Serious question to RSFC conservatives on here (seriously)
Google Beta User
supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
Don't you realize that it is exactly that kind of attitude and
labelling that has made people recoil from your party and will
continue to do so?
Seriously.
Maine, Oregon and Iowa are not exactly strongholds of "welfare
parasites".
Give it up, you're pathetic, and I'd strongly like to hope that the
few of you here expressing such sentiments are not speaking for the
entire RSFC conservative contingent.
MoParMaN
news:4699b51e-8064-4ac2...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
This post will prolly cause blood to run in the streets and you will be to
blame. Way to go...you pathetic parasite of the anti-christ.
--
--MoParMaN--
---Scud Coordinates 32.61204 North 96.92989 West---
---Remove "Clothes" to Reply---
Huck Kennedy
D00d. What's it like to look up at the sky through the narrow
slit at the top of Jaros's creel?
RK
Hoover
"Google Beta User" <wany...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4699b51e-8064-4ac2...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
David Loewe, Jr.
Actually, I've had moonbats question me as to why I'm not supporting
Democratic candidates given the fact that I'm on SSDI and Medicaid, so
what *I've* seen is quite the reverse.
--
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for Western Civilization
as it commits suicide."
- James Burnham
Right Is Wrong
"Hoover" <hoo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I don't believe they're mostly welfare types - i just think they're sheep
Says the dittohead that comes and posts Limbaugh's daily rants.
and Iraq had WMD's.
baaaaaaaaaaa baaaaaaaaaaa
--
"My fellow prisoners...." John Hensley McCain
John Rogers
you like the same things I do! Wax paper! Boiled football leather! Dog
breath!
>I've seen a few "cons" on here insinuate that majority of Obama
>supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
Actually my impression is, outside of the A-A block, the majority of
Obama supporters are clueless white-collar types.
John Rogers
AU Class of 1985
The Al Del Greco of Atlanta
"Could it be that somebody else is looking into my mind?
Some other place?
Somewhere?
Some other time?"
Steve Casburn
John Rogers <tige...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Actually my impression is, outside of the A-A block, the majority of
> Obama supporters are clueless white-collar types.
Ummmmmmmm...dude?
How can I be clueless...
> "Could it be that somebody else is looking into my mind?
> Some other place?
> Somewhere?
> Some other time?"
...if I own this album?
Steve
...RIDDLE ME *THAT*, BARNMAN!...
--
Steve Casburn <steve....@gmail.com>
"Shut up he explained" - Ring Lardner, Jr.
John Rogers
you like the same things I do! Wax paper! Boiled football leather! Dog
breath!
>In article <s9u1h45qpv994rhvu...@4ax.com>,
> John Rogers <tige...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Actually my impression is, outside of the A-A block, the majority of
>> Obama supporters are clueless white-collar types.
>
>Ummmmmmmm...dude?
>
>How can I be clueless...
>
>
>> "Could it be that somebody else is looking into my mind?
>> Some other place?
>> Somewhere?
>> Some other time?"
>
>...if I own this album?
>
>
>Steve
>
>...RIDDLE ME *THAT*, BARNMAN!...
You have a good friend like me (much wiser than you) that gave it to
you?
John Rogers
AU Class of 1985
The Al Del Greco of Atlanta
"Could it be that somebody else is looking into my mind?
Steve Casburn
John Rogers <tige...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Steve Casburn:
> > John Rogers:
> >
> >> Actually my impression is, outside of the A-A block, the majority of
> >> Obama supporters are clueless white-collar types.
> >
> >Ummmmmmmm...dude?
> >
> >How can I be clueless...
> >
> >
> >> "Could it be that somebody else is looking into my mind?
> >> Some other place?
> >> Somewhere?
> >> Some other time?"
> >
> >...if I own this album?
> >
>
> You have a good friend like me (much wiser than you) that gave it to
> you?
No, none of my friends thought to give me that album.
