Bellomy On Suicide Watch?
dam
really shaken him up.
dam
-----
You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not
based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe. - Carl
Sagan
Chris Bellomy
> This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
> really shaken him up.
No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
circus again.
It's an idiocracy, and has been for awhile.
cb
Glen Heiman
"Chris Bellomy" <ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote in message
news:eK6dnYDMbtMaykzR...@supernews.com...
You're right. Lack of integrity, ethics, honesty, legality,
Constitutionality, and loyalty to the USA is NOT required of a liberal
politician.
Heiman
>
> cb
Cornhuskeress
> dam wrote, On 11/3/10 5:29 AM:
>
> > This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
> > really shaken him up.
>
> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
> circus again.
>
get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
proceedings. I want them to move forward.
Google Beta User
> I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
> get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
> proceedings. I want them to move forward.
Good luck with that.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/126873-top-republican-obama-might-force-gop-to-shut-down-government
dam
I totally agree. What I had issue with was that people actually
believed that Obama would somehow be different and there was no
convincing them otherwise.
dam
-----
Look again at that dot. That’s here. That’s home. That’s us. On it
everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of,
every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate
of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions,
ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every
hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every
king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father,
hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every
corrupt politician, every “superstar”, every “supreme leader”, every
saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote
of dust suspended in a sunbeam. – Carl Sagan
J. Hugh Sullivan
wrote:
Gee Whiz, man, it doesn't even appear to be an option.
Hugh
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
> > This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
> > really shaken him up.
>
> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
> circus again.
<
<I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
<get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
<proceedings. I want them to move forward.
Not backward?
--Tedward
J. Hugh Sullivan
<cahusk...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Considering the unstoppable socialism already in place, what is your
concept of moving forward and any tack to take to accomplish that?
For example I see no way to curb entitlement spending unless
accomplished by the states. Seems to me that control of the House
accomplishes very little except stalement.
Further consideration of the situation might mean that statemate IS
moving forward.
Hugh
Emperor Wonko the Sane
Given how much they've rsfcked things up the last decade or so, moving
forward is a bad thing. Gridlock is the preferable alternative.
Doug
JGibson
I'm pretty sure item #1 is to set up the committe on Obama's birth
certificate.
Ike
YES WE CAN!!
--
Yrs.,
Ike
*****************************************************
"It's a football game, not the Crusades." -JVP
*****************************************************
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
>>>>> This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
>>>>> really shaken him up.
>>>> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
>>>> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
>>>> circus again.
>>> I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
>>> get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
>>> proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure item #1 is to set up the committe on Obama's birth
>> certificate.
>
> YES WE CAN!!
BIRTH CERTIFICATES WE CAN BELIEVE IN!!
--Tedward
Chris Bellomy
Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
that you were doing so.
Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
Chris Bellomy
> On Nov 3, 8:37 am, Chris Bellomy<ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
>> dam wrote, On 11/3/10 5:29 AM:
>>
>>> This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
>>> really shaken him up.
>>
>> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
>> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
>> circus again.
>>
>> It's an idiocracy, and has been for awhile.
>>
>> cb
>
> I totally agree. What I had issue with was that people actually
> believed that Obama would somehow be different
If you don't think Obama has been different than Bush,
why has the right been engaged in a nonstop hategasm
this whole time?
You can't have it both ways, pla.
cb
Antonio Veranos
> > I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
> > get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
> > proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>
> Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
> that you were doing so.
>
> Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
So, when impeachment proceedings don't happen, then what?
You just pretend the above post never happened?
--
A. Veranos
What color does a smurf go when you choke it?
Chris Bellomy
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 13:40:10 -0500, Chris Bellomy wrote...
>
>>> I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
>>> get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
>>> proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>>
>> Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
>> that you were doing so.
>>
>> Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
>
> So, when impeachment proceedings don't happen, then what?
Then she can enjoy the government shutdown.
But there will be nonstop investigations and hearings
until the Democrats win the thing back. You can't
seriously imagine that the teatards would allow their
newly minted stormtroopers to sit back and do nothing.
cb
Antonio Veranos
> >> Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
> >> that you were doing so.
> >>
> >> Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
> >
> > So, when impeachment proceedings don't happen, then what?
>
> Then she can enjoy the government shutdown.
>
> But there will be nonstop investigations and hearings
> until the Democrats win the thing back. You can't
> seriously imagine that the teatards would allow their
> newly minted stormtroopers to sit back and do nothing.
You rooming with Starcade these days, or what?
Chris Bellomy
I remember the Clinton administration, which apparently
makes one of us.
cb
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
>> > I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
>> > get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
>> > proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>>
>> Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
>> that you were doing so.
>>
>> Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
>
> So, when impeachment proceedings don't happen, then what?
>
> You just pretend the above post never happened?
