Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
No landslide...
181 views
Skip to first unread message
Alan Baker
Nov 6, 2012, 10:27:06 PM11/6/12
to
...that's for certain.
Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
thought.
:-)
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
thought.
:-)
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Carbon
Nov 7, 2012, 12:49:01 AM11/7/12
to
On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 19:27:06 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> ...that's for certain.
>
> Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
> thought.
>
> :-)
That always happens. I've been following http://election.princeton.edu/,
> ...that's for certain.
>
> Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
> thought.
>
> :-)
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ and other stats-driven sites,
and they've been projecting an Obama win for months. Fox News has been
claiming the polls were biased and the true believers latched onto that,
but lo and behold, the nerds were right.
William Clark
Nov 7, 2012, 8:46:10 AM11/7/12
to
In article <pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
538 has the numbers right on the nose. If Romney takes Florida, Silver
is dead right; 303-235.
is dead right; 303-235.
Howard Brazee
Nov 7, 2012, 9:01:56 AM11/7/12
to
On 07 Nov 2012 05:49:01 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
wrote:
>That always happens. I've been following http://election.princeton.edu/,
>http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ and other stats-driven sites,
>and they've been projecting an Obama win for months. Fox News has been
>claiming the polls were biased and the true believers latched onto that,
>but lo and behold, the nerds were right.
Fox news claims reality is biased.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
wrote:
>That always happens. I've been following http://election.princeton.edu/,
>http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ and other stats-driven sites,
>and they've been projecting an Obama win for months. Fox News has been
>claiming the polls were biased and the true believers latched onto that,
>but lo and behold, the nerds were right.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
Howard Brazee
Nov 7, 2012, 9:57:20 AM11/7/12
to
Here's an article written by a conservative who thought Obama would
win:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ziegler/romney-loss-conservative-media_b_2084911.html?utm_hp_ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=110712&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief
win:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ziegler/romney-loss-conservative-media_b_2084911.html?utm_hp_ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=110712&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief
Irish Mike
Nov 7, 2012, 9:13:34 PM11/7/12
to
On Nov 6 2012 11:27 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> ....that's for certain.
and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and
are very sad to see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that
Obama's policies have caused in the last four years. And that is a group
of Americans I stand with - proudly and unapologetic ally.
Irish Mike
> ....that's for certain.
>
> Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
> thought.
>
> :-)
>
> --
> Alan Baker
The popular vote - the people's vote - was split almost even between Obama
> Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
> thought.
>
> :-)
>
> --
> Alan Baker
and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and
are very sad to see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that
Obama's policies have caused in the last four years. And that is a group
of Americans I stand with - proudly and unapologetic ally.
Irish Mike
Carbon
Nov 7, 2012, 9:30:00 PM11/7/12
to
On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:13:34 -0800, Irish Mike wrote:
> On Nov 6 2012 11:27 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>> ....that's for certain.
>>
>> Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
>> thought.
>>
>> :-)
>
> On Nov 6 2012 11:27 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>> ....that's for certain.
>>
>> Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
>> thought.
>>
>> :-)
>
> The popular vote - the people's vote - was split almost even between
> Obama and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for
> Romney and are very sad to see this country now locked in to the
> downward spiral that Obama's policies have caused in the last four
> years. And that is a group of Americans I stand with - proudly and
> unapologetic ally.
Back here on this planet, Romney lost the popular and electoral college
> Obama and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for
> Romney and are very sad to see this country now locked in to the
> downward spiral that Obama's policies have caused in the last four
> years. And that is a group of Americans I stand with - proudly and
> unapologetic ally.
votes. It's over. You lost.
Howard Brazee
Nov 7, 2012, 10:08:38 PM11/7/12
to
On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:13:34 -0800, "Irish Mike"
<ad7...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>The popular vote - the people's vote - was split almost even between Obama
>and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and
>are very sad to see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that
>Obama's policies have caused in the last four years. And that is a group
>of Americans I stand with - proudly and unapologetic ally.
Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
>The popular vote - the people's vote - was split almost even between Obama
>and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and
>are very sad to see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that
>Obama's policies have caused in the last four years. And that is a group
>of Americans I stand with - proudly and unapologetic ally.
Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 7, 2012, 10:26:39 PM11/7/12
to
On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 20:08:38 -0700, Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net>
wrote:
>On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:13:34 -0800, "Irish Mike"
><ad7...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
>>The popular vote - the people's vote - was split almost even between Obama
>>and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and
>>are very sad to see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that
>>Obama's policies have caused in the last four years. And that is a group
>>of Americans I stand with - proudly and unapologetic ally.
>
>Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
>Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
Irish Mike is so brilliant that he doesn't realize that over half (by
a small amount) of the voting Americans voted for Obama realizing that
Romney is an empty suit, and that he's in the minority.
wrote:
>On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:13:34 -0800, "Irish Mike"
><ad7...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
>>The popular vote - the people's vote - was split almost even between Obama
>>and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and
>>are very sad to see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that
>>Obama's policies have caused in the last four years. And that is a group
>>of Americans I stand with - proudly and unapologetic ally.
>
>Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
>Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
a small amount) of the voting Americans voted for Obama realizing that
Romney is an empty suit, and that he's in the minority.
Alan Baker
Nov 7, 2012, 11:06:32 PM11/7/12
to
In article <e3hrm9x...@news.ezprovider.com>,
The fact is that if it had gone the other way and Romney had been
elected, you would be talking about how close the split is.
elected, you would be talking about how close the split is.