But who am I to criticize, or scorn the things that they do?
Steve
Matthew Hennig
ace1-8b3...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com:
I don't think the majority are welfare types. I think they are made up
of the far left, blacks, voters who want to vote for him just because
he's black, people that hate Bush, and people that are caught up in the
charisma of Obama, amongst other groups. I do think that alot of them
agree with his social program proposals. I also think that alot of them
aren't thinking it through and think raising taxes is ok as long as it
wouldn't happen to them.
MH
--
Ten of Spades
Aggee Fedayeen Chief
Supreme Ruler of the Obvious
RSFC Rookie of the Year 2005
Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006
"We just got outplayed today. That's the bottom line. And we got
outcoached."
- OU Head Coach Bob Stoops following the Texas A&M game, Nov 9, 2002
Fear_The_ Swamp
Re: Serious question to RSFC conservatives on here (seriously)
Group: rec.sport.football.college Date: Tue, Nov 4, 2008, 8:39pm (CST+1)
From: tige...@yahoo.com (John Rogers)
you like the same things I do! Wax paper! Boiled football leather! Dog
breath!
I've seen a few "cons" on here insinuate that majority of Obama
supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
Actually my impression is, outside of the A-A block, the majority of
Obama supporters are clueless white-collar types.
Other typical Obama supporters are the feeble minded college kids, who
have had thier brian pumped with liberal garbage from far left lib
professors..................... or the typical dem in the beat up car,
plastered with anti Bush stickers, and some loser driving with 50 nose
rings. And others would be the typical pot bellied pervert like "right
is wrong" who can't apologize enough for being white, and acuuses any
white that doesn't agree with Obama's politics a bigot.
Bobs yer uncle
Is that original? Because even if its not, its very funny.
Steve Casburn
Matthew Hennig <ma...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote:
>
> Google Beta User:
>
> > I've seen a few "cons" on here insinuate that majority of Obama
> > supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
> of the far left, blacks, voters who want to vote for him just because
> he's black, people that hate Bush, and people that are caught up in the
> charisma of Obama, amongst other groups. I do think that alot of them
> agree with his social program proposals. I also think that alot of them
> aren't thinking it through and think raising taxes is ok as long as it
> wouldn't happen to them.
I can't characterize the majority of Obama supporters with any
confidence, but speaking for myself, I supported Obama for two
overarching reasons:
1. Because he appears to have the temperament, discipline, intelligence,
curiosity, eloquence, and -- yes, Matthew -- the charisma that could
make him a great president. And we need one of those right now.
2. Because the Republican Party and its leaders, including McCain,
completely discredited themselves from 2002 to 2006 with their unanimous
support for the disaster that has been the Bush 43 administration. I
won't take the GOP seriously again until a new generation of leaders
emerges in the party; the current group is irredeemably tainted by their
betrayal of bedrock Republican principles and basic common sense.
I hope that the Democrats can deliver for America. Because right now,
they're all we've got.
lein
> In article <Xns9B4D1A1982D48matthaggies...@207.115.17.102>,
> Matthew Hennig <ma...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Google Beta User:
>
> > > I've seen a few "cons" on here insinuate that majority of Obama
> > > supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
> [...]
> > I don't think the majority are welfare types. I think they are made up
> > of the far left, blacks, voters who want to vote for him just because
> > he's black, people that hate Bush, and people that are caught up in the
> > charisma of Obama, amongst other groups. I do think that alot of them
> > agree with his social program proposals. I also think that alot of them
> > aren't thinking it through and think raising taxes is ok as long as it
> > wouldn't happen to them.
>
> I can't characterize the majority of Obama supporters with any
> confidence, but speaking for myself, I supported Obama for two
> overarching reasons:
>
> 1. Because he appears to have the temperament, discipline, intelligence,
> curiosity, eloquence, and -- yes, Matthew -- the charisma that could
> make him a great president. And we need one of those right now.