He'll go into a deflationary death spiral.
--Tedward
Chris Bellomy
Every time you cite that, it just makes you look even
dumber. First, because I was right and you were wrong;
and second, because you don't even have the smrats to
understand this.
cb
Antonio Veranos
Your memory rather conveniently remembers every slight against the Left,
including ones which never happened outside of your imagination, and
ignores a great deal more than that. I prefer mine, grounded in
reality.
Chris Bellomy
That's a nice fluffy answer with absolutely zero
substantial content.
In rebuttal, I give you Darrell Issa:
http://snipurl.com/1eohw9 [www_newsweek_com]
cb
Antonio Veranos
> >> I remember the Clinton administration, which apparently
> >> makes one of us.
> >
> > Your memory rather conveniently remembers every slight against the Left,
> > including ones which never happened outside of your imagination, and
> > ignores a great deal more than that. I prefer mine, grounded in
> > reality.
>
> That's a nice fluffy answer with absolutely zero
> substantial content.
Given the snarky nothingness to which I was responding, it was
appropriate.
Huck Kennedy
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:24:03 -0500, Chris Bellomy wrote...
> > >> I remember the Clinton administration, which apparently
> > >> makes one of us.
>
> > > Your memory rather conveniently remembers every slight against the Left,
> > > including ones which never happened outside of your imagination, and
> > > ignores a great deal more than that. I prefer mine, grounded in
> > > reality.
>
> > That's a nice fluffy answer with absolutely zero
> > substantial content.
>
> Given the snarky nothingness to which I was responding, it was
> appropriate.
Oh bullshit. You compared Chris to a tinfoil hat conspiracy-
theory madman like Starcade because Chris is afraid the new Republican
House might launch a bunch of investigations and possibly impeachment
against Obama. Chris replied that apparently you don't remember the
Clinton administration, which is full of content, but apparently it
went right over your head.
Look--dumbshit--the Republican House spent years investigating
and then impeaching Clinton, so for Chris to be afraid they'd pull the
same stunt as Obama is not tinfoil madness--it is grounded in very
recent history.
You offer NOTHING but childish snark in reply, and then have the
gall to accuse Chris of what you're doing, to wit, offering nothing
but childish snark.
Huck
Antonio Veranos
> > > > Your memory rather conveniently remembers every slight against the Left,
> > > > including ones which never happened outside of your imagination, and
> > > > ignores a great deal more than that. I prefer mine, grounded in
> > > > reality.
> >
> > > That's a nice fluffy answer with absolutely zero
> > > substantial content.
> >
> > Given the snarky nothingness to which I was responding, it was
> > appropriate.
>
> Oh bullshit. You compared Chris to a tinfoil hat conspiracy-
> theory madman like Starcade because Chris is afraid the new Republican
> House might launch a bunch of investigations and possibly impeachment
> against Obama. Chris replied that apparently you don't remember the
> Clinton administration, which is full of content, but apparently it
> went right over your head.
1. Predicting, not afraid of.
2. Categorizing the entire Clinton administration as a period of
wrongful assault by the right such that a comment like the one made
would be even close to appropriate *IS* Starcade-like lunacy. You don't
have to like that the man lied to Congress, but he did, period.
Chris Bellomy
This is exactly right.
cb
Chris Bellomy
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 12:33:47 -0700 (PDT), Huck Kennedy wrote...
>
>>>>> Your memory rather conveniently remembers every slight against the Left,
>>>>> including ones which never happened outside of your imagination, and
>>>>> ignores a great deal more than that. I prefer mine, grounded in
>>>>> reality.
>>>
>>>> That's a nice fluffy answer with absolutely zero
>>>> substantial content.
>>>
>>> Given the snarky nothingness to which I was responding, it was
>>> appropriate.
>>
>> Oh bullshit. You compared Chris to a tinfoil hat conspiracy-
>> theory madman like Starcade because Chris is afraid the new Republican
>> House might launch a bunch of investigations and possibly impeachment
>> against Obama. Chris replied that apparently you don't remember the
>> Clinton administration, which is full of content, but apparently it
>> went right over your head.
>
> 1. Predicting, not afraid of.
>
> 2. Categorizing the entire Clinton administration as a period of
> wrongful assault by the right
You really don't remember it, do you? Just say so,
it's ok. But quit embarrassing yourself with this
tripe.
cb
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
>>>>> I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
>>>>> get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
>>>>> proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>>>>
>>>> Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
>>>> that you were doing so.
>>>>
>>>> Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
>>>
>>> So, when impeachment proceedings don't happen, then what?
>>>
>>> You just pretend the above post never happened?
>>
>> He'll go into a deflationary death spiral.
>
> Every time you cite that, it just makes you look even
> dumber. First, because I was right and you were wrong;
> and second, because you don't even have the smrats to
> understand this.
