after the chemical attack was designed to accomplish the goal of getting Syria to surrender its chemical weapons. It worked.

Obama never had any intentions of going to war - it was an act put on by an accomplished statesman who understands the use of finesse.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

And she was twice the man you are.

[Winston_Smith]

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:25:22 -0700, deep wrote:

>They were singing in the streets "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead". She
>was an evil witch who helped the wealthy destroy the middle class.

Very simply, a human being died. She had friends, family, and yes,
political supporters that morn her.

And yet, our beloved leftists, while chanting how much they love
humanity, made a joke out of a human death.

She is a part of history, good, bad, and indifferent. But her place is
in the history books; she hadn't been involved for 20 years.

And yet, our beloved leftists, while chanting about tolerance and
inclusive government, decided to make a political statement in the
moment of 'now' - 20 years later - and snub her.

It should have been about the simple fact that two very close nations
honor and respect each others leaders in public even when they are on
the other side of the political debate.

But, no, our beloved leftists decided to diss an entire nation because
that's what Obama's 60s radical mantras tell him is the thing to do.

I have trouble seeing him as any kind of deep thinker. He is the child
of revolutionaries that wanted to collapse the world, right, left, and
middle, and rebuild it in the image of their impossible fantasies.

Obama grew up in that world, mentored by the hard core of the
anarchist socialists. He has a mantra ready-made to guide him in all
situations. He is in the battle of all times for the revolutionaries'
dream and no thought of conventional behavior or human decency is
allowed to cross his mind. His revolution must prevail no matter what
the cost.

Like many dreamers, he is living out the fantasies of the previous
generation that raised and trained him. And taking us along for the
ride.

[Rudy Canoza]

Only the parasites were doing that. The decent people, the backbone of
the UK, mourned her death. She was a good woman and a great leader.
You, you fuckstain, weren't fit to put a new roll of toilet paper into
her washroom.

[Winston_Smith]

As much as he was hoping he would be allowed to some day.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:22:53 -0800, Rudy Canoza

She was a bitchy female version of the sociopath Ronald Reagan. Both
of them hated regular people and did nothing but work to benefit the
ultra wealthy and powerful.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:21:36 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:25:22 -0700, deep wrote:
>
>>They were singing in the streets "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead". She
>>was an evil witch who helped the wealthy destroy the middle class.
>
>Very simply, a human being died. She had friends, family, and yes,
>political supporters that morn her.

She was a corrupt, evil person. Just google thatcher corruption and
you will see. Regular people rejoice when somebody like that is
finally gone. Unfortunately the damage people like she and Ronald
Reagan have done will be with us forever.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:13:42 -0700, deep wrote:

>She was a bitchy female version of the sociopath Ronald Reagan. Both
>of them hated regular people and did nothing but work to benefit the
>ultra wealthy and powerful.

So the left is giving up on being uniters, diversity, tolerance, being
inclusive, and such similar fuzzy feel good ideas then?

Obama's whole campaign pitch was a crock and a load, you are saying.
It sounded good, but no plans to deliver one bit of it.

"Kill they enemy". Gospel of Obama/Deep, Chapter 1, verse 1.

"Hope & Change - forget it". Gospel of Obama/Deep, Chapter 1, verse 2.

[Rudy Canoza]

She was a great leader who prevented the UK from sinking into third
world living conditions.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 11/13/2013 2:41 PM, deep wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:21:36 -0700, Winston_Smith
> <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:25:22 -0700, deep wrote:
>>
>>> They were singing in the streets "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead". She
>>> was an evil witch who helped the wealthy destroy the middle class.
>>
>> Very simply, a human being died. She had friends, family, and yes,
>> political supporters that morn her.
>
> She was a corrupt, evil person.

No, she wasn't. She was a great leader who slapped shitbag cocksuckers
like you down.

[jon_banquer]

http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/04/26/300345/mark-thatcher-a-corrupt-baronet/


"While former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was given a final farewell last week, there are still many who speak the name of one particularly notorious member of Thatcher’s family in hushed tones. But who is this family member and how did he trade on Margaret Thatcher’s name?


Mark Thatcher, born in 1953, is the son of Margaret and Dennis Thatcher, and the twin brother of Carol Thatcher. Mark’s embarrassments to his mother started shortly after she became the country’s PM in the 1979 general election.

According to the Times of London, Mark pocketed an $18 million commission in relation to the £45 billion Al-Yamamah arms deal in 1985, a controversial arms sale by British arms producer BAE systems to Saudi Arabia.

Moreover, Mark Thatcher had been secretly paid commission by construction firm Cementation, for an Oman contract which his mother had lobbied for. According to the reports, he received a huge commission despite confidential warnings to Whitehall from the then ambassador to Oman, Ivor Lucas.

The Guardian newspaper said once that Mark Thatcher has made a career of "ruthlessly exploiting his famous surname and access to power... to set him on the road to riches.” The British paper described the former PM’s son as a “wheeler-dealer”.

For all the money Mark Thatcher traded on his mother’s political influence, and more importantly for weakening Thatcher’s position in the office, Sir Bernard Ingham, the then PM's press secretary, suggested Mark to leave the country prior to the 1987 general election.

So in the mid 1980s, Mark Thatcher moved to Dallas, Texas, where he was prosecuted for financial scandals, including tax evasion, later in 1996.

Mark Thatcher's use of his position as the Prime Minister's son was made clearer after The Guardian disclosed he got the British taxpayer to pay for 24-hour British bodyguards and unprecedented security at his home in the US.

According to the paper, Margaret authorized the unprecedented use of British taxpayers' money to fortify Mark's luxurious home in Texas. She also authorized the home secretary to conceal from MPs the £117,000 cost of his special branch bodyguards while in Britain.

So following the financial scandals in the US, Mark Thatcher moved to Cape Town, South Africa. It was then in 1998, when Margaret and Denis' son was involved in another scandal involving loan sharking in the country. According to the reports, Thatcher’s loan shark company offered unofficial loans to hundreds of police officers, military personnel and civil servants.

Mark Thatcher’s illegal activities, however, were not limited to illegal commissions and tax avoidance. When in South Africa, he pleaded guilty in relation to 2004 Equatorial Guinea coup d'état attempt organized by his friend, Simon Mann.

The charges were related to "possible funding and logistical assistance” in relation to the attempted coup, aimed at toppling President Obiang. Thatcher was then fined 3,000,000 South African rand(£215000), and received a four-year suspended jail sentence.

“[Thatcher] was not just an investor; he came completely on board and became a part of the management team" of the coup plot, said Mann during Mark’s trial in 2008.

It was right after this incident when Mark Thatcher, known in his homeland as a “mum’s boy”, was questioned by the government authorities on whether he should be stripped of his inherited “baronet” title.

Mark Thatcher inherited his father Denis Thatcher’s hereditary baronetcy title in 2003. The Baronetage was created for Denis Thatcher by the British Queen when his wife Margaret Thatcher resigned as the British Prime Minister in 1990.

Mark Thatcher attended her mother’s funeral service at St. Paul's Cathedral on April 17, where hundreds of Britons turned their backs on Margaret Thatcher’s coffin as a sign of anger against her policies, which they believe has wrecked British working class in the 1980’s and after."

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 2:51:25 PM UTC-8, Rudy Canoza sock puppet wrote:

> No, she wasn't. She was a great leader who slapped shitbag cocksuckers
>
> like you down.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/apr/11/mark-thatcher


"One of this week's more surreal sights has been the reappearance in England of Mark Thatcher, who will be chief mourner at the forthcoming official funeral of his mother.

The now 59-year-old – who was convicted in South Africa in 2005 over his involvement in a failed coup in Equatorial Guinea – has achieved a certain fresh respectability in the eyes of the world, by now being entitled to call himself "Sir" Mark.

The title is a consequence of the bestowal on his father Denis, in Mrs Thatcher's own resignation honours as prime minister, of an unusual hereditary baronetcy. When his father died in 2003, the title passed to Mark: it was thus the last of several favours his mother did for him, thanks to her position.

He is now reported to spend much of his time in the fashionable Spanish resort of Marbella and was relaxing in Barbados when news came of his mother's death. Sir Mark, titular head of the Thatcher family, was speaking earlier this week of the "very sad moment" of his mother's death, in what must have been his first formal interview before the UK's TV cameras since his rather embittered exile from the UK almost 30 years before.

His departure in 1984 followed the first of what were to be many scrapes. A career as a would-be rally driver ended when he got lost in the Sahara desert, and had to be rescued at considerable expense. Then, following a political scandal, it was decided by the then prime minister's PR advisers that Mark would do well to leave the country.

He had been exposed by the Observer for trading on his mother's name in the Middle East, over a contract to build a £300m university in Oman. A company controlled by construction magnate Victor Matthews employed Mark Thatcher as a secret consultant, who would get a large commission if the firm landed the contract. He travelled to the British client state of Oman to join his mother, who was on an official mission there. She strenuously lobbied the sultan to award a building contract to her son's firm, Cementation Ltd.