Alan Baker
Nov 7, 2012, 11:09:38 PM11/7/12
to
In article <qa9m98l8jt60dptfi...@4ax.com>,
As much as Republican pundits tried to spin exit polls, the fact that
many Americans said the most important issue was the economy isn't a
repudiation of what Obama has done so far. Quite the reverse. If a large
majority of Americans declare the economy the most important issue, and
yet vote to re-elect him, then it's an endorsement of his handling of
the economy...
...and a repudiation of the man who wouldn't say how he was going to
balance the budget while getting the US economy moving (except by going
on and on about reaching across the aisle).
many Americans said the most important issue was the economy isn't a
repudiation of what Obama has done so far. Quite the reverse. If a large
majority of Americans declare the economy the most important issue, and
yet vote to re-elect him, then it's an endorsement of his handling of
the economy...
...and a repudiation of the man who wouldn't say how he was going to
balance the budget while getting the US economy moving (except by going
on and on about reaching across the aisle).
Alan Baker
Nov 7, 2012, 11:23:28 PM11/7/12
to
them...
...what...
...not allies...
...so enemies?
Nice attitude you have there.
johnty
Nov 8, 2012, 2:55:19 AM11/8/12
to
On Thursday, 8 November 2012 02:18:16 UTC, Irish Mike wrote:
> The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and are very sad to
> see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that Obama's policies
> have caused in the last four years.
Those policies are trying to pull out of the spiral he inherited, not caused.
> The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and are very sad to
> see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that Obama's policies
> have caused in the last four years.
Alan Baker
Nov 8, 2012, 4:59:03 AM11/8/12
to
In article <7527efbc-7d16-45f5...@googlegroups.com>,
The complete cognitive disassociation that some people are capable of
astounds me.
The economy was in freefall when Obama took office, and has been
recovering slowly for the last 3 years...
...becomes a "downward spiral".
astounds me.
The economy was in freefall when Obama took office, and has been
recovering slowly for the last 3 years...
...becomes a "downward spiral".
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:23:12 AM11/8/12
to
In article <7527efbc-7d16-45f5...@googlegroups.com>,
joh...@hotmail.com says...
Those policies are not working and you know it.
joh...@hotmail.com says...
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:23:42 AM11/8/12
to
In article <pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
We all have lost.
nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:24:22 AM11/8/12
to
In article <4f8m98h34jt82cftl...@4ax.com>,
how...@brazee.net says...
how...@brazee.net says...
>
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:13:34 -0800, "Irish Mike"
> <ad7...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
> >The popular vote - the people's vote - was split almost even between Obama
> >and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and
> >are very sad to see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that
> >Obama's policies have caused in the last four years. And that is a group
> >of Americans I stand with - proudly and unapologetic ally.
>
> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:13:34 -0800, "Irish Mike"
> <ad7...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
> >The popular vote - the people's vote - was split almost even between Obama
> >and Romney. The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and
> >are very sad to see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that
> >Obama's policies have caused in the last four years. And that is a group
> >of Americans I stand with - proudly and unapologetic ally.
>
> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:25:33 AM11/8/12
to
In article <qa9m98l8jt60dptfi...@4ax.com>,
bkn...@conramp.net says...
You get the government you vote for.
Fuel prices will rise, gas prices will rise and we will become
subservient to the UN.
bkn...@conramp.net says...
Fuel prices will rise, gas prices will rise and we will become
subservient to the UN.
William Clark
Nov 8, 2012, 7:44:36 AM11/8/12
to
all the red states where the Democrats did not even bother, the fact
that Romney could not win the popular vote is the surprise.
Howard Brazee
Nov 8, 2012, 9:27:25 AM11/8/12
to
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
>
>If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
>
>If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
has some, and Congress has others.
gpsman
Nov 8, 2012, 10:09:50 AM11/8/12
to
On Nov 8, 7:25 am, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
That ought to dispel any questions regarding your willful ignorance.
>
> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
-----
- gpsman
FDK
Nov 8, 2012, 10:10:24 AM11/8/12
to
"BAR" wrote in message
news:MPG.2b056e56...@news.giganews.com...
taxes go through the ceiling. Those who are working and / or have
money, will pay for those who don't. Just like it's been, but a lot
worse.
But take heart: Inflation is only 1.7%, except, goods, gas and food
have doubled in most cases.
MNMikeW
Nov 8, 2012, 10:12:33 AM11/8/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 8, 2012, 10:13:49 AM11/8/12
to
Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
>>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
>>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
>>
>> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
>
> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> has some, and Congress has others.
>
Obama could care less about the constitution.
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
>>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
>>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
>>
>> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
>
> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> has some, and Congress has others.
>
FDK
Nov 8, 2012, 10:14:11 AM11/8/12
to
"BAR" wrote in message
news:MPG.2b056ecb...@news.giganews.com...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/latinos-minorities-obama-win-election-article-1.1198477
Howard Brazee
Nov 8, 2012, 11:16:11 AM11/8/12
to
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:14:11 -0500, "FDK" <f...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>You get the government you vote for.
>
>No, you got the government the minorities voted for.
>
>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/latinos-minorities-obama-win-election-article-1.1198477
We're all minorities.
>
>>You get the government you vote for.
>
>No, you got the government the minorities voted for.
>
>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/latinos-minorities-obama-win-election-article-1.1198477
I am curious what people here think about Colorado legalizing
Marijuana, and whether they expect Obama's administration to fight it
working. Is this a Libertarian issue for you? A States' Rights
issue? A Big Brother issue? Are conservatives more or less
supportive of Colorado's law than liberals?