I don't think anyone else on the planet thinks we were ever
in a deflationary death spiral, nor do the inflation/deflation
statistics back it up.
You really are a tool.
--Tedward
Chris Bellomy
Enough people thought so that we got that Stimulus bill
which put the brakes on against it.
Deflationary pressure is still strong, though. The
death spiral still rotates. Not as quickly and
strongly as it would have, but it's still there.
You'd have to know something of economics to understand
this, though, which is why you should exit the discussion
now.
cb
no longer patient with fools
Antonio Veranos
> > 2. Categorizing the entire Clinton administration as a period of
> > wrongful assault by the right
>
> You really don't remember it, do you?
My memories are grounded in Reality; yours aren't.
One of us may in fact be embarassing himself here; it isn't me.
Huck Kennedy
You forgot to quote this gem of Slick's:
> > You don't have to like that the man lied to Congress, but he did, period.
as though that were the justification for the Republicans launching
all the investigations rather than the result years later after they
were complete.
Huck
Huck Kennedy
Is your TV borked, tedward? Everyone was talking about it.
The Bushies told us that would be our fate if we didn't immediately
bail out Wall Street.
Huck
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
>>>>>>> I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the
>>>>>>> government
>>>>>>> get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
>>>>>>> proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
>>>>>> that you were doing so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, when impeachment proceedings don't happen, then what?
>>>>>
>>>>> You just pretend the above post never happened?
>>>>
>>>> He'll go into a deflationary death spiral.
>>>
>>> Every time you cite that, it just makes you look even
>>> dumber. First, because I was right and you were wrong;
>>> and second, because you don't even have the smrats to
>>> understand this.
>>
>> I don't think anyone else on the planet thinks we were ever
>> in a deflationary death spiral,
>
> Enough people thought so that we got that Stimulus bill
> which put the brakes on against it.
>
> Deflationary pressure is still strong, though. The
> death spiral still rotates. Not as quickly and
> strongly as it would have, but it's still there.
Ah, so now the goal posts go from "death spiral" to "strong pressure",
but even that is stupid.
> You'd have to know something of economics to understand
> this, though, which is why you should exit the discussion
> now.
Apparently you can read, though the comprehension is suspect:
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/
We had *extremely* mild inflation for 8 months. If that is the
"death spiral" you claim, you are either cluesless or dishonest.
> no longer patient with fools
No longer patient with dishonest fucks
--Tedward
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
> >>>>> I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
> >>>>> get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
> >>>>> proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>
> >>>> Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
> >>>> that you were doing so.
>
> >>>> Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
>
> >>> So, when impeachment proceedings don't happen, then what?
>
> >>> You just pretend the above post never happened?
>
> >> He'll go into a deflationary death spiral.
>
> > Every time you cite that, it just makes you look even
> > dumber. First, because I was right and you were wrong;
> > and second, because you don't even have the smrats to
> > understand this.
>
> I don't think anyone else on the planet thinks we were ever
> in a deflationary death spiral,
<
< Is your TV borked, tedward? Everyone was talking about it.
<The Bushies told us that would be our fate if we didn't immediately
<bail out Wall Street.
Is your English borked, Ralph? Were we ever in one? Do you have
some economic data that demonstrates the existence of a death spiral?
I strong disagree everyone was talking about it, much less believing
it would happen, but the fact of the matter is the Chris was and is
wrong.
--Tedward
The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior
> "Huck Kennedy" <tempeh...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm still confuzzled by Ralph using Bushies to buttress his case -
crap - does this mean I need to use Hugo Chavez somewhere as a
positive to support one of my cases?
Chris Bellomy
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:39:15 -0500, Chris Bellomy wrote...
>
>>> 2. Categorizing the entire Clinton administration as a period of
>>> wrongful assault by the right
>>
>> You really don't remember it, do you?
>
> My memories are grounded in Reality;
Apparently not, or else they are woefully incomplete. Maybe
a trip to Mena would do them some good.
cb
Jaybyrd
> This massive vote of no confidence for incumbents and Washington in general now puts huge pressure on Republicans to reach full employment in two years.
IFYPFY
Ike
>
> stormtroopers
>
> cb
Zero to NAZI in 5.9 seconds.
--
Yrs.,
Ike
*****************************************************
"It's a football game, not the Crusades." -JVP
*****************************************************
Ike
> On Nov 3, 12:28 pm, Antonio Veranos <summerstorm0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:24:03 -0500, Chris Bellomy wrote...
>>>>> I remember the Clinton administration, which apparently
>>>>> makes one of us.
>>>> Your memory rather conveniently remembers every slight against the Left,
>>>> including ones which never happened outside of your imagination, and
>>>> ignores a great deal more than that. I prefer mine, grounded in
>>>> reality.