You left out the most important quality, wisdom.
>
> 2. Because the Republican Party and its leaders, including McCain,
> completely discredited themselves from 2002 to 2006 with their unanimous
> support for the disaster that has been the Bush 43 administration. I
> won't take the GOP seriously again until a new generation of leaders
> emerges in the party; the current group is irredeemably tainted by their
> betrayal of bedrock Republican principles and basic common sense.
What bedrock Republican principles do you value?
>
> I hope that the Democrats can deliver for America. Because right now,
> they're all we've got.
So are you happy that Obama's first pick (chief of staff) is a former
Clinton cronie?
OrangeDood
> In article <Xns9B4D1A1982D48matthaggies...@207.115.17.102>,
Give that bjorque a cigar
Well said! *clap clap clap*
Cheers,
--Jeff
Tom Enright
> I've seen a few "cons" on here insinuate that majority of Obama
> supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
<snip>
Really? I haven't seen it. Suggesting that Obama supporters are
welfare addicts is a bit like implying that the entire GOP is racist,
both sentiments are hyperbolic and probably used more sarcastically
than anything else.
OTOH, my experience is that a great number of Obama supporters rely on
the government for their living. Not necessarily in the form of
"handouts" but teachers, civil servants, government contractors,
retired (SS) persons etc.
-Tom Enright
"Given a choice between equal misery and unequal progress, our modern
Procrusteans will always file a brief for misery."
-Paul Greenberg
Chagney Hunt
> So are you happy that Obama's first pick (chief of staff) is a former
> Clinton cronie?
Ari Gold ain't a cronie. A douche he can be, but a cronie he ain't.
Damon Hynes, Pastor Of Muppets
> OTOH, my experience is that a great number of Obama supporters rely on
> the government for their living. Not necessarily in the form of
> "handouts" but teachers, civil servants, government contractors,
> retired (SS) persons etc.
Vested Interest, baybee. Is it any wonder ? ($1)
OTOH, a true conservative would kindly, gently cause those in the
government sector to discover rugged individualism and self-reliance.
(Newt Gingrich, 1994: "We're going to turn the Pentagon into a
Triangle!")
Edward M. Kennedy
> 1. Because he appears to have the temperament, discipline, intelligence,
> curiosity, eloquence, and -- yes, Matthew -- the charisma that could
> make him a great president. And we need one of those right now.
In terms of foreign policy, I agree. I yam askaired of his economic
ramifications though.
--Tedward
Matthew Hennig
news:steve.casburn-DC5...@text.giganews.com:
I'd put forth that Bush will not be looked at as such a disaster 15 or 20
years from now once emotions have cooled down. Bush certainly had some
proposals that weren't good. He wasn't perfect, but he did far better
than some have.
mianderson
> On Nov 4, 6:59 pm, Google Beta User <wanyik...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I've seen a few "cons" on here insinuate that majority of Obama
> > supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
>
> <snip>
>
> Really? I haven't seen it. Suggesting that Obama supporters are
> welfare addicts is a bit like implying that the entire GOP is racist,
> both sentiments are hyperbolic and probably used more sarcastically
> than anything else.
>
> OTOH, my experience is that a great number of Obama supporters rely on
> the government for their living. Not necessarily in the form of
> "handouts" but teachers, civil servants, government contractors,
> retired (SS) persons etc.
Obama won individuals making 200k or more 52 to 46. Obama also won
people making under some very low amount(can't remember what) by a
wide margin.
Mccain won all the middle income groups.
Seeing as how teachers, civil servants,etc compromise a pretty large
swath of middle income groups, I'd be very surprised if obama won
those. I remember when I taught high school bush stickers outnumbered
all others by 10 to 1 margins in the teacher parking lot.