I heard a radio announcer mention that The Denver Broncos have the
smartest quarterback in the NFL - as Peyton Manning bought 21 Denver
area Papa John's Pizza places in October, and the Marijuana
legalization came in November... 8^)
golf...@yahoo.com
Nov 8, 2012, 11:32:12 AM11/8/12
to
On Nov 7, 12:49 am, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 19:27:06 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> > ...that's for certain.
>
> > Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
> > thought.
>
> > :-)
>
> That always happens. I've been followinghttp://election.princeton.edu/,http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/and other stats-driven sites,
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 19:27:06 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> > ...that's for certain.
>
> > Imagine that: some folks here put their ideology ahead of rational
> > thought.
>
> > :-)
>
> and they've been projecting an Obama win for months. Fox News has been
> claiming the polls were biased and the true believers latched onto that,
> but lo and behold, the nerds were right.
Rasmussen was wrong, Gallup was wrong. (Romney +5 the week prior to
> claiming the polls were biased and the true believers latched onto that,
> but lo and behold, the nerds were right.
the election was just absurd. They must be using middle school
remedial math kids to make their predictions ) PEW was just about
right but Nate Silver has been consistent with his predictions and
they proved out.
MNMikeW
Nov 8, 2012, 11:38:39 AM11/8/12
to
Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:14:11 -0500, "FDK" <f...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> You get the government you vote for.
>>
>> No, you got the government the minorities voted for.
>>
>> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/latinos-minorities-obama-win-election-article-1.1198477
>
> We're all minorities.
>
>
> I am curious what people here think about Colorado legalizing
> Marijuana, and whether they expect Obama's administration to fight it
> working. Is this a Libertarian issue for you? A States' Rights
> issue? A Big Brother issue? Are conservatives more or less
> supportive of Colorado's law than liberals?
I would imagine conservatives are far less supportive that liberals.
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:14:11 -0500, "FDK" <f...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> You get the government you vote for.
>>
>> No, you got the government the minorities voted for.
>>
>> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/latinos-minorities-obama-win-election-article-1.1198477
>
> We're all minorities.
>
>
> I am curious what people here think about Colorado legalizing
> Marijuana, and whether they expect Obama's administration to fight it
> working. Is this a Libertarian issue for you? A States' Rights
> issue? A Big Brother issue? Are conservatives more or less
> supportive of Colorado's law than liberals?
Kind of a no-brainer there. I think it should be legal so I say pass the
bong and get me some Cheetos!
>
> I heard a radio announcer mention that The Denver Broncos have the
> smartest quarterback in the NFL - as Peyton Manning bought 21 Denver
> area Papa John's Pizza places in October, and the Marijuana
> legalization came in November... 8^)
>
I can't stand Papa John's pizza. Now if he bought some Papa Murphys he'd
> I heard a radio announcer mention that The Denver Broncos have the
> smartest quarterback in the NFL - as Peyton Manning bought 21 Denver
> area Papa John's Pizza places in October, and the Marijuana
> legalization came in November... 8^)
>
have something. ;-)
Alan Baker
Nov 8, 2012, 12:08:54 PM11/8/12
to
In article
<c45c1a1d-3e42-4ded...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
Actually. Gallup stopped producing numbers in the wake of Sandy and the
right-wing fanatics here kept crowing about a number that was
increasingly out of date.
<c45c1a1d-3e42-4ded...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
right-wing fanatics here kept crowing about a number that was
increasingly out of date.
Alan Baker
Nov 8, 2012, 12:19:25 PM11/8/12
to
In article <MPG.2b056e37...@news.giganews.com>,
Really? What was the bottom number for jobs in the US in the current
economic cycle? When was it, and what has happened since?
economic cycle? When was it, and what has happened since?
Don Kirkman
Nov 8, 2012, 12:21:55 PM11/8/12
to
begun.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 8, 2012, 4:26:50 PM11/8/12
to
compliment.
johnty
Nov 8, 2012, 4:45:18 PM11/8/12
to
On Thursday, 8 November 2012 15:10:19 UTC, FDK wrote:
> But take heart: Inflation is only 1.7%, except, goods, gas and food
> have doubled in most cases.
Without a time reference your claim that gas has doubled, like your other empty claims, is totally meaningless.
> But take heart: Inflation is only 1.7%, except, goods, gas and food
> have doubled in most cases.
Pick a period of relevance - Nov 04($2) to June 08($4) for instance?
MNMikeW
Nov 8, 2012, 6:02:03 PM11/8/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 8, 2012, 6:19:30 PM11/8/12
to
Immigration....still in limbo
Czars....Didn't hear you bitching about Bush's and he nominated more
than Obama.
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:07:48 PM11/8/12
to
In article <vr8o981ho3ud0u5ub...@4ax.com>,
bkn...@conramp.net says...
Reality is not your friend.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/05/obama-to-congress-ill-decide-whats-
constitutional/
bkn...@conramp.net says...
http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/05/obama-to-congress-ill-decide-whats-
constitutional/
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:09:09 PM11/8/12
to
In article <rdfo989ur43dac97k...@4ax.com>,
bkn...@conramp.net says...
> Immigration....still in limbo
You must have missed the change from catch and release to don't bother
catching.
> Czars....Didn't hear you bitching about Bush's and he nominated more
> than Obama.
More than Obama. You need to support that with some facts.
bkn...@conramp.net says...