>>> That's a nice fluffy answer with absolutely zero
>>> substantial content.
>> Given the snarky nothingness to which I was responding, it was
>> appropriate.
>
> Oh bullshit. You compared Chris to a tinfoil hat conspiracy-
> theory madman like Starcade because Chris is afraid the new Republican
> House might launch a bunch of investigations and possibly impeachment
> against Obama. Chris replied that apparently you don't remember the
> Clinton administration, which is full of content, but apparently it
> went right over your head.
>
> Look--dumbshit--the Republican House spent years investigating
> and then impeaching Clinton,
'cause he/her spent years breaking laws and lying about it?
Tom Enright
> > > You don't have to like that the man lied to Congress, but he did, period.
> as though that were the justification for the Republicans launching
> all the investigations rather than the result years later after they
> were complete.
So you were saying that it was wrong to investigate Clinton for lying
to Congress?
-Tom Enright
> Huck
Chris Bellomy
> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>
>>
>> stormtroopers
>
> Zero to NAZI in 5.9 seconds.
Hey. Teabaggers have aspirations, too, you know.
cb
Antonio Veranos
> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>
> >
> > stormtroopers
> >
> > cb
>
> Zero to NAZI in 5.9 seconds.
I noticed that but chose to ignore it.
Huck Kennedy
I'm not saying the Bushies were the only ones believing it--
they're the ones who threatened it would happen if we didn't
immediately bail out Wall Street, and the Dems bought into it.
Now as for tedward's silly distinction between everyone
predicting it would happen and WELL 1T DIDN'T!!@1! (no shit, Sherlock,
we went ahead with the bailouts) is just plain dumn.
Huck
Chris Bellomy
That isn't what happened. I think we should investigate
you for lying to rsfc.
cb
Ike
heh.
Tom Enright
Which investigations do you feel should not have been conducted?
-Tom Enright
> cb
Ike
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 17:05:01 -0400, Ike wrote...
>
>> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>
>>> stormtroopers
>>>
>>> cb
>> Zero to NAZI in 5.9 seconds.
>
> I noticed that but chose to ignore it.
>
rhetoric works for both sides. I honestly take no offense. Until someone tries
to crucify an historical reenactor for wearing a German uniform.
Huck Kennedy
Are you saying you never passed sixth grade reading tests?
I'm saying that the Republicans were investigating Clinton
years before Clinton ever lied to Congress, so Slick's using that as
an excuse for Republicans launching investigations against Clinton is
bogus.
Huck
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
----
Hey, dumbass, Chris made the assertaion after the Bush bailouts
and said it was going to happen [effectively anyway].
There were a few alarmists in late summer & fall of 2009, and
Chris was quick to grab yet another absurd position. Of course,
you ignore that Chris continues to claim it happened and is h
appening. When cornered about being wrong, he just makes
shit up and then runs away.
Did you even *look* at the inflation/deflation link I provided.
--Tedward
Chris Bellomy
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 17:05:01 -0400, Ike wrote...
>
>> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> stormtroopers
>>>
>>> cb
>>
>> Zero to NAZI in 5.9 seconds.
>
> I noticed that but chose to ignore it.
You boys ever see Star Wars?
cb
Chris Bellomy
Let's put it this way... investigations are supposed to
happen *after* wrongdoing. They're not supposed to lead
to it.
cb
Tom Enright
Which investigation(s)? Could you please be more specific?
-Tom Enright
> Huck
Ike
Interesting. Sto�truppen predated the Nazis. They were first used in WWI.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormtrooper
Chris Bellomy
> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>> Antonio Veranos wrote, On 11/3/10 4:20 PM:
>>> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 17:05:01 -0400, Ike wrote...
>>>
>>>> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> stormtroopers
>>>>>
>>>>> cb
>>>>
>>>> Zero to NAZI in 5.9 seconds.
>>>
>>> I noticed that but chose to ignore it.
>>
>> You boys ever see Star Wars?
>
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormtrooper
Yep.
FWIW, I really wasn't drawing a direct Nazi comparison,
though I did want a hint of it.
cb
SNORKY
wrote:
>dam wrote, On 11/3/10 5:29 AM:
>> This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
>> really shaken him up.
>
>No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
>the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
>circus again.
>
>It's an idiocracy, and has been for awhile.
>
>cb
The Repubs circus? Sheesh, we've all had front row seats to the 5
Trillion Dollar Barack de Soileil.
Antonio Veranos
I was hoping you wouldn't try the above.
C'mon, Chris.
Tom Enright
> TomEnrightwrote, On 11/3/10 4:23 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 3, 5:20 pm, Chris Bellomy<ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
>
> >>> On Nov 3, 3:50 pm, Huck Kennedy<tempeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> You don't have to like that the man lied to Congress, but he did, period.