I know that in my hometown(warner robins, ga) where civil servants on
base make up a ridiculous% of the workforce(17,000 civil service
workers in a town of maybe 90k), mccain dominated. Of course like
with the teachers thing, that may be due to the fact that that
particular city is just a gop dominated city.
So maybe I shouldn't overgeneralize, but I know that in the only three
places I've spent considerable amounts of time(warner robins,
valdosta, and evans) teachers and civil servants and gov't contractors
are overwhelmingly conservative. Or maybe not conservative, but
overwhelmingly gop. Im sure it would be a lot different in metro
though for obvious reasons.
SG
> On Nov 7, 8:06 am, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 4, 6:59 pm, Google Beta User <wanyik...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I've seen a few "cons" on here insinuate that majority of Obama
>>> supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
>> <snip>
>>
>> Really? I haven't seen it. Suggesting that Obama supporters are
>> welfare addicts is a bit like implying that the entire GOP is racist,
>> both sentiments are hyperbolic and probably used more sarcastically
>> than anything else.
>>
>> OTOH, my experience is that a great number of Obama supporters rely on
>> the government for their living. Not necessarily in the form of
>> "handouts" but teachers, civil servants, government contractors,
>> retired (SS) persons etc.
>
>
> Obama won individuals making 200k or more 52 to 46. Obama also won
> people making under some very low amount(can't remember what) by a
> wide margin.
>
> Mccain won all the middle income groups.
>
> Seeing as how teachers, civil servants,etc compromise a pretty large
> swath of middle income groups, I'd be very surprised if obama won
> those. I remember when I taught high school
you taught high school, dam, how old are you
E. F. Hokie
> I'd put forth that Bush will not be looked at as such a disaster 15 or 20
> years from now once emotions have cooled down. Bush certainly had some
> proposals that weren't good. He wasn't perfect, but he did far better
> than some have.
4,000+ rise up from their graves for a moment to ask you to please take
your uberRepubliGoggles off... just long enough to think one thought.
--
E.F. Hokie
"To those who have fought for it,
freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
Jefferson N. Glapski
news:Xns9B4F84FD8D...@198.186.190.61...
> In message news:Xns9B4F8007B501...@207.115.33.102, Matthew
> Hennig <ma...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> done wrote:
>
>> I'd put forth that Bush will not be looked at as such a disaster 15 or 20
>> years from now once emotions have cooled down.
>
> of his are the key causes of the financial and housing meltdowns.
>
> Did Carter contribute with CRA? Yes. Did Clinton contribute by expanding
> CRA and signing the repeal of Glass-Steagall? Yes. Did Congressional
> Democrats, led by Dodd, Schumer, and the Congressional Black Caucus, hide
> problems at Freddie and Fannie? Yes.
>
> But the TWO PRIMARY CAUSES of the meltdown are:
>
> 1. The decision to file suit to overturn state regulation of mortgage
> issuers, specifically targeting New York among other states, where state
> regulations required that "ability to pay" (and other anti-abusive lending
> provisions) be part of the underwriting decision. These suits barred
> states from clamping down on lenders who made loans to people who could
> not
> pay.
> 2. The decision by the Bush SEC (led by Bill Donaldson) to lift
> broker/dealer leverage limits in 2004.
>
> In fact, the Clinton SEC (headed by Arthur Levitt) REJECTED a previous
> request to lift the 12:1 leverage limits. Do you know who made that
> request? Henry Paulson. Do you know what firms were granted the leverage
> exemptions? Goldman Sachs, Bear Stearns, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch
> and
> Lehman Brothers. Oops.
>
> Take a look at the chart here:
>
> http://market-ticker.org/archives/647-Boiled-Down-Credit-Bubble.html
>
> It clearly shows the home price index curve steepening from 2001 to 2004
> and then going parabolic to all-time highs from '04 to '06.
Wrong.
Not repealing Glass Steagall (only partial, and only some companies had time
to take advantage of greater liberty) helped the current situation, because
the fully integrated houses are the only ones that are solvent.