>
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:02:03 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> >> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:13:49 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Howard Brazee wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> >>>>>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
> >>>>
> >>>> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> >>>> has some, and Congress has others.
> >>>>
> >>> Obama could care less about the constitution.
> >>
> >> Please Mike. You're starting to sound like Bert...and that ain't a
> >> compliment.
> >>
> >He's proven is several times already. DOMA, immigration enforcement, Czars.
> DOMA...the president can't pass legislation
Obama decided not to enforce the law.
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:02:03 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> >> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:13:49 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Howard Brazee wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> >>>>>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
> >>>>
> >>>> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> >>>> has some, and Congress has others.
> >>>>
> >>> Obama could care less about the constitution.
> >>
> >> Please Mike. You're starting to sound like Bert...and that ain't a
> >> compliment.
> >>
> >He's proven is several times already. DOMA, immigration enforcement, Czars.
> DOMA...the president can't pass legislation
> Immigration....still in limbo
You must have missed the change from catch and release to don't bother
catching.
> Czars....Didn't hear you bitching about Bush's and he nominated more
> than Obama.
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:10:39 PM11/8/12
to
In article <k7gi0q$2qh$1...@dont-email.me>, f...@aol.com says...
We will find out how much the liberals like it when the Gestapo, I mean
TSA, starts fisting them whenever they fly.
http://www.infowars.com/poll-nearly-one-third-of-americans-would-accept-
tsa-body-cavity-search-in-order-to-fly/
TSA, starts fisting them whenever they fly.
http://www.infowars.com/poll-nearly-one-third-of-americans-would-accept-
tsa-body-cavity-search-in-order-to-fly/
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:13:49 PM11/8/12
to
In article <64396a1e-900f-4f05...@googlegroups.com>,
joh...@hotmail.com says...
Again, reality doesn't agree with your fantasy.
http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx
When Bush left office gas was ~$1.86 per gallon.
Today gas is ~$3.65 which is double of what it was when Obama entered
office.
joh...@hotmail.com says...
http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx
When Bush left office gas was ~$1.86 per gallon.
Today gas is ~$3.65 which is double of what it was when Obama entered
office.
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:15:30 PM11/8/12
to
In article <ag25gg...@mid.individual.net>, mnmi...@aol.com says...
He should have bought the Frito-Lay's distributorship.
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:16:20 PM11/8/12
to
In article <alangbaker-C2656...@news.shawcable.net>,
alang...@telus.net says...
entered office.
alang...@telus.net says...
>
> In article <MPG.2b056e37...@news.giganews.com>,
> BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <7527efbc-7d16-45f5...@googlegroups.com>,
> > joh...@hotmail.com says...
> > >
> > > On Thursday, 8 November 2012 02:18:16 UTC, Irish Mike wrote:
> > > > The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and are very sad
> > > > to
> > > > see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that Obama's
> > > > policies
> > > > have caused in the last four years.
> > >
> > >
> > > Those policies are trying to pull out of the spiral he inherited, not
> > > caused.
> >
> > Those policies are not working and you know it.
>
> Really? What was the bottom number for jobs in the US in the current
> economic cycle? When was it, and what has happened since?
There are fewer people working today than were working when Obama
> In article <MPG.2b056e37...@news.giganews.com>,
> BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <7527efbc-7d16-45f5...@googlegroups.com>,
> > joh...@hotmail.com says...
> > >
> > > On Thursday, 8 November 2012 02:18:16 UTC, Irish Mike wrote:
> > > > The fact is half the voters in America voted for Romney and are very sad
> > > > to
> > > > see this country now locked in to the downward spiral that Obama's
> > > > policies
> > > > have caused in the last four years.
> > >
> > >
> > > Those policies are trying to pull out of the spiral he inherited, not
> > > caused.
> >
> > Those policies are not working and you know it.
>
> Really? What was the bottom number for jobs in the US in the current
> economic cycle? When was it, and what has happened since?
entered office.
BAR
Nov 8, 2012, 7:31:03 PM11/8/12
to
In article <v8gn98pdocsqqmem5...@4ax.com>,
how...@brazee.net says...
how...@brazee.net says...
>
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> >> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> >> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
> >
> >If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
>
> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> has some, and Congress has others.
You missed the section that describes how a veto works.
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> >> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> >> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
> >
> >If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
>
> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> has some, and Congress has others.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 8, 2012, 7:35:38 PM11/8/12
to
quote? If you'll find it in one of the many fanatical ultra-right
pieces of shit that you read it'll be a miracle. You missed the intro
to that sentence that has erroneous quote marks. It says...In other
words.
It's What those rags want their readers to think he actually said.
Idiot.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 8, 2012, 7:41:32 PM11/8/12
to
Notice that Bush appointed 49 and Obama 43. How's that for a fact.
Then look at how many were not confirmed.
FDK
Nov 8, 2012, 8:03:19 PM11/8/12
to
"Howard Brazee" wrote in message
news:gdmn98plfrf4650kh...@4ax.com...
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:14:11 -0500, "FDK" <f...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>You get the government you vote for.
>
>No, you got the government the minorities voted for.
>
>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/latinos-minorities-obama-win-election-article-1.1198477
>We're all minorities.
>I am curious what people here think about Colorado legalizing
>Marijuana,
johnty
Nov 9, 2012, 3:01:51 AM11/9/12
to
On Friday, 9 November 2012 00:14:08 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > > Pick a period of relevance - Nov 04($2) to June 08($4) for instance?
> Again, reality doesn't agree with your fantasy.