>
> >>>> as though that were the justification for the Republicans launching
> >>>> all the investigations rather than the result years later after they
> >>>> were complete.
>
> >>> So you were saying that it was wrong to investigate Clinton for lying
> >>> to Congress?
>
> >> That isn't what happened. I think we should investigate
> >> you for lying to rsfc.
> > Which investigations do you feel should not have been conducted?
> Let's put it this way... investigations are supposed to
> happen *after* wrongdoing. They're not supposed to lead
> to it.
You should have been Nixon's attorney, he would have loved that
angle. Or, anyone who has been found guilty of perury, obstruction of
justice etc., you just got them off the hook.
You don't understand how the whole "special prosecutor" deal works.
He is *obligated* under law to pursue all criminal activity.
-Tom Enright
"We are on strike, we the men of the mind. We are on strike against
self-immolation. We are on strike against the creed of unearned
rewards and unrewarded duties."
-John Galt
> cb
Chris Bellomy
> On Nov 3, 5:42 pm, Chris Bellomy<ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
>> TomEnrightwrote, On 11/3/10 4:23 PM:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 3, 5:20 pm, Chris Bellomy<ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
>>>> TomEnrightwrote, On 11/3/10 4:15 PM:
>>
>>>>> On Nov 3, 3:50 pm, Huck Kennedy<tempeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> You don't have to like that the man lied to Congress, but he did, period.
>>
>>>>>> as though that were the justification for the Republicans launching
>>>>>> all the investigations rather than the result years later after they
>>>>>> were complete.
>>
>>>>> So you were saying that it was wrong to investigate Clinton for lying
>>>>> to Congress?
>>
>>>> That isn't what happened. I think we should investigate
>>>> you for lying to rsfc.
>
>>> Which investigations do you feel should not have been conducted?
>
>> Let's put it this way... investigations are supposed to
>> happen *after* wrongdoing. They're not supposed to lead
>> to it.
>
> You should have been Nixon's attorney, he would have loved that
> angle.
No, he wouldn't have, you mendacious asshole, because
the Watergate investigation covered crimes already known
to have been committed. Contrast that to spending millions
of dollars only to find that no crimes were committed, as
happened with Whitewater.
Now get along and go suck some CEO's cock. Be sure to
squeeze ballsack when the moment arrives. Don't forget
to murmur sweet nothings about how you voted.
cb
Tom Enright
> Tom Enright wrote, On 11/4/10 7:27 AM:
> >>> Which investigations do you feel should not have been conducted?
> >> Let's put it this way... investigations are supposed to
> >> happen *after* wrongdoing. They're not supposed to lead
> >> to it.
> > You should have been Nixon's attorney, he would have loved that
> > angle.
> No, he wouldn't have, you mendacious asshole, because
> the Watergate investigation covered crimes already known
> to have been committed. Contrast that to spending millions
> of dollars only to find that no crimes were committed, as
> happened with Whitewater.
Really, 15 convictions for "no crimes committed"?
During the course of the WW investigation it was discovered that
Clinton had lied. Starr was obligated to investigate that. That's
nobody's fault but Billy's.
> Now get along and go suck some CEO's cock. Be sure to
> squeeze ballsack when the moment arrives. Don't forget
> to murmur sweet nothings about how you voted.
So your program of providing "Head For The Homeless" didn't go so
well? Hint: Poor people don't hirer workers or pay taxes or pay for
health care.
-Tom Enright
"Obama’s priorities lie not in the Hindu Kush but in America: Why
squander your presidency on trying to turn an economically moribund
feudal backwater into a functioning nation state when you can turn a
functioning nation state into an economically moribund feudal
backwater?"
-Mark Steyn
> cb
Dennis J
crying out loud. Who knows what's happened to his brain? Maybe it's
scrambled his molecules...
>
>"Chris Bellomy" <ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote in message
>news:eK6dnYDMbtMaykzR...@supernews.com...
>> dam wrote, On 11/3/10 5:29 AM:
>>> This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
>>> really shaken him up.
>>
>> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
>> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
>> circus again.
>>
>> It's an idiocracy, and has been for awhile.
>
>You're right. Lack of integrity, ethics, honesty, legality,
>Constitutionality, and loyalty to the USA is NOT required of a liberal
>politician.
>
>Heiman
>
>>
>> cb
>
true that list of things to lack is a requirement of most
Politicians... at least to get to the National Stage...
--
"It’s been so difficult to get out of this recession because of the disequilibrium in the real economy.”" -- Paul Volcker
"Education is the progressive discovery of our own Ignorance" Will Durant
"One can't have a sense of perspective without a sense of Humor" -- Wayne Thiboux
"the Glass is not only half full, it has been delicious so far!!" -- ME
To reply, SCRAPE off the end bits.