Nor is it the government's role to dictate limits to private companies
either.
The big problem goes back to FDR and Fannie and Freddie.
Jefferson N. Glapski
news:1229c0ed-3584-4f68...@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 8:06 am, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 6:59 pm, Google Beta User <wanyik...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I've seen a few "cons" on here insinuate that majority of Obama
> > supporters are *wink* welfare, lazy types. *wink*
>
> <snip>
>
> Really? I haven't seen it. Suggesting that Obama supporters are
> welfare addicts is a bit like implying that the entire GOP is racist,
> both sentiments are hyperbolic and probably used more sarcastically
> than anything else.
>
> OTOH, my experience is that a great number of Obama supporters rely on
> the government for their living. Not necessarily in the form of
> "handouts" but teachers, civil servants, government contractors,
> retired (SS) persons etc.
Obama won individuals making 200k or more 52 to 46. Obama also won
people making under some very low amount(can't remember what) by a
wide margin.
-------------------
I wouldn't trust any surveys asking your salary, unless "Prefer not to
answer" is an option.
If not, expect shitty results. Some days, I may be a Brazillionaire, other
days, a pauper.
Steve Casburn
Matthew Hennig <ma...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote:
>
> Steve Casburn:
> > 2. Because the Republican Party and its leaders, including McCain,
> > completely discredited themselves from 2002 to 2006 with their
> > unanimous support for the disaster that has been the Bush 43
> > administration. I won't take the GOP seriously again until a new
> > generation of leaders emerges in the party; the current group is
> > irredeemably tainted by their betrayal of bedrock Republican
> > principles and basic common sense.
>
> I'd put forth that Bush will not be looked at as such a disaster 15 or 20
> years from now once emotions have cooled down. Bush certainly had some
> proposals that weren't good. He wasn't perfect, but he did far better
> than some have.
Matthew, I respect your loyalty in saying that. On January 21, 2009,
George W. Bush is going to have very few friends in this world, and I
applaud you for standing by him.
But George W. Bush will go down as perhaps the worst president in
American history. Despite having an overwhelming margin of support from
the American people in the wake of 9/11, he chose policies that (for
him) felt good and were easy and comfortable, instead of using his
political capital to push the hard policies we needed. He also did an
inexcusably poor job of administering the daily business of the
government. As a result, our country is weaker today than it was eight
years ago.
If anything, in 15-20 years Bush 43's disastrous administration will be
seen as even worse than we see it today, as its consequences are felt.
Steve Casburn
<c8eacb43-a7da-4972...@e38g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
lein <jan.lei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Steve Casburn:
>
> > I supported Obama for two overarching reasons:
> > 2. Because the Republican Party and its leaders, including McCain,
> > completely discredited themselves from 2002 to 2006 with their unanimous
> > support for the disaster that has been the Bush 43 administration. I
> > won't take the GOP seriously again until a new generation of leaders
> > emerges in the party; the current group is irredeemably tainted by their
> > betrayal of bedrock Republican principles and basic common sense.
>
> What bedrock Republican principles do you value?
These three:
1. Administrative competence.
2. Fiscal conservatism.
3. Diplomatic prudence.
The Republican Party has proven over the last eight years that it cannot
be trusted with any of these three, which is why I am willing to give
the Democrats a chance.
E. F. Hokie
> But George W. Bush will go down as perhaps the worst president in
> American history. Despite having an overwhelming margin of support from
> the American people in the wake of 9/11, he chose policies that (for
> him) felt good and were easy and comfortable, instead of using his
> political capital to push the hard policies we needed. He also did an
> inexcusably poor job of administering the daily business of the
> government. As a result, our country is weaker today than it was eight
> years ago.
>
> If anything, in 15-20 years Bush 43's disastrous administration will be
> seen as even worse than we see it today, as its consequences are felt.
Well said.