Re-check your drivel. Me and reality are like this X
> > > Pick a period of relevance - Nov 04($2) to June 08($4) for instance?
> Again, reality doesn't agree with your fantasy.
BAR
Nov 9, 2012, 7:50:54 AM11/9/12
to
In article <9d150619-4fdf-4d83...@googlegroups.com>,
joh...@hotmail.com says...
http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx?time=24
The data disagrees with you.
joh...@hotmail.com says...
The data disagrees with you.
MNMikeW
Nov 9, 2012, 9:36:28 AM11/9/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 9, 2012, 9:37:39 AM11/9/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 9, 2012, 9:47:30 AM11/9/12
to
immigration using his little amnesty ploy.
Alan Baker
Nov 9, 2012, 11:21:35 AM11/9/12
to
In article <ag4jc3...@mid.individual.net>,
MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> > On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:02:03 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:13:49 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Howard Brazee wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> >>>>>>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> >>>>> has some, and Congress has others.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Obama could care less about the constitution.
> >>>
> >>> Please Mike. You're starting to sound like Bert...and that ain't a
> >>> compliment.
> >>>
> >> He's proven is several times already. DOMA, immigration enforcement, Czars.
> > DOMA...the president can't pass legislation
> > Immigration....still in limbo
> > Czars....Didn't hear you bitching about Bush's and he nominated more
> > than Obama.
> >
> DOMA is already passed. Obama has chosen not to enforce it.
And a bunch of federal courts have found it to be unconstitutional...
> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> > On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:02:03 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:13:49 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Howard Brazee wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> >>>>>>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> >>>>> has some, and Congress has others.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Obama could care less about the constitution.
> >>>
> >>> Please Mike. You're starting to sound like Bert...and that ain't a
> >>> compliment.
> >>>
> >> He's proven is several times already. DOMA, immigration enforcement, Czars.
> > DOMA...the president can't pass legislation
> > Immigration....still in limbo
> > Czars....Didn't hear you bitching about Bush's and he nominated more
> > than Obama.
> >
> DOMA is already passed. Obama has chosen not to enforce it.
johnty
Nov 9, 2012, 12:00:19 PM11/9/12
to
On Friday, 9 November 2012 12:51:52 UTC, BAR wrote:
> The data disagrees with you.
Jeez, you are so dumb I bet you think that girls can't get pregnant from rape.
> The data disagrees with you.
I'll spell it out so a five year old can understand.
Try and find a five year old to explain it to you.
John clicks on the "8 years" link on the graph that Janet has provided. Look, John, see the graph in late 2004 - that's at the bottom left side. See the price on the side there? Hovering around, and for a short while below, 1.86? Yes, says John. Can you the date at the bottom? It says 9 November, doesn't it John. Yes. Do you you see it Janet? Derr, wha? says Janet.
Now, John, look at the graph in the centre, see the line shoot past 3.87 and for a short time as high as 4.12. Yes, John sees it. Janet can't find it. Poor Janet
Look at the vertical line there - this indicates the date, just like before. It says 6/11. Does that mean 11 June, Janet? Dunno, says Janet.
Does the data agree with you John? Yes, it does.
Is Janet a complete dickhead? Yes, yes I am says Janet...
MNMikeW
Nov 9, 2012, 12:09:45 PM11/9/12
to
Don Kirkman
Nov 9, 2012, 12:59:23 PM11/9/12
to
chart is based from.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
BAR
Nov 9, 2012, 6:20:20 PM11/9/12
to
In article <alangbaker-768E0...@news.shawcable.net>,
alang...@telus.net says...
alang...@telus.net says...
>
> In article <ag4jc3...@mid.individual.net>,
> MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> > > On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:02:03 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:13:49 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Howard Brazee wrote:
> > >>>>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> > >>>>>>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> > >>>>> has some, and Congress has others.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Obama could care less about the constitution.
> > >>>
> > >>> Please Mike. You're starting to sound like Bert...and that ain't a
> > >>> compliment.
> > >>>
> > >> He's proven is several times already. DOMA, immigration enforcement, Czars.
> > > DOMA...the president can't pass legislation
> > > Immigration....still in limbo
> > > Czars....Didn't hear you bitching about Bush's and he nominated more
> > > than Obama.
> > >
> > DOMA is already passed. Obama has chosen not to enforce it.
>
> And a bunch of federal courts have found it to be unconstitutional...
Why would it be unconstitutional, it what the people wanted.
> In article <ag4jc3...@mid.individual.net>,
> MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> > > On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:02:03 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:13:49 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Howard Brazee wrote:
> > >>>>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 07:24:22 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Of course, the president does not implement taxing and spending -
> > >>>>>>> Congress does. We are living under Congress's policies.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> If the president has no affect on the policies, why do we have one?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Read the Constitution. We have separation of powers, the president
> > >>>>> has some, and Congress has others.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Obama could care less about the constitution.
> > >>>
> > >>> Please Mike. You're starting to sound like Bert...and that ain't a
> > >>> compliment.
> > >>>
> > >> He's proven is several times already. DOMA, immigration enforcement, Czars.
> > > DOMA...the president can't pass legislation
> > > Immigration....still in limbo
> > > Czars....Didn't hear you bitching about Bush's and he nominated more
> > > than Obama.
> > >
> > DOMA is already passed. Obama has chosen not to enforce it.
>
> And a bunch of federal courts have found it to be unconstitutional...
BAR
Nov 9, 2012, 6:24:01 PM11/9/12
to
In article <n0gq989p32thb6vdl...@4ax.com>, donsno2
@charter.net says...