Dennis J
matter, for crying out loud. Who knows what's happened to his brain?
Maybe it's scrambled his molecules...
>On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 06:31:42 -0700 (PDT), Cornhuskeress
><cahusk...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 3, 5:37=A0am, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
>>> dam wrote, On 11/3/10 5:29 AM:
>>>
>>> > This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
>>> > really shaken him up.
>>>
>>> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
>>> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
>>> circus again.
>>>
>>I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
>>get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
>>proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>
>Considering the unstoppable socialism already in place, what is your
>concept of moving forward and any tack to take to accomplish that?
>
>For example I see no way to curb entitlement spending unless
>accomplished by the states. Seems to me that control of the House
>accomplishes very little except stalement.
>
>Further consideration of the situation might mean that statemate IS
>moving forward.
>
>Hugh
gotta stop the ship before you go full reverse...
J. Hugh Sullivan
A ship could reverse course, as in a Williamson Turn for man overboard
- but not the ship of state, of course.
Hugh
Michael Press
"The Scharnow turn is most appropriate when the point to be
reached is significantly further astern than the vessel's
turning radius. For other situations, an Anderson turn or a
Williamson turn might be more appropriate."
Hmmm. How far astern is MOB and what is the ship's turning radius?
The Williamson turn "was originally called the `Butakov
pipe' and was used in the Russo-Japanese War as a way
of keeping guns at the same distance from an enemy."
The Williamson turn "was also used by U.S. Navy nuclear
submarines to clear their sonar dead zones."
_
--
Michael Press
J. Hugh Sullivan
wrote:
-
>Michael Press
The times I was OD Underway we used the Williamson in all practices. I
butchered it a couple of times, so I read the book and practiced for
hours at the tank in Norfolk. I nailed it the next time.
I appreciate the info.
Hugh
David V. Loewe, Jr
wrote:
>Antonio Veranos wrote, On 11/3/10 2:18 PM:
>> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:00:01 -0500, Chris Bellomy wrote...
>>> Antonio Veranos wrote, On 11/3/10 1:57 PM:
>>>> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 13:51:48 -0500, Chris Bellomy wrote...
>>>>
>>>>>>> Then you voted for the wrong people, when it was obvious
>>>>>>> that you were doing so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, I hope you enjoy what you reap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, when impeachment proceedings don't happen, then what?
>>>>>
>>>>> Then she can enjoy the government shutdown.
>>>>>
>>>>> But there will be nonstop investigations and hearings
>>>>> until the Democrats win the thing back. You can't
>>>>> seriously imagine that the teatards would allow their
>>>>> newly minted stormtroopers to sit back and do nothing.
>>>>
>>>> You rooming with Starcade these days, or what?
>>>
>>> I remember the Clinton administration, which apparently
>>> makes one of us.
>>
>> Your memory rather conveniently remembers every slight against the Left,
>> including ones which never happened outside of your imagination, and
>> ignores a great deal more than that. I prefer mine, grounded in
>> reality.
>
>That's a nice fluffy answer with absolutely zero
>substantial content.
>
>In rebuttal, I give you Darrell Issa:
>
>http://snipurl.com/1eohw9 [www_newsweek_com]
won't load.
--
"Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat."
- John Lehman, Secretary of the Navy, 1981-1987
Chris Bellomy
snipurl has been down today. The link is to a Newsweek
article that ran last month, though, and features Issa
quotes about how eager he is to crank up some
investigations.
cb
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
As opposed to the "well-respect" [1] Waxman cranking up his own
hobby-horse investigations?
[1] That was some really poor editing on that article.
--
"Reading Solzhenitsyn makes it difficult to take seriously the
people in this culture who insist that Dissent has been squelched.
Brother, you have no idea."
James Lileks
Chris Bellomy
Easy there. Bush has confessed to breaking international
law. If it applied to Republicans, he'd be in prison right
now awaiting trial in The Hague.
cb
David V. Loewe, Jr
wrote:
List?
BTW, nice deflection there.
>If it applied to Republicans,
Since when have we let *Americans* of any stripe be subjected to
"justice" at The Hague?
>he'd be in prison right now awaiting trial in The Hague.
--
"The real question of government versus private enterprise is argued on
too philosophical and abstract a basis. Theoretically, planning may
be good. But nobody has ever figured out the cause of government
stupidity-- and until they do (and find the cure) all ideal plans will
fall into quicksand."
- Richard P. Feynman
Some dued
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 06:31:42 -0700 (PDT), Cornhuskeress
>
> >On Nov 3, 5:37=A0am, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
> >> dam wrote, On 11/3/10 5:29 AM:
>
> >> > This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
> >> > really shaken him up.
>
> >> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
> >> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
> >> circus again.
>
> >I hope you are wrong about this. I do not want to see the government
> >get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
> >proceedings. I want them to move forward.