Furthermore, if there is actual proof to be found of actionable charges,
I hope that it's found/uncovered in time for action to be taken.
J. Hugh Sullivan
>But George W. Bush will go down as perhaps the worst president in
>American history.
Probably until O-Bam finishes his term - if he does.
>If anything, in 15-20 years Bush 43's disastrous administration will be
>seen as even worse than we see it today, as its consequences are felt.
I have no doubt that will be the excuse that O-Bam, Peloser, Reid and
other socialists will use.
Hugh
rich hammett
olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, J. Hugh Sullivan:
>>But George W. Bush will go down as perhaps the worst president in
>>American history.
> Probably until O-Bam finishes his term - if he does.
You think he's gonna quit?
>>If anything, in 15-20 years Bush 43's disastrous administration will be
>>seen as even worse than we see it today, as its consequences are felt.
> I have no doubt that will be the excuse that O-Bam, Peloser, Reid and
> other socialists will use.
It's lucky that they were given such an easy, obvious excuse for
just about any failure.
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/
\ "How come things that happen to stupid people keep
/ happening to me?!"
J. Hugh Sullivan
<bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote:
>Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, J. Hugh Sullivan:
>> On Sat, 08 Nov 2008 21:33:53 -0800, Steve Casburn
>> <steve....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>But George W. Bush will go down as perhaps the worst president in
>>>American history.
>
>> Probably until O-Bam finishes his term - if he does.
>
>You think he's gonna quit?
No.
>
>>>If anything, in 15-20 years Bush 43's disastrous administration will be
>>>seen as even worse than we see it today, as its consequences are felt.
>
>> I have no doubt that will be the excuse that O-Bam, Peloser, Reid and
>> other socialists will use.
>
>It's lucky that they were given such an easy, obvious excuse for
>just about any failure.
>
>rich
Whatever - so long as socialism is a failure and utter disaster.
Hugh
Jim Gysin
rich hammett sent the following on 11/10/2008 9:31 AM:
> Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
> olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, J. Hugh Sullivan:
>> On Sat, 08 Nov 2008 21:33:53 -0800, Steve Casburn
>> <steve....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> But George W. Bush will go down as perhaps the worst president in
>>> American history.
>
>> Probably until O-Bam finishes his term - if he does.
>
> You think he's gonna quit?
Don't encourage him. (Hugh, not Obama.)
--
Jim Gysin
Waukesha, WI
Kyle T. Jones
> On Nov 7, 7:06 am, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> OTOH, my experience is that a great number of Obama supporters rely on
>> the government for their living. Not necessarily in the form of
>> "handouts" but teachers, civil servants, government contractors,
>> retired (SS) persons etc.
>
> Vested Interest, baybee. Is it any wonder ? ($1)
>
> OTOH, a true conservative would kindly, gently cause those in the
> government sector to discover rugged individualism and self-reliance.
Yeah... those cops and fire-fighters need a lesson on "rugged
individualism and self-reliance"!!!!1!@! (yeah, I know, for some reason
the sentiment is always better received when you replace cops and
fire-fighters with those oh-so-convenient Teacher-Targets(TM)... man,
the way some of y'all are so bitter about teachers, one has to wonder if
you don't realize that No, Not all of Yer Little Angels CAN Be
Genyusses!!!1!(*))
Get off the DOLE, LEECHES!
Cheers.
(*)This message brought to you by the proud spouse of a public school
teacher (kindergarten)
J. Hugh Sullivan
wrote:
His kind discourage me. What I'm doing to him is pinning the tail on
the donkey.
Hugh
Jim Gysin
J. Hugh Sullivan sent the following on 11/10/2008 1:55 PM:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:16:26 GMT, Jim Gysin <jimg...@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> rich hammett sent the following on 11/10/2008 9:31 AM:
>>> Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
>>> olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, J. Hugh Sullivan:
>>>> On Sat, 08 Nov 2008 21:33:53 -0800, Steve Casburn
>>>> <steve....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> But George W. Bush will go down as perhaps the worst president in
>>>>> American history.