You can click on the quick charts for the 5 or 8 year graphs to show you
a broader range, more than 2 years. I would have expected that an
alleged fucking genius like you to figure that out but, obviously you
are too stupid.
@charter.net says...
a broader range, more than 2 years. I would have expected that an
alleged fucking genius like you to figure that out but, obviously you
are too stupid.
BAR
Nov 9, 2012, 6:29:02 PM11/9/12
to
In article <52cd4917-2f1e-42b3...@googlegroups.com>,
joh...@hotmail.com says...
Gas was 1.86 when Obama entered office and it is $3.64 now, I just
bought some about 20 minutes ago.
You conveniently snipped the rest of my post because it didn't fit in
your your desire act like a complete ass. I will provide you with the
snipped text.
Again, reality doesn't agree with your fantasy.
joh...@hotmail.com says...
bought some about 20 minutes ago.
You conveniently snipped the rest of my post because it didn't fit in
your your desire act like a complete ass. I will provide you with the
snipped text.
Again, reality doesn't agree with your fantasy.
http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx
When Bush left office gas was ~$1.86 per gallon.
Today gas is ~$3.65 which is double of what it was when Obama
entered office.
Exactly what did I say that was incorrect?
When Bush left office gas was ~$1.86 per gallon.
Today gas is ~$3.65 which is double of what it was when Obama
entered office.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 9, 2012, 6:30:45 PM11/9/12
to
unconstitutional. You just don't have a lick of common sense.
Alan Baker
Nov 9, 2012, 6:51:29 PM11/9/12
to
In article <MPG.2b0759c4...@news.giganews.com>,
I see...
So it's a "sad day for liberty" when the people decide they want Obama
as president, but when a law is passed indirectly by their
representatives, it can't possibly be unconstitutional because "it [sic]
what the people wanted"...
...is that a fair summation of your two-facedness?
So it's a "sad day for liberty" when the people decide they want Obama
as president, but when a law is passed indirectly by their
representatives, it can't possibly be unconstitutional because "it [sic]
what the people wanted"...
...is that a fair summation of your two-facedness?
gpsman
Nov 9, 2012, 7:24:27 PM11/9/12
to
On Nov 9, 6:20 pm, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> Why would it be unconstitutional, it what the people wanted.
Wow, that's got to rank among the most stunningly ignorant statements
>
> Why would it be unconstitutional, it what the people wanted.
ever posted to Usenet.
Congratulations.
-----
- gpsman
BAR
Nov 9, 2012, 7:25:00 PM11/9/12
to
In article <alangbaker-B2866...@news.shawcable.net>,
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
supporting adults deal with every day.
safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
supporting adults deal with every day.
Alan Baker
Nov 9, 2012, 7:29:25 PM11/9/12
to
In article <MPG.2b0768e2...@news.giganews.com>,
Which doesn't address my question...
>
> I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
> supporting adults deal with every day.
LOL
I never expected someone such as you to actually answer my question.
>
> I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
> supporting adults deal with every day.
I never expected someone such as you to actually answer my question.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 9, 2012, 7:35:59 PM11/9/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 9, 2012, 7:39:08 PM11/9/12
to
that don't make any sense.
>
>I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
>supporting adults deal with every day.
Seriously Bert, you don't have a whit of an idea of what anyone here
>I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
>supporting adults deal with every day.
earns. Only idle gossip from morons like LLLLLLarrry go that route.
Alan Baker
Nov 9, 2012, 7:42:52 PM11/9/12
to
In article <7c8r989774dpsllt5...@4ax.com>,
In truth, I don't earn all that much in absolute terms...
...but that's a choice. My condo is paid off, there's plenty invested
for the future, and there are better things to do (for me, anyway) than
slaving away for 40 hours a week.
20 hours a week at $66-$90 per hour works far better for me. :-)
...but that's a choice. My condo is paid off, there's plenty invested
for the future, and there are better things to do (for me, anyway) than
slaving away for 40 hours a week.
20 hours a week at $66-$90 per hour works far better for me. :-)
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 9, 2012, 7:47:31 PM11/9/12
to
On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:42:52 -0800, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote:
>In article <7c8r989774dpsllt5...@4ax.com>,
> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 19:25:00 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> >I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
>> >supporting adults deal with every day.
>>
>> Seriously Bert, you don't have a whit of an idea of what anyone here
>> earns. Only idle gossip from morons like LLLLLLarrry go that route.
>
>In truth, I don't earn all that much in absolute terms...
That wasn't the point Bert the Shallow was trying to make.
Self-supporting was his low shot.
wrote:
>In article <7c8r989774dpsllt5...@4ax.com>,
> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 19:25:00 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> >I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
>> >supporting adults deal with every day.
>>
>> Seriously Bert, you don't have a whit of an idea of what anyone here
>> earns. Only idle gossip from morons like LLLLLLarrry go that route.
>
>In truth, I don't earn all that much in absolute terms...
Self-supporting was his low shot.
Alan Baker
Nov 9, 2012, 7:49:17 PM11/9/12
to
In article <cq8r98dp89hoeai8o...@4ax.com>,
bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:42:52 -0800, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <7c8r989774dpsllt5...@4ax.com>,
> > bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 19:25:00 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> >> >I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
> >> >supporting adults deal with every day.
> >>
> >> Seriously Bert, you don't have a whit of an idea of what anyone here
> >> earns. Only idle gossip from morons like LLLLLLarrry go that route.