>
> Considering the unstoppable socialism already in place, what is your
> concept of moving forward and any tack to take to accomplish that?
>
> For example I see no way to curb entitlement spending unless
> accomplished by the states. Seems to me that control of the House
> accomplishes very little except stalement.
>
> Further consideration of the situation might mean that statemate IS
> moving forward.
>
> Hugh
The first thing that needs fixed, before anything else will ever get
better, is the foundation. Get rid of lobbyists. Until then nothing
voters say or do will matter a damn cause everyone will always vote
for the sign they see most and those signs are paid for by lobbyists.
GregoryD
> Antonio Veranos wrote:
>> On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 17:05:01 -0400, Ike wrote...
>>
>>> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>>
>>>> stormtroopers
>>>> cb
>>> Zero to NAZI in 5.9 seconds.
>>
>> I noticed that but chose to ignore it.
>>
>
>
> rhetoric works for both sides. I honestly take no offense. Until someone
> tries to crucify an historical reenactor for wearing a German uniform.
>
Wrong historical reenactment.
GregoryD
Jim Brown
> On Nov 4, 8:53 am, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
>
> > Tom Enright wrote, On 11/4/10 7:27 AM:
> > >>> Which investigations do you feel should not have been conducted?
> > >> Let's put it this way... investigations are supposed to
> > >> happen *after* wrongdoing. They're not supposed to lead
> > >> to it.
> > > You should have been Nixon's attorney, he would have loved that
> > > angle.
> > No, he wouldn't have, you mendacious asshole, because
> > the Watergate investigation covered crimes already known
> > to have been committed. Contrast that to spending millions
> > of dollars only to find that no crimes were committed, as
> > happened with Whitewater.
>
> Really, 15 convictions for "no crimes committed"?
>
> During the course of the WW investigation it was discovered that
> Clinton had lied. Starr was obligated to investigate that. That's
> nobody's fault but Billy's.
>
> > Now get along and go suck some CEO's cock. Be sure to
> > squeeze ballsack when the moment arrives. Don't forget
> > to murmur sweet nothings about how you voted.
>
> So your program of providing "Head For The Homeless" didn't go so
> well? Hint: Poor people don't hirer workers or pay taxes or pay for
> health care.
>
Snap.
Jim Brown
> dam wrote, On 11/3/10 9:08 AM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 3, 8:37 am, Chris Bellomy<ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
> >> dam wrote, On 11/3/10 5:29 AM:
>
> >>> This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
> >>> really shaken him up.
>
> >> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
> >> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
> >> circus again.
>
>
>
> > I totally agree. What I had issue with was that people actually
> > believed that Obama would somehow be different
>
> If you don't think Obama has been different than Bush,
> why has the right been engaged in a nonstop hategasm
> this whole time?
>
> You can't have it both ways, pla.
>
Mirror image of the eight years previous?
Chris Bellomy
I don't remember libs telling conservatives in 2002 that
Bush was no different than Clinton.
Try to keep up.
cb
Jim Brown
Sorry to confuse your feeble mind...I was talking about the hategasm
you and your elk had for W for eight years.
Chris Bellomy
I'm sure you can come up with something from 2001-02 that
I posted which fits this description, right?
cb
otherwise, i'm sure you can retract and apologize, right?
Jim Brown
If you would kindly post with your account from that time period, I
would gladly do the required search. Your current account on google
only goes back a couple years. I'm too tired to start digging from
scratch.
Chris Bellomy
Just google up anything and everything posted by a guy
named "Czar."
cb
Chris Bellomy
BTW, the reason I'm so certain about this is that I
remember very clearly what turned me against Bush:
the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Right up until he actually
went through with it, I gave him the benefit of the
doubt that he was saber rattling to get what he
really wanted out of Saddam. He had to prove me
wrong before I gave up on him completely.
cb
J. Hugh Sullivan
<theodo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 3, 11:49=A0am, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 06:31:42 -0700 (PDT), Cornhuskeress
>>
>> <cahuskerf...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >On Nov 3, 5:37=3DA0am, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog@sirhc> wrote:
>> >> dam wrote, On 11/3/10 5:29 AM:
>>
>> >> > This massive vote of no confidence for Obama and the Dems must have
>> >> > really shaken him up.
>>
>> >> No, it was expected. So is the impeachment mania now looming...
>> >> the Repugs will find some lame thing or other to set up their
>> >> circus again.
>>
>> >I hope you are wrong about this. =A0I do not want to see the government
>> >get all mired down with a bunch of hearings and impeachment
>> >proceedings. =A0I want them to move forward.
>>
>> Considering the unstoppable socialism already in place, what is your
>> concept of moving forward and any tack to take to accomplish that?