>>>> Probably until O-Bam finishes his term - if he does.
>>> You think he's gonna quit?
>> Don't encourage him. (Hugh, not Obama.)
>
> the donkey.
No, you're making yourself look like pond scum by making all sorts of
cute references to a future dead president. He wasn't my choice, but
he's still gonna be my president in a couple of months, and I take
exception to that sort of talk.
I expect this kind of hate from the loons (and have read plenty of it
here over the course of the Bush years), but I've always hoped that the
wingers might show some class. Some have, mind you, but you, at least,
clearly haven't.
mianderson
just one year between college and medical school
, >how old are you
4 years of college, 1 yr teaching, 4 years of medschool and
now......do the math.
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
J. Hugh Sullivan
wrote:
>> His kind discourage me. What I'm doing to him is pinning the tail on
>> the donkey.
>
>No, you're making yourself look like pond scum by making all sorts of
>cute references to a future dead president.
My reference to donkey was meant for hammett and I was obviously
unclear on the point.
What I look like to people, outside my geography, who don't know me
personally is immaterial, especially people who obviously will never
be leaders or executives. I would prefer better but I sleep very well.
>He wasn't my choice, but
>he's still gonna be my president in a couple of months, and I take
>exception to that sort of talk.
You are welcome to take all the exception you wish. He will have the
title of president - I'll call him anything I wish.
>I expect this kind of hate from the loons (and have read plenty of it
>here over the course of the Bush years), but I've always hoped that the
>wingers might show some class. Some have, mind you, but you, at least,
>clearly haven't.
My reaction to the stupidity of socialism is not hate, it's
disappointment at the lack of intelligence on the part of those who
support socialism. I am not disappointed at masses of blacks who
support Obama because he looks black - I expected no more. If that is
racist, sobeit.
I respond at the level of class shown by the people to whom I respond.
You may expect that to run the gamut.
I would prefer to tell Obama to his face but I don't have that option,
so I will confront him here when I wish and applaud him when he takes
proper action. For me, I am the sole determiner.
Hugh
Jim Gysin
J. Hugh Sullivan sent the following on 11/11/2008 10:02 AM:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:15:18 GMT, Jim Gysin <jimg...@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> His kind discourage me. What I'm doing to him is pinning the tail on
>>> the donkey.
>> No, you're making yourself look like pond scum by making all sorts of
>> cute references to a future dead president.
>
> My reference to donkey was meant for hammett and I was obviously
> unclear on the point.
No, I got that part. But you seem to be unclear on the part where I
said that your multiple references to a future dead president is beneath
anyone with even a passing acquaintance with class.
> What I look like to people, outside my geography, who don't know me
> personally is immaterial, especially people who obviously will never
> be leaders or executives. I would prefer better but I sleep very well.
>
>> He wasn't my choice, but
>> he's still gonna be my president in a couple of months, and I take
>> exception to that sort of talk.
>
> You are welcome to take all the exception you wish. He will have the
> title of president - I'll call him anything I wish.
Yeah, I get it. I got it the first time. You're gonna be as unclassy
and hateful and fugly as the Bushitler crowd has been for the past eight
years or more. Have fun with that.
>> I expect this kind of hate from the loons (and have read plenty of it
>> here over the course of the Bush years), but I've always hoped that the
>> wingers might show some class. Some have, mind you, but you, at least,
>> clearly haven't.
>
> My reaction to the stupidity of socialism is not hate,
If you're having fantasies about the death of someone you don't even
hate, I can only imagine the fate that you would mete out to those who
actually achieve that particular pinnacle.
> it's
> disappointment at the lack of intelligence on the part of those who
> support socialism.
Agreed. It's just unfortunate to me that you have to make yourself look
even worse than those you're disappointed in.
> I am not disappointed at masses of blacks who
> support Obama because he looks black - I expected no more. If that is
> racist, sobeit.
The fact that you even needed the word "if" in that last sentence says
all that needs to be said. And yeah, I caught the "looks" in the first
sentence, too, but I'm not gonna bite on it.
> I respond at the level of class shown by the people to whom I respond.
> You may expect that to run the gamut.
Given that you've been encouraging his death, I wasn't aware that you'd
been interacting with Obama personally here in this chatrum. I must
have missed a thread or two.
> I would prefer to tell Obama to his face but I don't have that option,
> so I will confront him here when I wish and applaud him when he takes
> proper action. For me, I am the sole determiner.
So Obama *is* a poster here? Cool!
J. Hugh Sullivan
wrote:
>
>J. Hugh Sullivan sent the following on 11/11/2008 10:02 AM:
>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:15:18 GMT, Jim Gysin <jimg...@geemail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> His kind discourage me. What I'm doing to him is pinning the tail on
>>>> the donkey.
>>> No, you're making yourself look like pond scum by making all sorts of
>>> cute references to a future dead president.
>>
>> My reference to donkey was meant for hammett and I was obviously
>> unclear on the point.
>
>No, I got that part. But you seem to be unclear on the part where I
>said that your multiple references to a future dead president is beneath
>anyone with even a passing acquaintance with class.
Your jumping to unsupported conclusions is astounding. I have never
actually mentioned his death. What you infer from what I posted is
your ignoring what I said and substituting your absurd interpretation.
You are not intellectually capable of speaking for me.
>> What I look like to people, outside my geography, who don't know me
>> personally is immaterial, especially people who obviously will never
>> be leaders or executives. I would prefer better but I sleep very well.
>>
>>> He wasn't my choice, but
>>> he's still gonna be my president in a couple of months, and I take
>>> exception to that sort of talk.
>>
>> You are welcome to take all the exception you wish. He will have the
>> title of president - I'll call him anything I wish.
>
>Yeah, I get it. I got it the first time. You're gonna be as unclassy
>and hateful and fugly as the Bushitler crowd has been for the past eight
>years or more. Have fun with that.
I always do. It was superflous to mention that you understood that.
>
>>> I expect this kind of hate from the loons (and have read plenty of it
>>> here over the course of the Bush years), but I've always hoped that the
>>> wingers might show some class. Some have, mind you, but you, at least,
>>> clearly haven't.
>>
>> My reaction to the stupidity of socialism is not hate,
>
>If you're having fantasies about the death of someone you don't even
>hate, I can only imagine the fate that you would mete out to those who
>actually achieve that particular pinnacle.
You haven't a chance to make my fantasies. What ever made you think
you could be an ant at my picnic?
>
>> it's
>> disappointment at the lack of intelligence on the part of those who
>> support socialism.
>
>Agreed. It's just unfortunate to me that you have to make yourself look
>even worse than those you're disappointed in.
>
>> I am not disappointed at masses of blacks who
>> support Obama because he looks black - I expected no more. If that is
>> racist, sobeit.
>
>The fact that you even needed the word "if" in that last sentence says
>all that needs to be said. And yeah, I caught the "looks" in the first
>sentence, too, but I'm not gonna bite on it.
>
>> I respond at the level of class shown by the people to whom I respond.
>> You may expect that to run the gamut.
>
>Given that you've been encouraging his death, I wasn't aware that you'd
>been interacting with Obama personally here in this chatrum. I must
>have missed a thread or two.
You have obviously missed what was actually said in several - not
unusual for you people in the cheap seats.
>
>> I would prefer to tell Obama to his face but I don't have that option,
>> so I will confront him here when I wish and applaud him when he takes
>> proper action. For me, I am the sole determiner.
>
>So Obama *is* a poster here? Cool!
No, I'm hoping one of his schoolmates reads and reports to him.
Hugh