AZ Radical Right Attacks School Mural, Skin Of Depicted Latino Too Dark!
The Lone Weasel
AFTER COUNCILMAN STOKES RACIAL FEARS
"Nearly 500 people turned out Saturday to protest" changes to the skin
color of a mural at an elementary school in Prescott, AZ. School
officials recently asked the artists to "lighten the faces of the
mural's main subject," a Hispanic boy. The school's principal denied
that his request has anything to do with race, saying he just wanted
the artists to make the students "look happier and more excited," and
to "remove some shadowing that made the faces darker than they are."
But the mural, which depicts students using various forms of energy
efficient transportation, attracted heated, racially based opposition
early on in the mostly white town. R.E. Wall, the artist who heads the
group that created the mural, told the Prescott Daily Courier that
passersby regularly shouted racial slurs at his group as they worked,
such as, "Get the nigger off the wall," "Get the spic off the wall,"
and, "You're desecrating our school." An article on the Courier's
website about the unveiling of the mural in late May attracted dozens
of comments with racial undertones. Wall "attributes the start of the
racial controversy to recent comments that Prescott City Councilman
Steve Blair made" on his radio show. "I am not a racist," Blair said
last month in one of many segments on the mural, "but I will tell you
depicting a black guy in the middle of that mural, based upon who's
President of the United States today and based upon the history of
this community, when I grew up we had four black families. ... I would
have to ask the question, 'Why?'" A school official said the "black
guy" in the mural is actually a Hispanic student. Blair was fired last
week from his radio show over the comments but he said he has no
immediate plans to resign from the city council. Arizona recently
passed a harsh new immigration law, which many believe will lead to
racial profiling.
_______
Johnny Lane Johnson would love walking by this mural and shouting a
common racial epithet that he uses nearly every day, using the lame
excuse that "Monty Python" used it first.
This is just more ridiculous horseshit hatched by the Arizona radical
right in a vain attempt to intimidate the rest of us...
REJECTED!
--
NRACLAPTRAP
brad herschel
>
One day America will sort of "choose up". When it all shakes out your
skin color will be your uniform of war.
brad
Phlip
> One day America will sort of "choose up". When it all shakes out your
> skin color will be your uniform of war.
One day we will kick the silly habit of giving the 0.5% of us sick
with hatred the biggest megaphones.
Dänk 666
> RADICAL RIGHT -- ARTISTS ASKED TO LIGHTEN SKIN COLOR ON ARIZONA MURAL
> AFTER COUNCILMAN STOKES RACIAL FEARS
19th century Mexican dictator Porfirio Díaz broke with tradition by
becoming one of the few presidents who was not a member of the lily-
white elite that has ruled the country for centuries. Embarrassed by
his darker skin color, he wore corn starch as makeup, and ordered
artists to whiten him up in official portraits.
Foxtrot
Source, Crap Flap?
The Lone Weasel
> skin color will be your uniform of war.
Our skin color is biologically determined - we're all brown. I hope
that means we're all on the same side.
And you're not.
--
NRACLAPTRAP
The Lone Weasel
Tracey12
That's not very American.
Foxtrot
>> Source, Crap Flap?
>
>Prescott, Arizona.
>
>Next.
Afraid to show where you copied it from, eh Crap Flap?
Lemme guess. A reader's comment below a dailykooks article?
The Lone Weasel
So you can't find Arizona with a Google search, eh Cocksnot?
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_northern_az/prescott/mural-creates-quite-a-stir-in-prescott
http://www.prescottaz.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&subsectionID=1086&articleID=81753
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/04/0457380.html
http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&ArticleID=81328
Not that you'd ever read any of these articles, eh Cocksnot?
Next loon, please.
--
NRACLAPTRAP
Foxtrot
You posted the article, Crap Flap. It's not my duty to Google your
claims.