>>
>> For example I see no way to curb entitlement spending unless
>> accomplished by the states. Seems to me that control of the House
>> accomplishes very little except stalement.
>>
>> Further consideration of the situation might mean that statemate IS
>> moving forward.
>>
>> Hugh
>
>The first thing that needs fixed, before anything else will ever get
>better, is the foundation. Get rid of lobbyists. Until then nothing
>voters say or do will matter a damn cause everyone will always vote
>for the sign they see most and those signs are paid for by lobbyists.
That is certainly part of the fix. Yet individuals have the right to
consult with their Congressmen. The resolution of that would be very
difficult.
Could we ever get back to where our REPRESENTATIVES talked to their
constituents? Even if we did how would they, for example, decide
between socialism as represented by Bellomy and social and fiscal
conservatism as represented by me.
Hugh
David V. Loewe, Jr
wrote:
>Could we ever get back to where our REPRESENTATIVES talked to their
>constituents?
This is probably heresy for most of you - left and right - but how about
increasing the size of the House? The average population of a
Congressional District (as of the 2000 census and later redistricting)
was just shy of 647,000. How does one person really adequately
represent, liaison with and do constituent work for that many people?
--
"...you know, it seems to me you suffer from the problem of
wanting a tailored fit in an off the rack world."
Dennis Juds
J. Hugh Sullivan
<dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 11:31:39 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan)
>wrote:
>
>>Could we ever get back to where our REPRESENTATIVES talked to their
>>constituents?
>
>This is probably heresy for most of you - left and right - but how about
>increasing the size of the House? The average population of a
>Congressional District (as of the 2000 census and later redistricting)
>was just shy of 647,000. How does one person really adequately
>represent, liaison with and do constituent work for that many people?
In theory the idea has merit. In fact I would say no more than 25%
have the mentality to suggest anything workable.
Hugh
Chris Bellomy
> On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 11:31:39 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan)
> wrote:
>
>> Could we ever get back to where our REPRESENTATIVES talked to their
>> constituents?
>
> This is probably heresy for most of you - left and right - but how about
> increasing the size of the House? The average population of a
> Congressional District (as of the 2000 census and later redistricting)
> was just shy of 647,000. How does one person really adequately
> represent, liaison with and do constituent work for that many people?
I think that's a great idea, but you should know that
it would be a huge boon to the Democrats in Presidential
elections.
cb
Jaybyrd
> On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 11:31:39 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan)
> wrote:
>
> >Could we ever get back to where our REPRESENTATIVES talked to their
> >constituents?
>
> This is probably heresy for most of you - left and right - but how about
> increasing the size of the House? The average population of a
> Congressional District (as of the 2000 census and later redistricting)
> was just shy of 647,000. How does one person really adequately
> represent, liaison with and do constituent work for that many people?
Pennsylvanians are calling for a reduction in the size of our
legislature and most people agree its a good idea.
Antonio Veranos
> >> As opposed to the "well-respect" [1] Waxman cranking up his own
> >> hobby-horse investigations?
> >
> >Easy there. Bush has confessed to breaking international law.
>
> List?
>
> BTW, nice deflection there.
Odd, this reply was two days ago, but seems to have been ignored.
--
A. Veranos
What color does a smurf go when you choke it?
David Loewe, Jr.
<summers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:01:00 -0500, David V. Loewe, Jr wrote...
>
>> >> As opposed to the "well-respect" [1] Waxman cranking up his own
>> >> hobby-horse investigations?
>> >
>> >Easy there. Bush has confessed to breaking international law.
>>
>> List?
>>
>> BTW, nice deflection there.
>
>Odd, this reply was two days ago, but seems to have been ignored.
Chris is melting. So is Ralph.
--
"To the last, I grapple with thee; From Hell's heart, I stab at thee;
For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee."
-Herman Melville, "Moby Dick"
Chris Bellomy
> On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 02:33:30 -0500, Antonio Veranos
> <summers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:01:00 -0500, David V. Loewe, Jr wrote...
>>
>>>>> As opposed to the "well-respect" [1] Waxman cranking up his own
>>>>> hobby-horse investigations?
>>>>
>>>> Easy there. Bush has confessed to breaking international law.
>>>
>>> List?
>>>
>>> BTW, nice deflection there.
>>
>> Odd, this reply was two days ago, but seems to have been ignored.
>
> Chris is melting. So is Ralph.
I can't believe that you didn't see where Bush
admitted authorizing the waterboarding of Khalid
Sheikh Mohammed. It's to the point where you're
asking for cites of stuff that I know you know
already.
cb
David V. Loewe, Jr
wrote:
Why would Waxman be concerned about international law (which is the
deflection I mentioned - the more important sentence in the response)?
--
"I don't mind you *thinking* I'm stupid, but don't *talk* to me
like I'm stupid."
- Harlan Ellison