Her behaviour caused such concern to diplomats that it leaked back in London. In the ensuing political uproar, Mrs Thatcher was unable to deny that she had been well aware of the way her son stood to gain from her conflict of interest. She beat down opposition, however, by claiming she was "batting for Britain".

Behind the scenes, Mark was also allegedly set to benefit from the biggest arms deal in British history, also personally promoted by Mrs Thatcher, in which large secret payments were made by arms firm BAE to cement the so-called al-Yamamah warplane sale to Saudi Arabia. The arms sales to the Saudi ruling family gave BAE a staggering £43bn in revenue over the following two decades.

Syrian-born middleman Wafic Said handled multimillion pound commissions on the deal. Mark has previously denied that as much as £12m of those secret commissions came his way and formed the foundation of his suddenly-acquired fortune. But it has not been disputed that a £1m Mayfair house in Eaton Terrace was purchased on his behalf in 1987 by a Said offshore company. According to his biographers, Mark Hollingsworth and Paul Halloran, Said also gave Mark a £14,000 Rolex watch.

Even Mark's twin sister Carol, who had always sought to earn her own living as a journalist, subsequently described Mark's behavior as "appalling". She told the Lady magazine in 1996: "In some ways he has behaved appallingly. I tried to behave in a vaguely respectable fashion because Mark got such awful publicity."

She added: "I didn't want everyone saying: 'Mrs Thatcher must be awful; both her children are off the rails'."

After the Oman scandal, Mark spent much of his time abroad, pursuing increasingly opaque business deals and establishing offshore tax residences.

He moved first to Dallas, where he married the daughter of a car dealer, and then, following disputes about his tax affairs, in 1996 to south Africa, to the wealthy white enclave of Constantia, on the Cape.

It was there that his behaviour landed him in serious trouble. In 2004 he fell in with mercenary soldier Simon Mann. The former SAS officer was helping organise a coup plot against the tyrannical President Obiang of Equatorial Guinea, and Mark was anxious to join in. Mann describes Mark as both an investor and a "brother-in-arms".

But when Mann finally emerged from five years in African prison cells after the coup's failure, he had nothing but harsh words for his former Old Harrovian colleague. He told an interviewer: "One of the biggest mistakes was approaching Mark Thatcher to put in money. He wanted to be one of the boys, gain power in an oil rich country, impress his mother. He turned out to be a very weak link indeed."

Mark was convicted in South Africa in January 2005 for his involvement in the affair, given a four-year suspended sentence and fined £266,000. His marriage had also ended, with equally harsh words from his then wife Diane about his behaviour and failure to agree a suitable financial settlement with her: "I think he was incredibly selfish, putting his needs for self-fulfilment, greed and lust for power before his family."

She added: "I feel sorry for him. It's as though he was given one of the best seats at the banquet of life and he's blown it."

To add to his woes, he was barred from entry to the US, whence his ex-wife and children had returned, on the grounds of his criminal conviction. His search for an offshore home began to look increasingly forlorn, as Switzerland and Monaco did not give him residence permits. He ended up in Gibraltar, the run-down British colony which offers tax breaks to wealthy people, provided they rent large properties there and pay £20,000 a year.

On the credit side, however, Mark appeared to find new happiness in 2008, when he married Sarah-Jane Clemence, sister-in-law of the Daily Mail's proprietor, Lord Rothermere, in a discreet ceremony in Gibraltar.

• This article was amended on 12 April 2013. The original said Mark Thatcher had married "Sarah Clemence, a wealthy widow". Sarah-Jane Clemence was divorced when they married, not widowed.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 14:50:31 -0800, Rudy Canoza

No she didn't. Under her leadership the wealthy got richer, the poor
got poorer, and a large portion of the middle class sunk into poverty.
She cut taxes on her wealthy friends and drastically cut education to
pay for it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/british-education-in-crisis-literacy-and-numeracy-skills-of-young-people-in-uk-among-lowest-in-developed-world-8866117.html

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:orv789t4mubjpk95e...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:13:42 -0700, deep wrote:
>
>>She was a bitchy female version of the sociopath Ronald Reagan. Both
>>of them hated regular people and did nothing but work to benefit the
>>ultra wealthy and powerful.
>
> So the left is giving up on being uniters, diversity, tolerance, being
> inclusive, and such similar fuzzy feel good ideas then?
>

No, the left is simply telling the truth about Reagan, and Thatcher.

>
> Obama's whole campaign pitch was a crock and a load, you are saying.
>

No, that's just something you pulled out of your ass, Winston.

> It sounded good, but no plans to deliver one bit of it.

Yup, sure thing...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:sui78913qcq13964p...@4ax.com...

You've again entered the manic phase, suggest check your meds, Winston.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:46:07 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:13:42 -0700, deep wrote:
>
>>She was a bitchy female version of the sociopath Ronald Reagan. Both
>>of them hated regular people and did nothing but work to benefit the
>>ultra wealthy and powerful.
>
>So the left is giving up on being uniters, diversity, tolerance, being
>inclusive, and such similar fuzzy feel good ideas then?
>
>Obama's whole campaign pitch was a crock and a load, you are saying.
>It sounded good, but no plans to deliver one bit of it.

All economic indicators have been improving under Obama

http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts.htm

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:16:05 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
<123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:

>You've again entered the manic phase, suggest check your meds, Winston.

Having no real response, I see you have again adopted the classic
quips of 10 year old minds everywhere. Good for you.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:17:14 -0700, deep wrote:

>All economic indicators have been improving under Obama
>
>http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts.htm

Snicker. Yeah, except all the real ones.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:on2889thcj6k95upp...@4ax.com...

You presented sweeping generalizations, the vast majority without substance.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:vp2889l2f1c6llkmk...@4ax.com...

Feel free to elaborate...Snicker...

[Rudy Canoza]

Yes, she did.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 11/13/2013 3:09 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>
> "Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:orv789t4mubjpk95e...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:13:42 -0700, deep wrote:
>>
>>> She was a bitchy female version of the sociopath Ronald Reagan. Both
>>> of them hated regular people and did nothing but work to benefit the
>>> ultra wealthy and powerful.
>>
>> So the left is giving up on being uniters, diversity, tolerance, being
>> inclusive, and such similar fuzzy feel good ideas then?
>>
>
> No, the left is simply telling the truth about Reagan, and Thatcher.

Bullshit.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:49:28 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:16:05 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"wrote:
>>
>>>You've again entered the manic phase, suggest check your meds, Winston.
>>
>> Having no real response, I see you have again adopted the classic
>> quips of 10 year old minds everywhere. Good for you.
>
>You presented sweeping generalizations, the vast majority without substance.

And you counter with an assumption based on nothing except your need
to say you didn't like what I posted. That, sir, is even less
substance. It is, of course, an intentional insult which is the
hallmark of liberals that can't cut it in a discussion.

Is it true when Gunner says you have the hammer and sickle worked into
your company logo?

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:52:46 -0800, Rudy Canoza

What, are you 12? Got some proof junior?

[Rudy Canoza]

You heard me: yes, she did.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:09:12 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
<123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:

>http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/

Unless it says we were clear of the war in Iraq in his first six
months, it's not worth the click.

Unless it says he fixed the economy in his first six months, it's not
worth the click.

Unless it says we really can keep our insurance if we like it, it's
not worth the click. Even Clinton says he has to find a way to keep
his promise. Doubt if he will. Be sure to post if he does.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:52:25 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:17:14 -0700, deep wrote:
>>
>>>All economic indicators have been improving under Obama
>>>http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts.htm
>>
>> Snicker. Yeah, except all the real ones.
>
>Feel free to elaborate...Snicker...

Feel free to define "all indicators".

As you wrote, "You presented sweeping generalizations ...".

"All" is pretty sweeping.

[jon_banquer]

When someone has to reference a proven liar like Mark Wieber to try and make a point they have lost the argument.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:59:09 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:09:12 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
><123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>
>>http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/
>
>Unless it says we were clear of the war in Iraq in his first six
>months, it's not worth the click.
>
>Unless it says he fixed the economy in his first six months, it's not
>worth the click.

Fix a totally trashed economy in six months? Are you serious? You
probably blame Obama because it gets dark at night.

>
>Unless it says we really can keep our insurance if we like it, it's
>not worth the click. Even Clinton says he has to find a way to keep
>his promise. Doubt if he will. Be sure to post if he does.

That's not Obama's fault. It's the insurance companies. Obama is not
dropping insured. The insurance companies are. Obama thought the
law fixed insurance companies dropping high risk patients. He was
mistaken.

[jon_banquer]

Proof isn't the strong point of sock puppets.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 11/13/2013 4:10 PM, deep wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:59:09 -0700, Winston_Smith
> <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:09:12 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
>> <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/
>>
>> Unless it says we were clear of the war in Iraq in his first six
>> months, it's not worth the click.
>>
>> Unless it says he fixed the economy in his first six months, it's not
>> worth the click.
>
> Fix a totally trashed economy in six months?

The economy was not "totally trashed", you Marxist cunt. And he hasn't
"fixed" it in *FIVE* years, let alone six months.

He said he was going to fix it. He didn't do it. He lied.