> >
> >In truth, I don't earn all that much in absolute terms...
>
> That wasn't the point Bert the Shallow was trying to make.
> Self-supporting was his low shot.
I know. I just like responding to nonsense with reality.
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:42:52 -0800, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <7c8r989774dpsllt5...@4ax.com>,
> > bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 19:25:00 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> >> >I wouldn't expect a child like you to understand concepts that self-
> >> >supporting adults deal with every day.
> >>
> >> Seriously Bert, you don't have a whit of an idea of what anyone here
> >> earns. Only idle gossip from morons like LLLLLLarrry go that route.
> >
> >In truth, I don't earn all that much in absolute terms...
>
> That wasn't the point Bert the Shallow was trying to make.
> Self-supporting was his low shot.
Howard Brazee
Nov 9, 2012, 8:34:52 PM11/9/12
to
>> And a bunch of federal courts have found it to be unconstitutional...
>
>Why would it be unconstitutional, it what the people wanted.
The two don't have to be related.
>
>Why would it be unconstitutional, it what the people wanted.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
johnty
Nov 10, 2012, 4:10:54 AM11/10/12
to
On Friday, 9 November 2012 23:29:14 UTC, BAR wrote:
> I will provide you with the snipped text. Again, reality doesn't agree with
> your fantasy. http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx When Bush left
> office gas was ~$1.86 per gallon. Today gas is ~$3.65 which is double of what
> it was when Obama entered office. Exactly what did I say that was incorrect?
You need some remedial reading lessons. I didn't that was incorrect, I said you provided no timescale, which makes the claim meaningless.
> I will provide you with the snipped text. Again, reality doesn't agree with
> your fantasy. http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx When Bush left
> office gas was ~$1.86 per gallon. Today gas is ~$3.65 which is double of what
> it was when Obama entered office. Exactly what did I say that was incorrect?
But as to what you did say that was incorrect:
"Again, reality doesn't agree with your fantasy" and "The data disagrees with you" is the short answer. The data come directly from your reference.
BAR
Nov 10, 2012, 9:11:18 AM11/10/12
to
In article <92895e82-7782-4b49...@googlegroups.com>,
joh...@hotmail.com says...
only because you haven't got a clue as to when Bush left office?
joh...@hotmail.com says...
>
> On Friday, 9 November 2012 23:29:14 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > I will provide you with the snipped text. Again, reality doesn't agree with
> > your fantasy. http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx When Bush left
> > office gas was ~$1.86 per gallon. Today gas is ~$3.65 which is double of what
> > it was when Obama entered office. Exactly what did I say that was incorrect?
>
> You need some remedial reading lessons. I didn't that was incorrect, I said you provided no timescale, which makes the claim meaningless.
You are as moronic as Baker. Do you need a time scale expressed in dates
> On Friday, 9 November 2012 23:29:14 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > I will provide you with the snipped text. Again, reality doesn't agree with
> > your fantasy. http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx When Bush left
> > office gas was ~$1.86 per gallon. Today gas is ~$3.65 which is double of what
> > it was when Obama entered office. Exactly what did I say that was incorrect?
>
> You need some remedial reading lessons. I didn't that was incorrect, I said you provided no timescale, which makes the claim meaningless.
only because you haven't got a clue as to when Bush left office?
johnty
Nov 11, 2012, 4:25:56 AM11/11/12
to
On Saturday, 10 November 2012 14:12:27 UTC, BAR wrote:
> Do you need a time scale expressed in dates only because you haven't got a clue as to when Bush left office?
A timescale is required for any meaning to be attached to what you claim. Do you not understand that? No, of course you don't.
> Do you need a time scale expressed in dates only because you haven't got a clue as to when Bush left office?
For instance, another thing you said that is incorrect is that food also doubled. On what timescale is that? Not since 2008 that's for sure, and good luck with running to google for help this time.
Yet again, you are either lying uncontrollably or you are genuinely insane.
BAR
Nov 11, 2012, 9:51:40 AM11/11/12
to
In article <71a2a568-20e8-4014...@googlegroups.com>,
joh...@hotmail.com says...
when Bush left office and today.
> For instance, another thing you said that is incorrect is that food also doubled. On what timescale is that? Not since 2008 that's for sure, and good luck with running to google for help this time.
When did I say food doubled?
> Yet again, you are either lying uncontrollably or you are genuinely insane.
You see bogey men when they are not their.
joh...@hotmail.com says...
>
> On Saturday, 10 November 2012 14:12:27 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > Do you need a time scale expressed in dates only because you haven't got a clue as to when Bush left office?
>
> A timescale is required for any meaning to be attached to what you claim. Do you not understand that? No, of course you don't.
I gave you a timescale, it is not my problem that you can't remember
> On Saturday, 10 November 2012 14:12:27 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > Do you need a time scale expressed in dates only because you haven't got a clue as to when Bush left office?
>
> A timescale is required for any meaning to be attached to what you claim. Do you not understand that? No, of course you don't.
when Bush left office and today.
> For instance, another thing you said that is incorrect is that food also doubled. On what timescale is that? Not since 2008 that's for sure, and good luck with running to google for help this time.
> Yet again, you are either lying uncontrollably or you are genuinely insane.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 11, 2012, 10:17:49 AM11/11/12
to
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 09:51:40 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>You see bogey men when they are not their.
Good God!
>You see bogey men when they are not their.