>http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_northern_az/prescott/mural-creates-quite-a-stir-in-prescott
>
>http://www.prescottaz.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&subsectionID=1086&articleID=81753
>
>http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/04/0457380.html
>
>http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&ArticleID=81328
>
>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/06/04/2010-06-04_arizona_school_asks_artists_to_lighten_face_of_hispanic_student_on_mural.html
The artist claims racial slurs. Anybody can claim anything. There's
no evidence it was done by known racists.
The principal asked to remove the *shadowing* and make the
students look happier. Are the protesters saying minorities lurk in
the shadows? Or that they don't look happy? Perhaps the claims
of racism are inferred?
This is obviously an attempt to smear Arizona for SB1070.
The Lone Weasel
>
> >http://www.prescottaz.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&subsectionID=1086&arti...
>
> >http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/04/0457380.html
>
> >http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&ArticleID=81328
>
> >http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/06/04/2010-06-04_arizon...
>
> The artist claims racial slurs. Anybody can claim anything.
I claim you're a fucking idiot with cocksnot hanging off your nose.
Point proven!
--
NRACLAPTRAP
Not Sure
This thread certainly backfired on you, didn't it? Continue crying and
sobbing, failure :)
>
> --
>
> NRACLAPTRAP
Gray Ghost
news:cc9f62d6-492e-462a...@d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
I claim you are a repulsive little shit who should be scraped off the shoe of
civilized society.
--
"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be
construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be
sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything
or nothing at pleasure."
�Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 1823
The Lone Weasel
No, I provided the web cites to the information and Cocksnot decided
to bug out. "Anybody can claim anything" is his surrender at
Appomattox.
You seem to be unsure about your support for Cocksnot's surrender.
Why don't you go away somewhere and figure out what you want to say?
Next.
--
NRACLAPTRAP
Foxtrot
>> > > The artist claims racial slurs. Anybody can claim anything.
>>
>> > I claim you're a fucking idiot with cocksnot hanging off your nose.
>>
>> > Point proven!
>>
>> This thread certainly backfired on you, didn't it?
>
>No, I provided the web cites to the information and Cocksnot decided
>to bug out. "Anybody can claim anything" is his surrender at
>Appomattox.
>
>You seem to be unsure about your support for Cocksnot's surrender.
>Why don't you go away somewhere and figure out what you want to say?
Do you actually think this was worthy of a serious response, Crap
Flap?
>> > I claim you're a fucking idiot with cocksnot hanging off your nose.
>to bug out. "Anybody can claim anything" is his surrender at
...was a challenge to you. Remember the congressmen who
claimed he was spat upon a couple months ago? No evidence.
Just like here.
The Lone Weasel
> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > The artist claims racial slurs. Anybody can claim anything.
>
> >> > I claim you're a fucking idiot with cocksnot hanging off your nose.
>
> >> > Point proven!
>
> >> This thread certainly backfired on you, didn't it?
>
> >No, I provided the web cites to the information and Cocksnot decided
> >to bug out. "Anybody can claim anything" is his surrender at
> >Appomattox.
>
> >You seem to be unsure about your support for Cocksnot's surrender.
> >Why don't you go away somewhere and figure out what you want to say?
>
> Do you actually think this was worthy of a serious response, Crap
> Flap?
Everybody deserves to be heard.
> >> > I claim you're a fucking idiot with cocksnot hanging off your nose.
>
> >"Anybody can claim anything" is his surrender at
>
> ...was a challenge to you. Remember the congressmen who
> claimed he was spat upon a couple months ago? No evidence.
What was his name? No evidence. Anybody can claim anything
especially idiots who use "anybody can claim anything" as their only
argument.
You can't even tell me if it was "congressmen" or just "he".
Anybody can claim anything and when they're as fucking confused as you
are Cocksnot, they're often ignored. I treat you like somebody who
has something to say even if neither of us knows what it is.