[deep]

Everything is improving. It always takes years for the economy to
recover after a crash like that.

http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts.htm

[Rudy Canoza]

On 11/13/2013 4:21 PM, deep wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:13:06 -0800, Rudy Canoza
> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/2013 4:10 PM, deep wrote:
>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:59:09 -0700, Winston_Smith
>>> <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:09:12 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
>>>> <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/
>>>>
>>>> Unless it says we were clear of the war in Iraq in his first six
>>>> months, it's not worth the click.
>>>>
>>>> Unless it says he fixed the economy in his first six months, it's not
>>>> worth the click.
>>>
>>> Fix a totally trashed economy in six months?
>>
>> The economy was not "totally trashed", you Marxist cunt. And he hasn't
>> "fixed" it in *FIVE* years, let alone six months.
>>
>> He said he was going to fix it. He didn't do it. He lied.
>
> Everything is improving.

Barely, and much later than Obummuh said it would.

He sucks.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:10:49 -0700, deep wrote:
>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:59:09 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:

>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:09:12 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"> wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/
>>
>>Unless it says we were clear of the war in Iraq in his first six
>>months, it's not worth the click.
>>
>>Unless it says he fixed the economy in his first six months, it's not
>>worth the click.
>
>Fix a totally trashed economy in six months? Are you serious? You
>probably blame Obama because it gets dark at night.

It's impossible and no one believed it. But that was the take-away
from hundreds of his whistle stop speeches. Just like out of Iraq in
six months. Nothing he promised happened. Mostly because it all WAS
impossible. He's a fool or a liar. Take you pick.

>>Unless it says we really can keep our insurance if we like it, it's
>>not worth the click. Even Clinton says he has to find a way to keep
>>his promise. Doubt if he will. Be sure to post if he does.
>
>That's not Obama's fault. It's the insurance companies. Obama is not
>dropping insured. The insurance companies are.

Because the policies Obama said we could keep do not met the ObamaCare
mandates. Yes, it IS Obama's fault. You could have not made the
promise, or he could have put the machinery to honor it in the rules.
He did nothing. Now he pretends he's surprised and his apologists
pretend there is some evil bad guy in the closet.

>Obama thought the
>law fixed insurance companies dropping high risk patients.

We have to pass it to find out what's in it. Now you want to make it
what we thought, maybe, just possibly, might be, in it.

>He was mistaken.

Incompetent or a liar. Take your pick.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:8d48891eig8miaubk...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:09:12 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
> <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>
>>http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/
>
> Unless it says we were clear of the war in Iraq in his first six
> months, it's not worth the click.
>

*I* never said that he has been able to keep ALL of his campan promises.....

> Unless it says he fixed the economy in his first six months, it's not
> worth the click.

*I* never said that he has been able to keep ALL of his promises.....

> Unless it says we really can keep our insurance if we like it, it's
> not worth the click. Even Clinton says he has to find a way to keep
> his promise. Doubt if he will. Be sure to post if he does.

*I* never said that he has been able to keep ALL of his promises.....

====

1) YOU said: "Obama's whole campaign pitch was a crock and a load, you are saying It sounded good, but no plans to deliver one bit of it."

2) I linked you to a 13 page document containg 20 items per page outlining promises Obama has kept, which you won't even look at....

3) Which means you are fucking liar, as usual....

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:pn48899g2fjkte1o2...@4ax.com...

No, YOU define "the unreal ones"...after all, it's you who's first claimed that they exist....

[deep]

Um, Congress wrote the law, not Obama. If you want to place blame
place it on the Republicans who fought every step of the way to water
the law down. Basically the law was written by the insurance
companies and clearly they wrote themselves in some loopholes.

>
>>Obama thought the
>>law fixed insurance companies dropping high risk patients.
>
>We have to pass it to find out what's in it. Now you want to make it
>what we thought, maybe, just possibly, might be, in it.
>
>>He was mistaken.
>
>Incompetent or a liar. Take your pick.

Have a bad day? Have a couple more shots of Wild Turkey, take another
slam on your Budweiser, and take a couple more benzos. You'l be ok.

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 4:24:16 PM UTC-8, Rudy Canoza sock puppet wrote:

> He sucks.

No as much as you do.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:24:16 -0800, Rudy Canoza

You're a pathetic little twit. Best part of all of this is the hatred
is eating you alive. It will shorten your life considerably and
that's good for everyone.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:49:09 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
<123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:

>2) I linked you to a 13 page document containg 20 items per page
>outlining promises Obama has kept, which you won't even look at....

>3) Which means you are fucking liar, as usual....

I didn't choose to read some propaganda, therefore I AM a liar.

That must be some of the liberal logic we hear so much about.

And, of course, some profanity and personal insults. Traditional sign
of a liberal who can't hold up his side of a discussion.

Is it true when Gunner says you have worked the hammer and sickle into
your company logo?

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:00:52 PM UTC-8, deep wrote:

> You're a pathetic little twit. Best part of all of this is the hatred
>
> is eating you alive. It will shorten your life considerably and
>
> that's good for everyone.

Another asshole will be along to replace him. That's the way the world works.

[jon_banquer]

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:41:59 -0700, deep wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:21:36 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>
>>On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:25:22 -0700, deep wrote:
>>
>>>They were singing in the streets "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead". She
>>>was an evil witch who helped the wealthy destroy the middle class.
>>

>>Very simply, a human being died. She had friends, family, and yes,
>>political supporters that morn her.
>
>She was a corrupt, evil person. Just google thatcher corruption and
>you will see.

GOOGLING "Deep Dudu Asshole"
About 9,350,000 results

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

ROFLMAO

If it was Bush instead of Obama it sure as hell would be Bush's fault.

What's REALLY amazing is you fall for your own bullshit every time.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:00:52 -0700, deep wrote:

> Best part of all of this is the hatred
>is eating you alive.

There must not be much left of you, then.

Deep Dudu's Dark Descent into Dementia....

"In reality, I'm trying to save you all."
Message-ID: <7fhop7lrt9rjpuhtf...@4ax.com>

“I'm a pacifist. I abhor violence.”
Message-ID: <n2kl37pj735iq9ain...@4ax.com>

"Email me a photograph of your face. I will put a round through each
eyeball and one between your front teeth, scan it in and email it back
to you."
Message-ID: <7jd0d7tbu7sm3th4j...@4ax.com>

“Maybe we should just sit back and watch the idiots kill each other.”
Message-ID: <4e78698a...@text.giganews.com>

“You are one sick fucking bastard. Get some help you freak. Why
don't you just eat your gun. It's not like anybody would care if you
blew the top of your head off. Not like anything worthwhile would be
lost.”
Message-ID: <a8umd7ttsok7l2bfn...@4ax.com>

“I would buy you a gun for Christmas if it had a bad slide that shot
back and blew your worthless head off.”
Message-ID: <mietd7hsh8ap0lr42...@4ax.com>

“If you people don't fucking wise up soon we are going to have to
start shooting you."
Message-ID: <v1e8r6pijl5btcjas...@4ax.com>

“Best part of when we become a communist country is we will get to
line trash like you up against a wall and shoot you.”
Message-ID: <l4dqc7l9s4fqk35rn...@4ax.com>

"I didn't say I was a communist. But I will volunteer for the firing
squad to shoot your ignorant ass."
— Scheißekopf "Deep Dudu", Wed, 23 Nov 2011

"Frag your CO for freedom."
Message-ID: <6ul9m7dgmo87jjrla...@4ax.com>

"I said shut the fuck up. ...You are clearly and out of touch with
reality raving lunatic. So shut up now. Euthanasia is not far away
in your future." -Lagerführerin Deep Dudu
Message-ID: <gtpmn7dprv625b0d5...@4ax.com>

"Jesus Christ you people are fucking stupid. It's so good for the
planet and the species that you all are going to be dead soon."
-Deep "Spreading the Love" Dudu May 28, 2012

"You're a fucking raving lunatic. Why don't you go for the grape
Koolaid now and beat the rush and do everyone in the world a favor?"
Message-ID: <br6238tv291ip0851...@4ax.com>

Big bulldozed pits are a better place for conservatives though.
Message-ID: <upin98td6j3nnqkib...@4ax.com>

"...we want you to die. Conservatism is the lingering disease that
infects society. The sooner we are rid of you the sooner we can go on
with trying to rebuild a sustainable society."
Message-ID: <7h7dq8tcataiagcnl...@4ax.com>

No, I think liberals should be allowed to have guns. Just Republicans
should have their guns confiscated and be relocated to re-education
camps.
Message-ID: <n3o1491eev9011e0a...@4ax.com>

Guy Fawkes: "Soooo, you want a race war?"
Deep DuDu: "Yep. That means you will be dead soon.
The sooner the better."
Posted Sat, 05 Oct 2013 14:13:56 -0600
Message-ID: <nms059t0svc31fpkk...@4ax.com>

"What would be fair is a bullet in the back of your worthless head
then
we bill your family for the bullet."
October 7, 2013

[Rudy Canoza]

On 11/13/2013 4:10 PM, deep wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:59:09 -0700, Winston_Smith

>>

>> Unless it says we really can keep our insurance if we like it, it's
>> not worth the click. Even Clinton says he has to find a way to keep
>> his promise. Doubt if he will. Be sure to post if he does.
>
> That's not Obama's fault.

It is.

> It's the insurance companies.

No, it's Obama's.


> Obama is notdropping insured. The insurance companies are.

The insurance companies are canceling policies because the law obliges
them to cancel the policies, you fuckstain.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 11/13/2013 5:00 PM, deep wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:24:16 -0800, Rudy Canoza
> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/2013 4:21 PM, deep wrote:
>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:13:06 -0800, Rudy Canoza
>>> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/13/2013 4:10 PM, deep wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:59:09 -0700, Winston_Smith
>>>>> <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:09:12 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
>>>>>> <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unless it says we were clear of the war in Iraq in his first six
>>>>>> months, it's not worth the click.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unless it says he fixed the economy in his first six months, it's not
>>>>>> worth the click.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fix a totally trashed economy in six months?
>>>>
>>>> The economy was not "totally trashed", you Marxist cunt. And he hasn't
>>>> "fixed" it in *FIVE* years, let alone six months.
>>>>
>>>> He said he was going to fix it. He didn't do it. He lied.
>>>
>>> Everything is improving.
>>
>> Barely, and much later than Obummuh said it would.
>>
>> He sucks.
>
> You're a pathetic little twit.

Obummuh is a shit president.

[Rudy Canoza]

Don't forget:

One day I came to the realization that they couldn't all be right,
therefore they must all be wrong. Simple logic, actually.

10/23/2013 4:07 PM
60lg69t1dk3cqm1cu...@4ax.com

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:58:39 -0700, deep wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:24:53 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:10:49 -0700, deep wrote:

>>>That's not Obama's fault. It's the insurance companies. Obama is not
>>>dropping insured. The insurance companies are.
>>
>>Because the policies Obama said we could keep do not met the ObamaCare
>>mandates. Yes, it IS Obama's fault. You could have not made the
>>promise, or he could have put the machinery to honor it in the rules.
>>He did nothing. Now he pretends he's surprised and his apologists
>>pretend there is some evil bad guy in the closet.
>
>Um, Congress wrote the law, not Obama.

If you keep going down this trail of apologies and pointing fingers
away from Obama, we are going to come down to "Bush did it".

Ah, no. First, Obama campaigned on it. Twice. It IS the landmark
legislation of HIS administration.

Second, Congress did not write the rules; they wrote enabling
legislation. The rules were written by the Department of Health and
Human Services. That's a department of the Obama's Executive branch.
It is headed by a member of Obama's cabinet. He appoints the cabinet.
He is fully entitled, actually obligated, to give them direction,
oversee their operation, and both credit and blame for their failures,
fall on the President. He is fully entitled to hire and fire as he
sees fit.

Third, that legislation was passed by the Dems with three bought and
paid for turn-coat RHINOS. The Republicans weren't even allowed to
attend half the workshop meetings. Physically locked out in some
cases.

>If you want to place blame
>place it on the Republicans who fought every step of the way to water
>the law down.

It matters not whether the Republicans fought it, that's just your
mis-direction. The executive - Obama's executive - wrote the working
rules and regulations. The Democrat legislature passed the enabling
legislation. The Republicans could do little more than bitch and moan.

>Basically the law was written by the insurance
>companies and clearly they wrote themselves in some loopholes.

Another mis-direction. If that is so, it's the Dems in Congress who
passed the enabling legislation and the Dems in the WH who wrote the
working law, that must answer for it.

You aren't saying it's OK for a president to break his promise if he
was snookered by brighter people, are you?

>>>Obama thought the
>>>law fixed insurance companies dropping high risk patients.
>>
>>We have to pass it to find out what's in it. Now you want to make it
>>what we thought, maybe, just possibly, might be, in it.
>>
>>>He was mistaken.
>>
>>Incompetent or a liar. Take your pick.
>
>Have a bad day? Have a couple more shots of Wild Turkey, take another
>slam on your Budweiser, and take a couple more benzos. You'l be ok.

If you have a choice other than "he screwed up" or "he was ignorant"
let us know. Otherwise, spare me the personal insults - the
traditional hallmark of a liberal who can't hold up his side of a
discussion.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:t248895btr2akgt2i...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:49:28 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:

>>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:16:05 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"wrote:
>>>
>>>>You've again entered the manic phase, suggest check your meds, Winston.
>>>
>>> Having no real response, I see you have again adopted the classic
>>> quips of 10 year old minds everywhere. Good for you.
>>
>>You presented sweeping generalizations, the vast majority without substance.
>
> And you counter with an assumption based on nothing except your need
> to say you didn't like what I posted.

As if your replay above suddenly adds substance....

> That, sir, is even less
> substance. It is, of course, an intentional insult which is the
> hallmark of liberals that can't cut it in a discussion.

Only two acting heads of state attenden Margaret Thatcher's funeral; Queen Elizabeth II, and Bulgarian President Rosen PlevnelievBulgarian president Rosen Plevneliev....

Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev was one of the two acting heads of state who attended Wednesday's ceremonial funeral of former British PM Margaret Thatcher. - See more at: http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=149642#sthash.HAZSVqsU.dpufBulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev was one of the two acting heads of state who attended Wednesday's ceremonial funeral of former British PM Margaret Thatcher. - See more at: http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=149642#sthash.HAZSVqsU.dpufBulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev was one of the two acting heads of state who attended Wednesday's ceremonial funeral of former British PM Margaret Thatcher. - See more at: http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=149642#sthash.HAZSVqsU.dpufBulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev was one of the two acting heads of state who attended Wednesday's ceremonial funeral of former British PM Margaret Thatcher. - See more at: http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=149642#sthash.HAZSVqsU.dpufBulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev was one of the two acting heads of state who attended Wednesday's ceremonial funeral of former British PM Margaret Thatcher. - See more at: http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=149642#sthash.Nx1x0Eds.dpuf--but of course, Obama didn't go because his "60's radical mantras" told him not to...

> Is it true when Gunner says you have the hammer and sickle worked into
> your company logo?

Gunner is dead, for all practical purposes.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:53:33 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"> wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:52:25 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:17:14 -0700, deep wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>All economic indicators have been improving under Obama
>>>>>http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts.htm
>>>>
>>>> Snicker. Yeah, except all the real ones.
>>>
>>>Feel free to elaborate...Snicker...
>>
>> Feel free to define "all indicators".
>> As you wrote, "You presented sweeping generalizations ...".
>>
>> "All" is pretty sweeping.
>
>No, YOU define "the unreal ones"...after all, it's you who's first claimed that they exist....

Are you saying there are no economic indicators out there that don't
agree with the official government statistics?

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:31:01 PM UTC-8, Rudy Canoza sock puppet wrote:

> Obummuh is a shit president.

So was Bush Sr.

So was Bush Jr.

So was Carter.

You have no point as per usual.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:39:02 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
<123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:

>Only two acting heads of state attenden Margaret Thatcher's
>funeral; Queen Elizabeth II, and Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev

You are morphing the point. The original post read.
|-- the Obama administration chose
|-- not to send a single senior member of the Cabinet.
|-- In fact, no actively serving, elected Democrat

That says nothing about head of state. You just now introduce that so
you can point out there weren't many.

There are many serving and past Democrats that would be perfectly
suitable representatives. Clinton must have known her and a good part
of his education was in England. He'd probably love a chance to see if
England still swings like a pendulum do.

>> Is it true when Gunner says you have the hammer and sickle worked into
>> your company logo?
>
>Gunner is dead, for all practical purposes.

Gunner will be very surprised to hear that.

I also note your evasion of the question.

[Guy Fawkes]

deep wrote in news:r93689h6habm2al7f...@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:54:38 -0800, GOP_Decline_and_Fall
><D...@null.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:28:56 -0700, "Ray Keller"
>><Left...@desperate.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>England vs Obama
>>>
>>>
>>>One reason why England will not join us against Syria:
>>>
>>> President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
>>>being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
>>>representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
>>>Hillary Clinton.
>>
>>There was no invitation from "England" , or indeed Britain.
>>
>>In all of the countries of the United Kingdom, England included,
>>ordinary folk held street parties to rejoice and celebrate her death.
>

> They were singing in the streets "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead". She
> was an evil witch who helped the wealthy destroy the middle class.
>

You really are a fucking moron.

--
Republicans really aren't human beings, so there is no harm, no foul.

Kirby Grant - Nov 3, 2013

Telling us his views of the world.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:7m8889tpdj327oji0...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:49:09 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
> <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>
>>2) I linked you to a 13 page document containg 20 items per page
>>outlining promises Obama has kept, which you won't even look at....
>
>>3) Which means you are fucking liar, as usual....
>
> I didn't choose to read some propaganda,

How in the fuck could you know what it is, you never read it......

> therefore I AM a liar.

Well, at least you've got THAT part correct ....

> That must be some of the liberal logic we hear so much about.

Naww.....it's just the voices in your head you're hearing.....

> And, of course, some profanity and personal insults. Traditional sign
> of a liberal who can't hold up his side of a discussion.

You're the one who's avoiding discussion, by attempting to change the subject, Winston....

> Is it true when Gunner says you have worked the hammer and sickle into
> your company logo?

Another lie...Gunner is a habitual liar--it's been proven many, many times....it's foolish for anyone to believe anything that he says.

--you and him seem to have a lot in common....

[Guy Fawkes]

deep wrote in news:4ov7895p4ekm3sbcj...@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:21:36 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:25:22 -0700, deep wrote:
>>

>>>They were singing in the streets "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead". She
>>>was an evil witch who helped the wealthy destroy the middle class.
>>

>>Very simply, a human being died. She had friends, family, and yes,
>>political supporters that morn her.
>
> She was a corrupt, evil person. Just google thatcher corruption and

> you will see. Regular people rejoice when somebody like that is
> finally gone. Unfortunately the damage people like she and Ronald
> Reagan have done will be with us forever.
>
>
>

Make sure your death notice is posted here. I'll buy the first keg.

[Guy Fawkes]

deep wrote in news:q718891obi8qv06vh...@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 14:50:31 -0800, Rudy Canoza
><LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
>>On 11/13/2013 2:13 PM, deep wrote:
>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:22:53 -0800, Rudy Canoza
>>> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:

>>>
>>>> On 11/12/2013 9:25 PM, deep wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:54:38 -0800, GOP_Decline_and_Fall
>>>>> <D...@null.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:28:56 -0700, "Ray Keller"
>>>>>> <Left...@desperate.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> England vs Obama
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One reason why England will not join us against Syria:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral
>>>>>>> despite being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's
>>>>>>> invitation as a representative of the American people. Joe Biden
>>>>>>> also refused, as did Hillary Clinton.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There was no invitation from "England" , or indeed Britain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In all of the countries of the United Kingdom, England included,
>>>>>> ordinary folk held street parties to rejoice and celebrate her
>>>>>> death.
>>>>>

>>>>> They were singing in the streets "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead". She
>>>>> was an evil witch who helped the wealthy destroy the middle class.
>>>>

>>>> Only the parasites were doing that. The decent people, the backbone
>>>> of the UK, mourned her death. She was a good woman and a great
>>>> leader. You, you fuckstain, weren't fit to put a new roll of toilet
>>>> paper into her washroom.
>>>
>>> She was a bitchy female version of the
>>
>>She was a great leader who prevented the UK from sinking into third
>>world living conditions.
>
> No she didn't. Under her leadership the wealthy got richer, the poor
> got poorer, and a large portion of the middle class sunk into poverty.
> She cut taxes on her wealthy friends and drastically cut education to
> pay for it.
>
> http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/british-education-in-crisis-lit
> eracy-and-numeracy-skills-of-young-people-in-uk-among-lowest-in-developed
> -world-8866117.html
>

More Marxist blather. Good Gawd you people are stupid. To atupid to be
allowed to live lest you contaminate the gene pool.

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:51:16 PM UTC-8, Winston_Smith wrote:

> Gunner will be very surprised to hear that.

No one who remembers what Mark Wieber was like before his stroke and who is objective will be surprised. Wieber is mentally dead. He's basically on life support.

[Guy Fawkes]

"PrecisionmachinisT" <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote in
news:ScidnfarB_oHmxnP...@scnresearch.com:

>
> "Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

> news:orv789t4mubjpk95e...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:13:42 -0700, deep wrote:
>>
>>>She was a bitchy female version of the sociopath Ronald Reagan. Both
>>>of them hated regular people and did nothing but work to benefit the
>>>ultra wealthy and powerful.
>>
>> So the left is giving up on being uniters, diversity, tolerance, being
>> inclusive, and such similar fuzzy feel good ideas then?
>>
>
> No, the left is simply telling the truth about Reagan, and Thatcher.
>
>>
>> Obama's whole campaign pitch was a crock and a load, you are saying.
>>
>
> No, that's just something you pulled out of your ass, Winston.

>
>> It sounded good, but no plans to deliver one bit of it.
>

> Yup, sure thing...
>
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise
> -kept/
>
>
>
>

Are you interested in truth? Perhaps you should chat with the liar Obama.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:58:17 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:49:09 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>
>>>2) I linked you to a 13 page document containg 20 items per page
>>>outlining promises Obama has kept, which you won't even look at....
>>
>>>3) Which means you are fucking liar, as usual....
>>
>> I didn't choose to read some propaganda,
>
>How in the fuck could you know what it is, you never read it......

I know what promises he did not keep. The ones I considered important.
Your page either talks about other irrelevant picky stuff or it lies.
Either way I don't need it to determine if Obama has lied to me.

>> therefore I AM a liar.
>
>Well, at least you've got THAT part correct ....

That was clever twenty five years ago.

>
>> That must be some of the liberal logic we hear so much about.
>
>Naww.....it's just the voices in your head you're hearing.....

Some profanity up top and now personal insults. Traditional sign

of a liberal who can't hold up his side of a discussion.

>> And, of course, some profanity and personal insults. Traditional sign
>> of a liberal who can't hold up his side of a discussion.

True then; true now.

>You're the one who's avoiding discussion, by attempting to change the subject, Winston....

Changing the subject ???? You morphed to a whole new thread. I guess
you got your rocks off on that one, huh?

>> Is it true when Gunner says you have worked the hammer and sickle into
>> your company logo?
>
>Another lie...Gunner is a habitual liar--it's been proven many, many times....
>it's foolish for anyone to believe anything that he says.
>
>--you and him seem to have a lot in common....

I only asked if it was true. Thou dost protest too much, me thinks.

How about a link to your logo so everyone can see for themselves?

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:tka889htr1lnf4f7u...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:39:02 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
> <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Only two acting heads of state attenden Margaret Thatcher's
>>funeral; Queen Elizabeth II, and Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev
>
> You are morphing the point. The original post read.
> |-- the Obama administration chose
> |-- not to send a single senior member of the Cabinet.
> |-- In fact, no actively serving, elected Democrat
>

Liar.

The original post says:

"President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
Hillary Clinton."

> That says nothing about head of state.

See above

> You just now introduce that so

No I did not.

> you can point out there weren't many.

Hogwash.

> There are many serving and past Democrats that would be perfectly
> suitable representatives.

And several of them went.

> Clinton must have known her and a good part
> of his education was in England. He'd probably love a chance to see if
> England still swings like a pendulum do.

And so what?

>>> Is it true when Gunner says you have the hammer and sickle worked into
>>> your company logo?
>>
>>Gunner is dead, for all practical purposes.
>
> Gunner will be very surprised to hear that.
>
> I also note your evasion of the question.

Only an imbecile would even ask such a question.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:38:43 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>It matters not whether the Republicans fought it, that's just your
>mis-direction. The executive - Obama's executive - wrote the working
>rules and regulations.

Nonsense. Maybe you should figure out what you are talking about
first before you go on.

>The Democrat legislature passed the enabling
>legislation. The Republicans could do little more than bitch and moan.
>

No, they forced 44 votes now to try to repeal it. They fought the
legislation every step of the way and made no meaningful contribution
to it.

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 6:10:00 PM UTC-8, Winston_Smith wrote:

> I only asked if it was true. Thou dost protest too much, me thinks.

You don't think. That's the problem.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:18:41 -0700, deep wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:38:43 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>It matters not whether the Republicans fought it, that's just your
>>mis-direction. The executive - Obama's executive - wrote the working
>>rules and regulations.
>
>Nonsense. Maybe you should figure out what you are talking about
>first before you go on.

That's never stopped you before, has it?

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"jon_banquer" <jonba...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ecb656f8-51c9-4181...@googlegroups.com...

> On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:51:16 PM UTC-8, Winston_Smith wrote:
>
>> Gunner will be very surprised to hear that.
>
> No one who remembers what Mark Wieber was like before his stroke and who is objective will be surprised. Wieber is mentally dead. He's basically on life support.
>

My guess is some of his junk will eventually fall and trap him and the authorities won't find him till the dogs have pretty much consume the remains.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 11/13/2013 6:18 PM, deep wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:38:43 -0700, Winston_Smith
> <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>> It matters not whether the Republicans fought it, that's just your
>> mis-direction. The executive - Obama's executive - wrote the working
>> rules and regulations.
>
> Nonsense.

No, not nonsense. No legislator writes a law like that. Executive
branch staffers do.

>> The Democrat legislature passed the enabling
>> legislation. The Republicans could do little more than bitch and moan.
>>
> No, they

Yes. It's a Democrat law.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:irb889lnj2415aaq8...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:58:17 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:49:09 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>
>>>>2) I linked you to a 13 page document containg 20 items per page
>>>>outlining promises Obama has kept, which you won't even look at....
>>>
>>>>3) Which means you are fucking liar, as usual....
>>>
>>> I didn't choose to read some propaganda,
>>
>>How in the fuck could you know what it is, you never read it......
>
> I know what promises he did not keep. The ones I considered important.
> Your page either talks about other irrelevant picky stuff or it lies.
> Either way I don't need it to determine if Obama has lied to me.
>
>>> therefore I AM a liar.
>>
>>Well, at least you've got THAT part correct ....
>
> That was clever twenty five years ago.
>>
>>> That must be some of the liberal logic we hear so much about.
>>
>>Naww.....it's just the voices in your head you're hearing.....
>
> Some profanity up top and now personal insults. Traditional sign
> of a liberal who can't hold up his side of a discussion.
>
>>> And, of course, some profanity and personal insults. Traditional sign
>>> of a liberal who can't hold up his side of a discussion.
>

My side of the discussion is that you fucking lied when you said (Obama) had "no plans to deliver one bit of it" in refrerence to his campaign promises.

> True then; true now.

No, you're still a liar--you just won't admit it.

>>You're the one who's avoiding discussion, by attempting to change the subject, Winston....
>
> Changing the subject ???? You morphed to a whole new thread. I guess
> you got your rocks off on that one, huh?
>
>>> Is it true when Gunner says you have worked the hammer and sickle into
>>> your company logo?
>>
>>Another lie...Gunner is a habitual liar--it's been proven many, many times....
>>it's foolish for anyone to believe anything that he says.
>>
>>--you and him seem to have a lot in common....
>
> I only asked if it was true. Thou dost protest too much, me thinks.

Ask Gunner to provide you some proof...after all, it's HIS claim...

> How about a link to your logo so everyone can see for themselves?

How about fuck off it's none of your goddamned business.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:hda889l479fdjigik...@4ax.com...

No, that's not what I'm saying....

--must be those voices in your head again.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:16:40 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:39:02 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>
>>>Only two acting heads of state attenden Margaret Thatcher's
>>>funeral; Queen Elizabeth II, and Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev
>>
>> You are morphing the point. The original post read.
>> |-- the Obama administration chose
>> |-- not to send a single senior member of the Cabinet.
>> |-- In fact, no actively serving, elected Democrat
>
>Liar.

Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
up their end of a discussion.

>The original post says:
>
>"President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
>being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
>representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
>Hillary Clinton."

Where does that say anything about "heads of state"? If the words are
there, they must be in invisible electrons.

The original post also says exactly what I cut and pasted from it in
my last response.

If your only debating tactic is to be screaming "Liar", there is
little point wasting the electrons to amuse you.

>> That says nothing about head of state.
>
>See above

Where?

> > You just now introduce that so
>
>No I did not.
>
>> you can point out there weren't many.
>
>Hogwash.
>
>> There are many serving and past Democrats that would be perfectly
>> suitable representatives.
>
>And several of them went.

Any of them at a level suitable to be considered the President's
representative? To the funeral of someone that was exactly the
equivalent of a President.

>> Clinton must have known her and a good part
>> of his education was in England. He'd probably love a chance to see if
>> England still swings like a pendulum do.
>
>And so what?

Sew buttons ???

>>>> Is it true when Gunner says you have the hammer and sickle worked into
>>>> your company logo?
>>>
>>>Gunner is dead, for all practical purposes.
>>
>> Gunner will be very surprised to hear that.
>> I also note your evasion of the question.
>
>Only an imbecile

Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
up their end of a discussion.

>would even ask such a question.

Then what can we say about someone that keeps evading it?

Got a link to your logo for us?

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:18:41 -0700, deep wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:38:43 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:

>
>>It matters not whether the Republicans fought it, that's just your
>>mis-direction. The executive - Obama's executive - wrote the working
>>rules and regulations.
>
>Nonsense. Maybe you should figure out what you are talking about
>first before you go on.

Personal insult - the hallmark of a liberal that can't hold up his
side of a discussion.

>>The Democrat legislature passed the enabling
>>legislation. The Republicans could do little more than bitch and moan.
>>
>No, they forced 44 votes now to try to repeal it.

And that has what to do with the working rules and regulations that
Obama's cabinet wrote after the Democrats in Congress enabled them to
do that ?????? Wrote and promulgated BEFORE the Rs tried that
maneuver.

>They fought the
>legislation every step of the way and made no meaningful contribution
>to it.

Making it wholly a Democrat production.

[jon_banquer]

Ever notice it's never about the skill with Mark Wieber it's always about all the junk equipment he owns?

You will never find Mark Wieber posting to a place like Welding Web or trying to MIG like TIG:

http://weldingweb.com/showthread.php?30845-Mig-like-Tig

In general, I get a kick out of machining morons like iggy who think because they retrofitted a knee mill with Linux CNC that they are now CNC machinists. I can't think of anything less important when it comes to building machining skills than converting a manual machine to CNC.

Ever notice how none of these losers ever talk about surfacing toolpath, etc.

Prismatic parts are as far as they will ever go.

[Winston_Smith]

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote

>> Are you saying there are no economic indicators out there that don't
>> agree with the official government statistics?
>
>No, that's not what I'm saying....
>
>--must be those voices in your head again.

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 6:42:34 PM UTC-8, Winston_Smith wrote:

> Got a link to your logo for us?

The more you repeat this, the more you sound like a retard. It reminds me of "Oh Danny boy" asking me over and over for pictures of my home machine shop.

Are you two idiots related by any chance?

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:46:49 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:18:41 -0700, deep wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:38:43 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>>
>>>It matters not whether the Republicans fought it, that's just your
>>>mis-direction. The executive - Obama's executive - wrote the working
>>>rules and regulations.
>>
>>Nonsense. Maybe you should figure out what you are talking about
>>first before you go on.
>
>Personal insult - the hallmark of a liberal that can't hold up his
>side of a discussion.
>

The Executive does NOT write legislation. This was written by
Congress. The President issues Executive Orders. This is not an
Executive Order.

>>>The Democrat legislature passed the enabling
>>>legislation. The Republicans could do little more than bitch and moan.
>>>
>>No, they forced 44 votes now to try to repeal it.
>
>And that has what to do with the working rules and regulations that
>Obama's cabinet wrote after the Democrats in Congress enabled them to
>do that ?????? Wrote and promulgated BEFORE the Rs tried that
>maneuver.

You got some cites for that? I never heard anybody claim that the
President writes legislation.

>
>>They fought the
>>legislation every step of the way and made no meaningful contribution
>>to it.
>
>Making it wholly a Democrat production.

If it were up to the Democrats we would have single payer. FYI the
Democrats rewrote the legislation several times trying to appease the
Republicans only to have them reject it anyway.

[Scout]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:s5e889d3ih9n477km...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:18:41 -0700, deep wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:38:43 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>>
>>>It matters not whether the Republicans fought it, that's just your
>>>mis-direction. The executive - Obama's executive - wrote the working
>>>rules and regulations.
>>
>>Nonsense. Maybe you should figure out what you are talking about
>>first before you go on.
>
> Personal insult - the hallmark of a liberal that can't hold up his
> side of a discussion.

What's even more amusing about that attempted insult is that Dudu has shown
time and time again that not knowing what he's talking about doesn't hinder
Dudu's ability to discuss any subject.

Rather, as usual, his attempts to cast insults are only a projection of his
own personal failings.

>>>The Democrat legislature passed the enabling
>>>legislation. The Republicans could do little more than bitch and moan.
>>>
>>No, they forced 44 votes now to try to repeal it.
>
> And that has what to do with the working rules and regulations that
> Obama's cabinet wrote after the Democrats in Congress enabled them to
> do that ?????? Wrote and promulgated BEFORE the Rs tried that
> maneuver.
>
>>They fought the
>>legislation every step of the way and made no meaningful contribution
>>to it.
>
> Making it wholly a Democrat production.

But it's got to be Bush's fault or Dudu might have to blame Obama for how
massively fucked up it is.

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 7:03:27 PM UTC-8, Scout wrote:

> What's even more amusing about that attempted insult is that Dudu has shown
>
> time and time again that not knowing what he's talking about doesn't hinder
>
> Dudu's ability to discuss any subject.

Sure hasn't stopped you from discussing 3D printing which as your posts make clear you don't know jack shit about.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:4hd889t7pe7qu83jv...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:16:40 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:39:02 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>
>>>>Only two acting heads of state attenden Margaret Thatcher's
>>>>funeral; Queen Elizabeth II, and Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev
>>>
>>> You are morphing the point. The original post read.
>>> |-- the Obama administration chose
>>> |-- not to send a single senior member of the Cabinet.
>>> |-- In fact, no actively serving, elected Democrat
>>
>>Liar.
>
> Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
> up their end of a discussion.
>
>>The original post says:
>>
>>"President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
>>being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
>>representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
>>Hillary Clinton."
>
> Where does that say anything about "heads of state"? If the words are

Obama is the US head of state, you nitwit.

> there, they must be in invisible electrons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_state

> The original post also says exactly what I cut and pasted from it in
> my last response.
>
> If your only debating tactic is to be screaming "Liar", there is
> little point wasting the electrons to amuse you.
>
>>> That says nothing about head of state.
>>
>>See above
>
> Where?
>
>> > You just now introduce that so
>>
>>No I did not.
>>
>>> you can point out there weren't many.
>>
>>Hogwash.
>>
>>> There are many serving and past Democrats that would be perfectly
>>> suitable representatives.
>>
>>And several of them went.
>
> Any of them at a level suitable to be considered the President's
> representative? To the funeral of someone that was exactly the
> equivalent of a President.

They were sent there represent the USA, NOT the president, you goofball.

>>> Clinton must have known her and a good part
>>> of his education was in England. He'd probably love a chance to see if
>>> England still swings like a pendulum do.
>>
>>And so what?
>
> Sew buttons ???

So now you imagine that Obama could have somehow ordered Clinton to go?

>>>>> Is it true when Gunner says you have the hammer and sickle worked into
>>>>> your company logo?
>>>>
>>>>Gunner is dead, for all practical purposes.
>>>
>>> Gunner will be very surprised to hear that.
>>> I also note your evasion of the question.
>>
>>Only an imbecile
>
> Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
> up their end of a discussion.

If the shoe fits...

>>would even ask such a question.
>
> Then what can we say about someone that keeps evading it?

It's simply none of your business.

> Got a link to your logo for us?

http://tinyurl.com/mdof8rb

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:52:09 -0700, deep wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:46:49 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:18:41 -0700, deep wrote:
>>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:38:43 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>>>
>>>>It matters not whether the Republicans fought it, that's just your
>>>>mis-direction. The executive - Obama's executive - wrote the working
>>>>rules and regulations.
>>>
>>>Nonsense. Maybe you should figure out what you are talking about
>>>first before you go on.
>>
>>Personal insult - the hallmark of a liberal that can't hold up his
>>side of a discussion.
>>
>The Executive does NOT write legislation. This was written by
>Congress. The President issues Executive Orders. This is not an
>Executive Order.

The Executive "executes" the intent of legislation. In modern terms
that means congress gives them a broad go-ahead and a budget. The
various cabinet departments write and enforce the rules and
regulations. That is not legislation. It's how a general legislative
concept gets turned into six feet high stacks of rules and codes books
that cover every nitty and every gritty.

If that is not what they do, why do we have a cabinet? What is it they
DO do?

>>>>The Democrat legislature passed the enabling
>>>>legislation. The Republicans could do little more than bitch and moan.
>>>>
>>>No, they forced 44 votes now to try to repeal it.
>>
>>And that has what to do with the working rules and regulations that
>>Obama's cabinet wrote after the Democrats in Congress enabled them to
>>do that ?????? Wrote and promulgated BEFORE the Rs tried that
>>maneuver.
>
>You got some cites for that? I never heard anybody claim that the
>President writes legislation.

And I didn't say that either. The Executive writes rules and
regulations to be the operating nuts and bolts of legislative intent.

>>>They fought the
>>>legislation every step of the way and made no meaningful contribution
>>>to it.
>>
>>Making it wholly a Democrat production.
>
>If it were up to the Democrats we would have single payer.

That's flat out silly. You only got three RHINOS to vote for it. Three
Ds could have been schmoused or bludgeoned into supporting it if the
Rs didn't bite. The Dems could have made it anything they felt like.
What they felt like was the present system.


Pelosi is much kidded for saying "we have to pass it to find out
what's in it". That's not some silly babbling. She is not dumb and
could read the bill on her desk just fine. She meant that until the
legislature passed legislation to enable the executive cabinet
department to write rules and regulations, she could not answer
specific and detailed questions about how things would work. She
didn't know. The executive cabinet level Department of Health and
Human Services had not yet written the rules, codes and regulations
that would spell out the detail answers.

This was 8th and 9th grade civics when I was in school. Sadly, most
voters today probably have been spared that course. And they vote for
silly and undefined ideas because they sound good in passing.

>FYI the
>Democrats rewrote the legislation several times trying to appease the
>Republicans only to have them reject it anyway.

Which, once again, says the final result is a product of the
Democrats. Once the Rs rejected it, it was whatever the Ds could agree
on enough to pass. The Rs were just laying in the corner, kicking
their feet, and crying. What was done was done purely by Democrat
hands.



Look, deep, I sympathize with you. Obama tried to do something that
sounds like a nice idea on the simple surface of it. Your guys are a
bunch of idealists and don't talk to people that have a clue how
complex the real world is. You are only interested in how it should
work if it were ideal.

You tried and it all turned to shit. I feel bad for you in a way. But
the plan and the execution was 100% Democrat.

There is no use pointing in every direction saying that's the bad guy
that screwed it up. It's ObamaCare and it's all his whether he pulls
it out or the party gets all but lynched at the next election. You
guys had the power to have it all your way and now they are all your
chickens that you must find a place to roost.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:qee8895e53ce0stvb...@4ax.com...

Glaringly apparent is your failure to produce even a single "real economic
indicator" showing that the economy has not indeed been improving....

--

[deep]

The price of whiskey is up at his favorite drive through liquor store.

[Winston_Smith]

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith"wrote i

>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:16:40 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:39:02 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Only two acting heads of state attenden Margaret Thatcher's
>>>>>funeral; Queen Elizabeth II, and Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev
>>>>
>>>> You are morphing the point. The original post read.
>>>> |-- the Obama administration chose
>>>> |-- not to send a single senior member of the Cabinet.
>>>> |-- In fact, no actively serving, elected Democrat
>>>
>>>Liar.
>>
>> Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
>> up their end of a discussion.
>>
>>>The original post says:
>>>
>>>"President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
>>>being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
>>>representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
>>>Hillary Clinton."
>>
>> Where does that say anything about "heads of state"? If the words are
>
>Obama is the US head of state, you nitwit.

Yes he is. He did not go.

Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
up their end of a discussion.

>> there, they must be in invisible electrons.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_state
>
>> The original post also says exactly what I cut and pasted from it in
>> my last response.
>>
>> If your only debating tactic is to be screaming "Liar", there is
>> little point wasting the electrons to amuse you.
>>
>>>> That says nothing about head of state.
>>>
>>>See above
>>
>> Where?
>>
>>> > You just now introduce that so
>>>
>>>No I did not.
>>>
>>>> you can point out there weren't many.
>>>
>>>Hogwash.
>>>
>>>> There are many serving and past Democrats that would be perfectly
>>>> suitable representatives.
>>>
>>>And several of them went.
>>
>> Any of them at a level suitable to be considered the President's
>> representative? To the funeral of someone that was exactly the
>> equivalent of a President.
>
>They were sent there represent the USA, NOT the president, you goofball.

Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
up their end of a discussion.

>>>> Clinton must have known her and a good part
>>>> of his education was in England. He'd probably love a chance to see if
>>>> England still swings like a pendulum do.
>>>
>>>And so what?
>>
>> Sew buttons ???
>
>So now you imagine that Obama could have somehow ordered Clinton to go?

I offered his name as an example of a suitable representative. Bush
might have been better because of the political viewpoint if isn't
totally senile yet. Any of our former VPs. A high cabinet member, past
or present. Obama would have none of that.

>>>>>> Is it true when Gunner says you have the hammer and sickle worked into
>>>>>> your company logo?
>>>>>
>>>>>Gunner is dead, for all practical purposes.
>>>>
>>>> Gunner will be very surprised to hear that.
>>>> I also note your evasion of the question.
>>>
>>>Only an imbecile
>>
>> Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
>> up their end of a discussion.
>
>If the shoe fits...

Oh,it fits you just fine. I'm not the one hurling insults and
profanity. We count on our liberal friends to do that. They never
disappoint.

>>>would even ask such a question.
>>
>> Then what can we say about someone that keeps evading it?
>
>It's simply none of your business.
>
>> Got a link to your logo for us?
>
>http://tinyurl.com/mdof8rb

Cute. I like it. Saved it. Yet another evasion of the question. That's
three times now. As much as I don't like the idea, I'm starting to
think I might have to believe Gunner on this one.

[Edward A. Falk]

In article <tBAgu.183309$9P6....@fx22.iad>,

Ray Keller <Left...@desperate.com> wrote:
>
>England vs Obama
>
>
>One reason why England will not join us against Syria:
>

> President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
>being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
>representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
>Hillary Clinton.

> By the way, former Secretary of State George Schultz went to the funeral.
>
> The British took note of the fact that the Obama administration chose

> not to send a single senior member of the Cabinet.

> In fact, no actively serving, elected Democrat attended Lady
> Thatchers funeral.
>
> The Obama Administration did, however, send a formal delegation of 14
> to the funeral of Socialist Dictator Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez,
> who died last month.

The U.S. sent delegations to both funerals, and did not send
the president or the cabinet to either.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/thatcherfuneral.asp
--
-Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[PrecisionmachinisT]

<deep> wrote in message news:p05889d86bjposdht...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:59:09 -0700, Winston_Smith
> <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:09:12 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
>><123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/
>>
>>Unless it says we were clear of the war in Iraq in his first six
>>months, it's not worth the click.
>>
>>Unless it says he fixed the economy in his first six months, it's not
>>worth the click.
>
> Fix a totally trashed economy in six months? Are you serious? You
> probably blame Obama because it gets dark at night.
>
>>
>>Unless it says we really can keep our insurance if we like it, it's
>>not worth the click. Even Clinton says he has to find a way to keep
>>his promise. Doubt if he will. Be sure to post if he does.
>
> That's not Obama's fault. It's the insurance companies. Obama is not
> dropping insured. The insurance companies are. Obama thought the
> law fixed insurance companies dropping high risk patients. He was
> mistaken.

The grandfather clause for existing policies expired on March 23, 2010 but
unsrupulous insurance companies continued selling junk policies knowing full
well that they would have to cancel them on or before Jan 2014

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:17:01 PM UTC-8, Winston_Smith wrote:

> Cute. I like it. Saved it. Yet another evasion of the question. That's
>
> three times now. As much as I don't like the idea, I'm starting to
>
> think I might have to believe Gunner on this one.

I'm beginning to think you have a lot in common with Mark Wieber, Winston.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 21:17:01 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>>Obama is the US head of state, you nitwit.
>
>Yes he is. He did not go.

Maybe he could not go. Maybe he was busy. I'm not sure which crisis
was happening at the time but I'm sure there was something. Besides,
no doubt he hated Thatcher. What's not to hate? The woman was and
evil right wing cunt. Going to her funeral would have been a sign of
respect and I'm sure he had none.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"jon_banquer" <jonba...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:f3cfc701-36b2-4dec...@googlegroups.com...

I think they both must have suffered a serious head injury at some point in
their lives.

[Winston_Smith]

deep wrote:
>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:08:05 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>"Winston_Smith"wrote

>>>
>>>>> Are you saying there are no economic indicators out there that don't
>>>>> agree with the official government statistics?
>>>>
>>>>No, that's not what I'm saying....
>>>>
>>>>--must be those voices in your head again.
>>>
>>> Personal insult - the hallmark of a liberal that can't hold up his
>>> side of a discussion.
>>
>>Glaringly apparent is your failure to produce even a single "real economic
>>indicator" showing that the economy has not indeed been improving....

Are you denying they exist? If you accept that they exist, there is
no point to be made by digging out examples.

>The price of whiskey is up at his favorite drive through liquor store.

Personal insult - the hallmark of a liberal that can't hold up his

side of a discussion. You guys never disappoint.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:25:37 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
<precisionm...@notmail.com> wrote:

>The grandfather clause for existing policies expired on March 23, 2010 but
>unsrupulous insurance companies continued selling junk policies knowing full
>well that they would have to cancel them on or before Jan 2014

So Obama should certainly have known that people could not keep them.

When he made the promise in 2011 and 2012.

Did he knowingly lie or was he just remarkably ignorant of what even
you seem to know ?

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:32:27 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"jon_banquer" wrote

>> On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:17:01 PM UTC-8, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Cute. I like it. Saved it. Yet another evasion of the question. That's
>>>
>>> three times now. As much as I don't like the idea, I'm starting to
>>>
>>> think I might have to believe Gunner on this one.
>>
>>
>> I'm beginning to think you have a lot in common with Mark Wieber, Winston.

Basically I see Gunner as a braggart and a BS artist. He is
entertaining and I'd probably love to have a beer with him. (Fascist
NeoCon that he is.) Him and I have locked horns so often, I'm
permanently in his kill file. (Except when he replies to me and then
accuse me of doing something devious to avoid his filters.)

If I recall, Jon, you are the guy that gets into such furious pissing
contests over some sort of CADware aren't you?

>I think they both must have suffered a serious head injury at some point in
>their lives.

[deep]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 21:34:26 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>deep wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:08:05 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>> "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>>"Winston_Smith"wrote
>>>>
>>>>>> Are you saying there are no economic indicators out there that don't
>>>>>> agree with the official government statistics?
>>>>>
>>>>>No, that's not what I'm saying....
>>>>>
>>>>>--must be those voices in your head again.
>>>>
>>>> Personal insult - the hallmark of a liberal that can't hold up his
>>>> side of a discussion.
>>>
>>>Glaringly apparent is your failure to produce even a single "real economic
>>>indicator" showing that the economy has not indeed been improving....
>
>Are you denying they exist? If you accept that they exist, there is
>no point to be made by digging out examples.

Well, if you tried posting one or two maybe we would believe you.
Especially if you showed the data.

Can't, can you? I'm right aren't I? They are all up.

[jon_banquer]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:42:24 PM UTC-8, Winston_Smith wrote:


> If I recall, Jon, you are the guy that gets into such furious pissing
>
> contests over some sort of CADware aren't you?

That's correct.

I'm very passionate and knowledgeable about CADCAM programming tools for CNC machines and I strongly believe in CADCAM software that has a "vision" to it.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:k6j889lk2g3q5j377...@4ax.com...

> "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith"wrote i
>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:16:40 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:39:02 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Only two acting heads of state attenden Margaret Thatcher's
>>>>>>funeral; Queen Elizabeth II, and Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev
>>>>>
>>>>> You are morphing the point. The original post read.
>>>>> |-- the Obama administration chose
>>>>> |-- not to send a single senior member of the Cabinet.
>>>>> |-- In fact, no actively serving, elected Democrat
>>>>
>>>>Liar.
>>>
>>> Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
>>> up their end of a discussion.
>>>
>>>>The original post says:
>>>>
>>>>"President Obama was a no-show at Margaret Thatcher's funeral despite
>>>>being invited to attend and thus snubbing England 's invitation as a
>>>>representative of the American people. Joe Biden also refused, as did
>>>>Hillary Clinton."
>>>
>>> Where does that say anything about "heads of state"? If the words are
>>
>>Obama is the US head of state, you nitwit.
>
> Yes he is.

I told you so.

> He did not go.

Nor did dozens of other heads of state.

> Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
> up their end of a discussion.

Complaining about insults does magically make your earlier assertion
correct.

>>> there, they must be in invisible electrons.
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_state
>>
>>> The original post also says exactly what I cut and pasted from it in
>>> my last response.
>>>
>>> If your only debating tactic is to be screaming "Liar", there is
>>> little point wasting the electrons to amuse you.
>>>
>>>>> That says nothing about head of state.
>>>>
>>>>See above
>>>
>>> Where?
>>>
>>>> > You just now introduce that so
>>>>
>>>>No I did not.
>>>>
>>>>> you can point out there weren't many.
>>>>
>>>>Hogwash.
>>>>
>>>>> There are many serving and past Democrats that would be perfectly
>>>>> suitable representatives.
>>>>
>>>>And several of them went.
>>>
>>> Any of them at a level suitable to be considered the President's
>>> representative? To the funeral of someone that was exactly the
>>> equivalent of a President.
>>
>>They were sent there represent the USA, NOT the president, you goofball.
>
> Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
> up their end of a discussion.

Complaining about insults does not change the fact that they were sent to
represent the USA and NOT the president.

>>>>> Clinton must have known her and a good part
>>>>> of his education was in England. He'd probably love a chance to see if
>>>>> England still swings like a pendulum do.
>>>>
>>>>And so what?
>>>
>>> Sew buttons ???
>>
>>So now you imagine that Obama could have somehow ordered Clinton to go?
>
> I offered his name as an example of a suitable representative. Bush
> might have been better because of the political viewpoint if isn't
> totally senile yet.

So now you imagine that Obama could have somehow ordered the elder Bush to
go?

--BTW: G.W. Bush was invited, but was a no-show

> Any of our former VPs. A high cabinet member, past
> or present. Obama would have none of that.

Hogwash, Obama sent a sizable delegation.

>>>>>>> Is it true when Gunner says you have the hammer and sickle worked
>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>> your company logo?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Gunner is dead, for all practical purposes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gunner will be very surprised to hear that.
>>>>> I also note your evasion of the question.
>>>>
>>>>Only an imbecile
>>>
>>> Back to the liberal hallmark of personal insult when they can't hold
>>> up their end of a discussion.
>>
>>If the shoe fits...
>
> Oh,it fits you just fine. I'm not the one hurling insults and
> profanity. We count on our liberal friends to do that. They never
> disappoint.
>
>>>>would even ask such a question.
>>>
>>> Then what can we say about someone that keeps evading it?
>>
>>It's simply none of your business.
>>
>>> Got a link to your logo for us?
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/mdof8rb
>
> Cute. I like it. Saved it. Yet another evasion of the question. That's
> three times now. As much as I don't like the idea, I'm starting to
> think I might have to believe Gunner on this one.

Which only proves how hopelessly gullible you are...

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:3ik88955p25sm0isk...@4ax.com...

> deep wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:08:05 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>> "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>>"Winston_Smith"wrote
>>>>
>>>>>> Are you saying there are no economic indicators out there that don't
>>>>>> agree with the official government statistics?
>>>>>
>>>>>No, that's not what I'm saying....
>>>>>
>>>>>--must be those voices in your head again.
>>>>
>>>> Personal insult - the hallmark of a liberal that can't hold up his
>>>> side of a discussion.
>>>
>>>Glaringly apparent is your failure to produce even a single "real
>>>economic
>>>indicator" showing that the economy has not indeed been improving....
>
> Are you denying they exist? If you accept that they exist, there is
> no point to be made by digging out examples.

I'm not so sure, show them to me...