William Clark
Nov 12, 2012, 10:43:21 AM11/12/12
to
BAR
Nov 12, 2012, 7:35:40 PM11/12/12
to
In article <clark-BE7CBF....@news.eternal-september.org>,
cl...@nospammatsceng.ohio-state.edu says...
Paying off their wagers. Something you don't know anything about.
cl...@nospammatsceng.ohio-state.edu says...
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 12, 2012, 7:38:27 PM11/12/12
to
grader does too. LMAO
William Clark
Nov 12, 2012, 9:58:23 PM11/12/12
to
BAR
Nov 13, 2012, 7:37:26 AM11/13/12
to
In article <clark-001B4C....@nntp.aioe.org>,
Everybody here knows you lost the wager do to the fact that you have
failed to substantiate your claims. Your request that any proof you
provide would have to be accepted as proof if you provided it was the
wantings of a child.
Pay off your wagers, deadbeat.
failed to substantiate your claims. Your request that any proof you
provide would have to be accepted as proof if you provided it was the
wantings of a child.
Pay off your wagers, deadbeat.
William Clark
Nov 13, 2012, 8:01:24 AM11/13/12
to
In article <MPG.2b0c090c...@news.giganews.com>,
Bertie, you are boring to the point of extinction. Your time would be
much better spent mastering the rudiments of the English language.
much better spent mastering the rudiments of the English language.
johnty
Nov 13, 2012, 8:04:32 AM11/13/12
to
On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> When did I say food doubled?
Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most cases" perhaps.
> When did I say food doubled?
BAR
Nov 13, 2012, 8:21:12 AM11/13/12
to
In article <92a02e31-9176-45a6...@googlegroups.com>,
joh...@hotmail.com says...
joh...@hotmail.com says...
>
> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > When did I say food doubled?
>
>
> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most cases" perhaps.
Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > When did I say food doubled?
>
>
> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most cases" perhaps.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 13, 2012, 9:25:54 AM11/13/12
to
made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
How about just saying "You're right"?
BAR
Nov 13, 2012, 7:14:25 PM11/13/12
to
Alan Baker
Nov 13, 2012, 7:16:58 PM11/13/12
to
In article <MPG.2b0cac69...@news.giganews.com>,
BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3...@4ax.com>,
> bkn...@conramp.net says...
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >
> > >In article <92a02e31-9176-45a6...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >joh...@hotmail.com says...
> > >>
> > >> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > >> > When did I say food doubled?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most
> > >> cases" perhaps.
> > >
> > >Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> >
> > The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
> > made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
> >
> > How about just saying "You're right"?
>
> Check the data.
Will that change that you did say that the cost of food had doubled?
> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3...@4ax.com>,
> bkn...@conramp.net says...
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >
> > >In article <92a02e31-9176-45a6...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >joh...@hotmail.com says...
> > >>
> > >> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > >> > When did I say food doubled?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most
> > >> cases" perhaps.
> > >
> > >Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> >
> > The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
> > made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
> >
> > How about just saying "You're right"?
>
> Check the data.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 13, 2012, 8:00:36 PM11/13/12
to
doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or tried to
lie out of it. He was right.
You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
obvious.
BAR
Nov 13, 2012, 10:34:24 PM11/13/12
to
Alan Baker
Nov 13, 2012, 10:38:32 PM11/13/12
to
In article <MPG.2b0cdb4c...@news.giganews.com>,
Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you that
you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the data, or
did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the data, or
did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 13, 2012, 10:47:46 PM11/13/12
to
BAR
Nov 13, 2012, 10:49:34 PM11/13/12
to
In article <f156a8p3jb03iduso...@4ax.com>,
Too bad Obama is transparent, like he said he would be.
Do you really like having a president who lies to you with every breath?
Do you really like having a president who lies to you with every breath?
Carbon
Nov 13, 2012, 11:27:37 PM11/13/12
to
demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to back
any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring the pot.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 14, 2012, 7:56:57 AM11/14/12
to
On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
wrote:
I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
he is really just limited in intellectual development.
wrote:
he is really just limited in intellectual development.
Carbon
Nov 14, 2012, 8:18:26 AM11/14/12
to
same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
since mastered.
It's a waste of time trying to reason with him.
MNMikeW
Nov 14, 2012, 10:24:54 AM11/14/12
to
William Clark
Nov 14, 2012, 11:10:23 AM11/14/12
to
Dene
Nov 14, 2012, 1:54:31 PM11/14/12
to
On Nov 14, 7:24 am, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
> Carbon wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
> >> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> >>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
> Carbon wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
> >> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> >>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
> >>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> >>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
> >>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article
> >>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6...@googlegroups.com>,
> >>>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
> >>>>>>>>> In article
> >>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6...@googlegroups.com>,
-Greg
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 14, 2012, 6:14:04 PM11/14/12
to
Alan Baker
Nov 14, 2012, 6:20:15 PM11/14/12
to
politics are, do you?
LOL
BAR
Nov 14, 2012, 6:55:37 PM11/14/12
to
In article <ca0047b0-38fd-48ec-9b6e-
262bcb...@vb8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, alang...@telus.net says...
I don't think any one cares what your politics are.
262bcb...@vb8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, alang...@telus.net says...
Carbon
Nov 14, 2012, 7:24:30 PM11/14/12
to
libertarian.
I usually fast-forward through the catfights and don't know what beef
you guys have with Alan. But generally he will have a cite or at least a
rational argument. I don't see how that is comparable to Bert's normal
M.O., which is to just make shit up.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 14, 2012, 7:25:23 PM11/14/12
to
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages