>> > >skink on sink <l...@ar.ds> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>> > >On 8/31/2012 3:12 AM, Paul Ryan wrote:
>> > >> Why are there so many Jewish people who want to buy Gold on TV?

>> > >Why are so many Dems racists?

>> > It's their heritage. They can't hide from it.

>> Yes, that's why the Civil Rights Act offended them and created the
>> DixieCrats.

>> Face it.  All I read from Republicans are rants about how black people
>> are stupid because they don't vote Republican.

>> And don't get me started on those Jews.   They don't vote GOP either.

>> I have no idea why those darkies and Christ killers don't support the
>> Republican party?

>> They must be racist.

>Well, there is one good thing.

>> > 3 Million Americans watch Fox News.  That's less than 1%

>> > 2% of the people attending the 2008 RNC conference were black.

>> Are you saying black America is in the tank for Obama again?

>> Oh the humanity!

>No,

> >On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 21:47:55 -0500, AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:

> >>In article <7448f$5042c269$adce5107$13...@PRIMUS.CA>,
> >>elbie_jovis_ka...@yahoo.com says...

> >>> On 01/09/2012 09:34 p.m., AlleyCat wrote:
> >>> > In article <wildbilly-09E5F6.17561101092012@c-61-68-245-
> >>> > 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

> >>> > How about we talk about who can't fix it, cuz he don't know a damn thing
> >>> > about no economy (Obama), and who can do a damn better job, because he
> >>> > knows a shitload more about finances and the economy, (Romney).

> >>> Romney knows how to screw workers. If that is the kind of knowledge you
> >>> crave, you should vote for him.

> >>Is that something you've heard, or know of first hand? Any one can
> >>parrot other people. Please cite the sites where it show just how Romney
> >>"screws" workers. Do you know how many "workers" are being screwed right
> >>now, because Obama doesn't know a fucking thing about economics and
> >>doesn't want the U.S. economy to prosper, anyway? Get yourself a brain
> >>for yourself and quit repeating what others say.

> >Romney is a Mormon.  Mormons are taught from early childhood to hate
> >non Mormons.  Romney cares nothing about regular Americans.

> I'll just add that lie to your list, shall I?

> http://klaus.webege.com/dudu/dudu.htm
> Deep Dudu's FORTRESS OF LIES
> Now With Over 200 Documented
> Lies, Falsehoods, Fabrications, Distortions, and Deceptions!

> >> How about we talk about who can't fix it, cuz he don't know a damn thing
> >> about no economy (Obama), and who can do a damn better job, because he
> >> knows a shitload more about finances and the economy, (Romney).

> > Romney knows how to screw workers. If that is the kind of knowledge you
> > crave, you should vote for him.

> Hmmm... 8 million jobs lost under Obama, what jobs he 'created' were done at
> a rate of over $200,000 under the stimulus spending.

> So who exactly has Obama not screwed the workers, much less the taxpayers?

>>> On 01/09/2012 09:34 p.m., AlleyCat wrote:
>>>> In article <wildbilly-09E5F6.17561101092012@c-61-68-245-
>>>> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

>>>> How about we talk about who can't fix it, cuz he don't know a damn thing
>>>> about no economy (Obama), and who can do a damn better job, because he
>>>> knows a shitload more about finances and the economy, (Romney).

>>> Romney knows how to screw workers. If that is the kind of knowledge you
>>> crave, you should vote for him.

>> Is that something you've heard, or know of first hand? Any one can
>> parrot other people. Please cite the sites where it show just how Romney
>> "screws" workers. Do you know how many "workers" are being screwed right
>> now, because Obama doesn't know a fucking thing about economics and
>> doesn't want the U.S. economy to prosper, anyway? Get yourself a brain
>> for yourself and quit repeating what others say.

>If you are a worker and are planning to vote for Romney, please do so.
>Just buy a family size jar of vaseline.

>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/30/bain-protesters-h...

>> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>> news:wildbilly-6C6010.11045801092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
>> > In article <MPG.2aab5ad3bf22e901989...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> > AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:

>> >> In article <wildbilly-09FB76.22260331082012@c-61-68-245-
>> >> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

>> >> > In article <k1rkbb$lj...@dont-email.me>, skank on scat <l...@ar.ds>
>> >> > wrote:

>> > Good reply "Cat", but the central fact of corporate life is that it is
>> > illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce investor's dividends.

>> Cite please for this statute.

> Unless modified by statute, traditional fiduciary duties require
> corporate officials to further the interests of shareholders,

> >> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
> >> news:wildbilly-6C6010.11045801092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
> >> > In article <MPG.2aab5ad3bf22e901989...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >> > AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:

> >> >> In article <wildbilly-09FB76.22260331082012@c-61-68-245-
> >> >> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

> >> >> > In article <k1rkbb$lj...@dont-email.me>, skank on scat <l...@ar.ds>
> >> >> > wrote:

> >> > Good reply "Cat", but the central fact of corporate life is that it is
> >> > illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce investor's dividends.

> >> Cite please for this statute.

> > Unless modified by statute, traditional fiduciary duties require
> > corporate officials to further the interests of shareholders,

> <yawn>

> Traditional fiduciary duties?

> You said, and I  quote "it is illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce
> investor's dividends."

> Please cite the statute that supports your claim.

> >On 01/09/2012 10:47 p.m., AlleyCat wrote:
> >> In article <7448f$5042c269$adce5107$13...@PRIMUS.CA>,
> >> elbie_jovis_ka...@yahoo.com says...

> >>> On 01/09/2012 09:34 p.m., AlleyCat wrote:
> >>>> In article <wildbilly-09E5F6.17561101092012@c-61-68-245-
> >>>> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

> >>>> How about we talk about who can't fix it, cuz he don't know a damn thing
> >>>> about no economy (Obama), and who can do a damn better job, because he
> >>>> knows a shitload more about finances and the economy, (Romney).

> >>> Romney knows how to screw workers. If that is the kind of knowledge you
> >>> crave, you should vote for him.

> >> Is that something you've heard, or know of first hand? Any one can
> >> parrot other people. Please cite the sites where it show just how Romney
> >> "screws" workers. Do you know how many "workers" are being screwed right
> >> now, because Obama doesn't know a fucking thing about economics and
> >> doesn't want the U.S. economy to prosper, anyway? Get yourself a brain
> >> for yourself and quit repeating what others say.

> >If you are a worker and are planning to vote for Romney, please do so.
> >Just buy a family size jar of vaseline.

> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/30/bain-protesters-h...
> >-mitt-romney-record?newsfeed=true

> Versus a tanker load of Prep H needed for a second term of
> Obama....right?

> Gunner

> --
> The essential differences between liberals and conservtives
> is that liberals could not exist without conservtives to defend
> their freedom and support them economicaly.

> Conservatives on the other hand, can exist and
> live quite well without liberals."

>> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>> news:wildbilly-A9247F.13115302092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
>> > In article <k1v05f$qj...@dont-email.me>,
>> > "Scout" <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>> >> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:wildbilly-6C6010.11045801092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
>> >> > In article <MPG.2aab5ad3bf22e901989...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> >> > AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:

>> >> >> In article <wildbilly-09FB76.22260331082012@c-61-68-245-
>> >> >> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

>> >> >> > In article <k1rkbb$lj...@dont-email.me>, skank on scat
>> >> >> > <l...@ar.ds>
>> >> >> > wrote:

>> >> > Good reply "Cat", but the central fact of corporate life is that it
>> >> > is
>> >> > illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce investor's dividends.

>> >> Cite please for this statute.

>> > Unless modified by statute, traditional fiduciary duties require
>> > corporate officials to further the interests of shareholders,

>> <yawn>

>> Traditional fiduciary duties?

>> You said, and I  quote "it is illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce
>> investor's dividends."

>> Please cite the statute that supports your claim.

> Been there, done that. You too stupid to read? Yeah, of course you are.

> >> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
> >> news:wildbilly-6C6010.11045801092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
> >> > In article <MPG.2aab5ad3bf22e901989...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >> > AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:

> >> >> In article <wildbilly-09FB76.22260331082012@c-61-68-245-
> >> >> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

> >> >> > In article <k1rkbb$lj...@dont-email.me>, skank on scat <l...@ar.ds>
> >> >> > wrote:

> >> > Good reply "Cat", but the central fact of corporate life is that it is
> >> > illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce investor's dividends.

> >> Cite please for this statute.

> > Unless modified by statute, traditional fiduciary duties require
> > corporate officials to further the interests of shareholders,

> <yawn>

> Traditional fiduciary duties?

> You said, and I  quote "it is illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce
> investor's dividends."

> Please cite the statute that supports your claim.

>> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>> news:wildbilly-A9247F.13115302092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
>> > In article <k1v05f$qj...@dont-email.me>,
>> > "Scout" <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>> >> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:wildbilly-6C6010.11045801092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
>> >> > In article <MPG.2aab5ad3bf22e901989...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> >> > AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:

>> >> >> In article <wildbilly-09FB76.22260331082012@c-61-68-245-
>> >> >> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

>> >> >> > In article <k1rkbb$lj...@dont-email.me>, skank on scat <l...@ar.ds>
>> >> >> > wrote:

>> >> > Good reply "Cat", but the central fact of corporate life is that it is
>> >> > illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce investor's dividends.

>> >> Cite please for this statute.

>> > Unless modified by statute, traditional fiduciary duties require
>> > corporate officials to further the interests of shareholders,

>> <yawn>

>> Traditional fiduciary duties?

>> You said, and I  quote "it is illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce
>> investor's dividends."

>> Please cite the statute that supports your claim.

>You can't read, Numbskull? Are you saying that only statues are laws?
>Hmmmm?

>"Unless modified by statute, traditional fiduciary duties require
>corporate officials to further the interests of shareholders". Except in
>the case of breaking the law, what other exceptions would there be?

> >> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
> >> news:wildbilly-A9247F.13115302092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
> >> > In article <k1v05f$qj...@dont-email.me>,
> >> > "Scout" <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

> >> >> "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:wildbilly-6C6010.11045801092012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au.
> >> >> ..
> >> >> > In article <MPG.2aab5ad3bf22e901989...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >> >> > AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:

> >> >> >> In article <wildbilly-09FB76.22260331082012@c-61-68-245-
> >> >> >> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

> >> >> >> > In article <k1rkbb$lj...@dont-email.me>, skank on scat
> >> >> >> > <l...@ar.ds>
> >> >> >> > wrote:

> >> >> > Good reply "Cat", but the central fact of corporate life is that it
> >> >> > is
> >> >> > illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce investor's dividends.

> >> >> Cite please for this statute.

> >> > Unless modified by statute, traditional fiduciary duties require
> >> > corporate officials to further the interests of shareholders,

> >> <yawn>

> >> Traditional fiduciary duties?

> >> You said, and I  quote "it is illegal for a CEO to do anything to reduce
> >> investor's dividends."

> >> Please cite the statute that supports your claim.

> > Been there, done that. You too stupid to read? Yeah, of course you are.

> IOW, you have nothing.

> Oh, and FYI.... tradition fiduciary duties....are NOT law.

> See, CEO can and will lower or even eliminate dividend payments if it's in
> the best interests of the company. See the CEOs FIRST responsibility is to
> the company....not the investors.

> >On 01/09/2012 10:47 p.m., AlleyCat wrote:
> >> In article <7448f$5042c269$adce5107$13...@PRIMUS.CA>,
> >> elbie_jovis_ka...@yahoo.com says...

> >>> On 01/09/2012 09:34 p.m., AlleyCat wrote:
> >>>> In article <wildbilly-09E5F6.17561101092012@c-61-68-245-
> >>>> 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbi...@withoutta.net says...

> >>>> How about we talk about who can't fix it, cuz he don't know a damn thing
> >>>> about no economy (Obama), and who can do a damn better job, because he
> >>>> knows a shitload more about finances and the economy, (Romney).

> >>> Romney knows how to screw workers. If that is the kind of knowledge you
> >>> crave, you should vote for him.

> >> Is that something you've heard, or know of first hand? Any one can
> >> parrot other people. Please cite the sites where it show just how Romney
> >> "screws" workers. Do you know how many "workers" are being screwed right
> >> now, because Obama doesn't know a fucking thing about economics and
> >> doesn't want the U.S. economy to prosper, anyway? Get yourself a brain
> >> for yourself and quit repeating what others say.

> >If you are a worker and are planning to vote for Romney, please do so.
> >Just buy a family size jar of vaseline.

> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/30/bain-protesters-h...
> >-mitt-romney-record?newsfeed=true

> Versus a tanker load of Prep H needed for a second term of
> Obama....right?

> Gunneria

> --
> The essential differences between liberals and conservtives
> is that liberals could not exist without conservtives to defend
> their freedom and support them economicaly.

> Conservatives on the other hand, can exist and
> live quite well without liberals."

> > <http://factcheck.org/2012/08/ryans-vp-spin/>
> > Ryan1s VP Spin

> Ryan's anti-spin anti-spin:

> Fact Check: Paul Ryan's convention address

> Jim Messina, the campaign manager for Obama for America, wasn't mincing
> words Thursday morning.
> In a fund raising email blasted out at 4:37 a.m., he said flat-out that
> GOP vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan "lied" about Medicare and the
> stimulus bill in his convention speech the night before.
> The first passage concerns what was once the largest employer in Ryan's
> hometown of Janesville, Wis.
> "A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that GM plant. Right
> there at that plant, candidate Obama said: 'I believe that if our
> government is there to support you, this plant will be here for another
> hundred years.' That's what he said in 2008. Well, as it turned out,
> that plant didn't last another year. It is locked up and empty to this
> day," Ryan said.
> It is true that President Obama, when he was running for president in
> February 2008, toured the GM plant in Janesville. But Democrats point
> out that the plant actually closed in December of that year, under
> President George W. Bush -- who in that same month authorized an
> emergency loan of $14 billion to GM and Chrysler.
> That was not enough to prevent GM from moving forward with plans it had
> already announced: to shutter the Janesville facility and lay off its
> remaining 1,200 workers.
> His aides point out -- and GM confirms -- that the plant was not shut
> down per se but idled, meaning it could be reactivated at any time.
> However, nothing Ryan said in his speech about the plant was factually
> untrue.
> Ryan stated in his convention speech that "we were about to lose a major
> factory" in the town at the time Obama showed up there. And though he
> compressed then-Sen. Obama's remarks, Ryan did not distort them.
> This is what Obama said at the time: "I believe that if our government
> is there to support you, and give you the assistance you need to re-tool
> and make this transition, that this plant will be here for another
> hundred years."
> In October 2008, after the plant's fate was announced, then-Sen. Obama
> issued a statement that inched closer to promising to help the factory,
> which in its prime employed some 7,000 people. "As president, I will
> lead an effort to retool plants like the GM facility in Janesville so we
> can build the fuel-efficient cars of tomorrow and create good-paying
> jobs in Wisconsin and all across America," Obama said at the time.

> > And be advised that the Republicans intend to kick sand into that
> > Vaseline,

> > Four hardy souls from rural Illinois joined tens of thousands of people
> > undeterred by threats of Hurricane Isaac during this week's Republican
> > National Convention (RNC). These four were about to join a much larger
> > group: the more than 2.4 million people in the past decade whose US jobs
> > have been shipped to China. In their case, the company laying them off
> > and sending their jobs overseas is Bain Capital, co-founded by the
> > Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney.

> Cite this please. How many did Bain send to China, compared to the last
> 4 years under Obama? I want to read from the source, not your lying
> fingers.

> I blame the unions, for if it weren't for them, millions of jobs would
> NOT have gone overseas.

> > > Is that something you've heard, or know of first hand? Any one can
> > > parrot other people.

> > Citation, please. I presume that you are full of crap, and can't support
> > your accusations any more than Paul Ryan can.

> Are you kidding me? What exactly do you want cited. I'll do my best to
> back it up, but first, I just need to know what you want cited.
> Unemployment? Do you really need that cited?
> There's a difference in accusing and stating facts. Ryan is pretty much
> stating what Obama has and hasn't done.
> Next!