--
NRACLAPTRAP
Foxtrot
>Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > > The artist claims racial slurs. Anybody can claim anything.
>>
>> >> > I claim you're a fucking idiot with cocksnot hanging off your nose.
>>
>> >> > Point proven!
>>
>> >> This thread certainly backfired on you, didn't it?
>>
>> >No, I provided the web cites to the information and Cocksnot decided
>> >to bug out. �"Anybody can claim anything" is his surrender at
>> >Appomattox.
>>
>> >You seem to be unsure about your support for Cocksnot's surrender.
>> >Why don't you go away somewhere and figure out what you want to say?
>>
>> Do you actually think this was worthy of a serious response, Crap
>> Flap?
>
>Everybody deserves to be heard.
Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>> � �>> > I claim you're a fucking idiot with cocksnot hanging off your nose.
>>
>> >"Anybody can claim anything" is his surrender at
>>
>> ...was a challenge to you. Remember the congressmen who
>> claimed he was spat upon a couple months ago? No evidence.
>
>What was his name? No evidence. Anybody can claim anything
>especially idiots who use "anybody can claim anything" as their only
>argument.
>
>You can't even tell me if it was "congressmen" or just "he".
It was Rep John Lewis who made the unsubstantiated claim.
>Anybody can claim anything and when they're as fucking confused as you
>are Cocksnot, they're often ignored. I treat you like somebody who
>has something to say even if neither of us knows what it is.
Civilized people don't use words like nigger or spic. If they did,
it's highly unlikely that they'd shout it in public to advertise what
assholes they are. And the artist, RE Wall claims "passersby
REGULARLY [emphasis added] shouted" the epithets.
* Unlikely that the slurs were used in public.
* More unlikely that they were shouted for all to hear.
* Even more unlikely that "passersby regularly shouted" them.
* RE Wall stood to benefit from the claims.
It doesn't pass the sniff test.
The Lone Weasel
> >Everybody deserves to be heard.
>
>Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
>any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
For you it would.
--
NRACLAPTRAP
Foxtrot
>Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> >Everybody deserves to be heard.
>>
>>Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
>>any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>
>For you it would.
Exactly what did that contribute to our discussion about the
phony racism claims in your article, Crap Flap?
Try to stay on topic, m'kay Loon Wussy?
The Lone Weasel
I said you deserve to be heard. I didn't say you had any right to be
heard. But when Amendment 28 is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING
RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
Try to disassociate yourself from the racist right, Cocksnot. They're
the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
Sounds like you already wish it.
--
NRACLAPTRAP
Phlip
wrote:
> I claim you are a repulsive little shit who should be scraped off the shoe of
> civilized society.
The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye. The more light you
shine on it, the more it will contract. -Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
Gray Ghost
news:1tb51694cre06c0o9...@4ax.com:
What about people that use the term "cocksnot"?
>
> * Unlikely that the slurs were used in public.
> * More unlikely that they were shouted for all to hear.
> * Even more unlikely that "passersby regularly shouted" them.
> * RE Wall stood to benefit from the claims.
>
> It doesn't pass the sniff test.
>
--
Foxtrot
>Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> >> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >Everybody deserves to be heard.
>>
>> >>Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
>> >>any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>>
>> >For you it would.
>>
>> Exactly what did that contribute to our discussion about the
>> phony racism claims in your article, Crap Flap?
>>
>> Try to stay on topic, m'kay Loon Wussy?
>
>I said you deserve to be heard. I didn't say you had any right to be
>heard. But when Amendment 28 is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING
>RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
>
>Try to disassociate yourself from the racist right, Cocksnot. They're
>the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
To begin with, I'm not on the right, Loon. I'm an anti-liberal. My
beliefs often overlap the right's however.
Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right. It has
isolated kooks just as the left has isolated kooks like the
Unabomber. Which brings us back to the mural article. Since there
is no widespread racism on the right, the claim that "passersby
regularly shouted racial slurs" doesn't hold water.
JohnJohnsn
> On Jun 11, 11:09 pm, Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>
>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Everybody deserves to be heard.
>
>>>> Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
>>>> any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>
>>> For you it would.
>
>> Exactly what did that contribute to our discussion about the
>> phony racism claims in your article, Crap Flap?
>
>> Try to stay on topic, m'kay Loon Wussy?
>
> I said you deserve to be heard. I didn't say you had any right to be heard.
> But when Amendment 28 is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING
> RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
Onviously this Mustelidae vermin has no clue as to how the Supreme
Court of the United States <http://www.supremecourt.gov> actually
functions:
Constitutional Origin. Article III, §1, of the Constitution provides
that "[t]he judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in
one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may
from time to time ordain and establish." The Supreme Court of the
United States was created in accordance with this provision and by
authority of the Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789 (1 Stat. 73). It
was organized on February 2, 1790.
Jurisdiction. According to the Constitution (Art. III, §2): "The
judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising
under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties
made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;-to all Cases
affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;-to all
Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;-to Controversies to
which the United States shall be a Party;-to Controversies between two
or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;-between
Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State
claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State,
or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and
Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court
shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before
mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both
as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations
as the Congress shall make."
Appellate jurisdiction has been conferred upon the Supreme Court by
various statutes, under the authority given Congress by the
Constitution. The basic statute effective at this time in conferring
and controlling jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may be found in 28
U. S. C. §1251 et seq., and various special statutes.
Rulemaking Power. Congress has from time to time conferred upon the
Supreme Court power to prescribe rules of procedure to be followed by
the lower courts of the United States. See 28 U. S. C. §2071 et seq.
...
<>
Since during the 2008-2009 term it received 7,738 petitions for Writ
of Certiorari.could you imagine what would happen if The Racist
Weasel's dream 28th Amendment came true and the SCotUS had to hear ALL
of them each term?
Ray Fischer
>The Lone Weasel <lee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>>> >> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> >Everybody deserves to be heard.
>>>
>>> >>Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
>>> >>any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>>>
>>> >For you it would.
>>>
>>> Exactly what did that contribute to our discussion about the
>>> phony racism claims in your article, Crap Flap?
>>>
>>> Try to stay on topic, m'kay Loon Wussy?
>>
>>I said you deserve to be heard. I didn't say you had any right to be
>>heard. But when Amendment 28 is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING
>>RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
>>
>>Try to disassociate yourself from the racist right, Cocksnot. They're
>>the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
>
>To begin with, I'm not on the right, Loon. I'm an anti-liberal. My
>beliefs often overlap the right's however.
"Often". Smirk.
>Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Phlip
> >Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>
> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
Foxtrot
> rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>> >Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>
>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
Only people looking for racism underneath each rock think they
are.
>Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
>Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
Hussein is his middle name, you fucking idiot. Urkel means thin,
big ears and nerdish. Seeing racism in places like that is why
nobody believes you crybabies.
JohnJohnsn
Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
"racist"?
Why, he even went back to using it after he had won the election
(while he and his handlers did not want it used BEFORE the election!).
Phlip
> On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>
> >> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>
> > Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
> > Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>
> Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
> "racist"?
People flaming Clinton don't call him "Jefferson". The name "Hussein"
Americans have been taught to hate for decades, as Saddam Hussein's
last name. Oh, and it's a Muslim name. Haters don't like that - except
for Muhammad Ali, the boxing legend. He gets a pass!
> Why, he even went back to using it after he had won the election
> (while he and his handlers did not want it used BEFORE the election!).
He was rubbing your nose in it; showing off that, among the Changes he
helped America accomplish, was moving from publicly hanging a Hussein,
as some kind of national enemy super-villain, to electing a Hussein.
Imagine how much electoral support he would have obtained if his name
was Clint Knuth, and his features Nordic! All the racists wouldn't
have noticed his evil Socialist agenda, and would have voted for him
in droves, as the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with!
Harry Callahan
499d3b...@z8g2000yqz.googlegroups.com:
> On Jun 11, 11:09�pm, Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> >> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >Everybody deserves to be heard.
>>
>> >>Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
>> >>any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>>
>> >For you it would.
>>
>> Exactly what did that contribute to our discussion about the
>> phony racism claims in your article, Crap Flap?
>>
>> Try to stay on topic, m'kay Loon Wussy?
>
> I said you deserve to be heard. I didn't say you had any right to be
> heard. But when Amendment 28 is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING
> RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
Apparently either the illiteracy or the constant boozing are interfering with
your nuerons. The proposed Amendment 28 would do such thing.
But hey believe what you will, you don't matter and no one really cares.
>
> Try to disassociate yourself from the racist right, Cocksnot. They're
> the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
>
> Sounds like you already wish it.
>
> --
>
>
> NRACLAPTRAP
>
--
"I know what you're thinking. Did he fire six shots or only five? Well, to
tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I've kinda lost track myself. But
being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and
would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I
feel lucky? Well, do ya punk?"
Gray Ghost
@42g2000prb.googlegroups.com:
I realize that being a leftist is really mentally debilitating, but his middle
name is "Hussein". Are you suggesting his parents are racists?
And considering the vile things said about Bush I rather think calling the
Obamao by is middle name is pretty fucking tame in comparison.
Freaking paranoid ass, looking for racists under the again.
Ray Fischer
>On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>
>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>>
>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>
>Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>"racist"?
Why? Are you stupid?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>I realize that being a leftist is really mentally debilitating,
As opposed to being an America-hating fascist such as yourself?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Scout
"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4c141972$0$1642$742e...@news.sonic.net...
IOW, you can't answer.
Scout
"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4c14199f$0$1642$742e...@news.sonic.net...
> Gray Ghost <grey_ghost47...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>I realize that being a leftist is really mentally debilitating,
>
> As opposed to being an America-hating fascist such as yourself?
Which comment simply proves his point.
Phlip
<me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> "Ray Fischer" <rfisc...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>
> news:4c14199f$0$1642$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>
> > Gray Ghost <grey_ghost471-newsgro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>I realize that being a leftist is really mentally debilitating,
>
> > As opposed to being an America-hating fascist such as yourself?
>
> Which comment simply proves his point.
Some name calling is more equal than others...
r_c_...@hushmail.com
> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:67171f00-f31b-4033-933a-
> 499d3b7dd...@z8g2000yqz.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 11, 11:09 pm, Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
> >> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
> >> >> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >Everybody deserves to be heard.
>
> >> >>Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
> >> >>any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>
> >> >For you it would.
>
> >> Exactly what did that contribute to our discussion about the
> >> phony racism claims in your article, Crap Flap?
>
> >> Try to stay on topic, m'kay Loon Wussy?
>
> > I said you deserve to be heard. I didn't say you had any right to be
> > heard. But when Amendment 28 is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING
> > RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
I wonder which "proposed" Amendment 28 Mr. Harrison is referring to:
Here's one:
"Article XXVIII That Congress shall make no law that prohibits
American citizens from the right to legal work. That all persons born
or naturalized in the United States of America, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States of America and
the State they reside. That every American citizen shall have the
Divine right to a dignified occupation, i.e.: job, labor, employment,
work, vocation, profession, career, telemarketing, salesmanship,
independent vendors, self-employment, home based enterprises, free
enterprise, etc.; and earn a comprehensive income for their time,
service, abilities and labor that has purchasing power commmensurate
with the prevalent living standards. Further, that the Congress of the
United States of America shall oblige all American citizens who want
to work to work for a legal, moral and ethical livelihood. That the
Federal, State and City Government shall not infringe the rights of
American citizens to work."
Here's another:
"Congress shall make no law that applies to any citizen of the United
States that does not apply equally to all US Senators and
Representatives. Congress shall make no law that applies to any US
Senator or Representative that does not apply equally to all citizens
of the United States. All existing laws and regulations that do not
meet these criteria shall be declared null and void!"
And another:
"• The Federal Government must not have a budget deficit, except in
times of war or national emergency as annually declared by 2/3 of both
chambers of the United States Congress.
"• The Federal Government must not spend more than 10 percent of the
previous year's Gross Domestic Product of the United States, except in
times of war or national emergency as annually declared by 2/3 of both
chambers of the United States Congress.
"• The Federal Government must not incure additional debt, except in
times of war or national emergency as annually declared by 2/3 of both
chambers of the United States Congress. All new Federal Government
debts must be paid off within ten years of incurring them; all
existing debts must be paid off within thirty years."
And yet another:
"Section 1. The sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of
the United States is hereby repealed.
"Section 2. An individual's income, from whatever source derived is
free from any direct tax by the federal government of the United
States. In no way shall a report of income be required of citizens of
the United States.
"Section 3. Indirect taxes collected should be apportioned among the
several States with regard to census or enumeration."
Hmm. None of these seem to cover the requirement that "when Amendment
The Lone Weasel
> >> >> >Everybody deserves to be heard.
>
> >> >>Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
> >> >>any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>
> >> >For you it would.
>
> >> Exactly what did that contribute to our discussion about the
> >> phony racism claims in your article, Crap Flap?
>
> >> Try to stay on topic, m'kay Loon Wussy?
>
> >I said you deserve to be heard. I didn't say you had any right to be
> >heard. But when Amendment 28 is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING
> >RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
>
> >Try to disassociate yourself from the racist right, Cocksnot. They're
> >the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
>
> To begin with, I'm not on the right, Loon. I'm an anti-liberal. My
> beliefs often overlap the right's however.
You're anti-liberal, which makes you a Progressive? Welcome to our
merry band.
> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
Laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh.
> It has
> isolated kooks just as the left has isolated kooks
But not many racists like you have in the teabagger and rightwing
republican fringe. A long, carefully twisted fringe.
> like the
> Unabomber.
Like Timothy McVeigh, Al Queda, the Taliban and James Earl Ray. You
boys own the violent loons.
> Which brings us back to the mural article. Since there
> is no widespread racism on the right
That just means no Teabagger surge in the 2010 elections, thus no
teabagger surge ever again.
Good points you missed there, Cocksnot.
--
NRACLAPTRAP
Steve
<lee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 12, 8:36 am, Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> >> >> >Everybody deserves to be heard.
>>
>> >> >>Wrong, Crap Flap. You have a right to speak but you don't have
>> >> >>any right to be heard. That would be cruel.
>>
>> >> >For you it would.
>>
>> >> Exactly what did that contribute to our discussion about the
>> >> phony racism claims in your article, Crap Flap?
>>
>> >> Try to stay on topic, m'kay Loon Wussy?
>>
>> >I said you deserve to be heard. I didn't say you had any right to be
>> >heard. But when Amendment 28 is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING
>> >RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
>>
>> >Try to disassociate yourself from the racist right, Cocksnot. They're
>> >the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
>>
>> To begin with, I'm not on the right, Loon. I'm an anti-liberal. My
>> beliefs often overlap the right's however.
>
>You're anti-liberal, which makes you a Progressive? Welcome to our
>merry band.
>
>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>
>Laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh.
<snort> Harrison "laughs" even though he's never won any argument,
never scored a single point, and the US politics are trending 180
degrees from where he wants it. He must think it funny to be a
failure.
The Lone Weasel
> Supreme Court power to prescribe rules of procedure to be followed by
> the lower courts of the United States. See 28 U. S. C. §2071 et seq.
>
> of Certiorari.could you imagine what would happen if The Racist
> Weasel's dream 28th Amendment came true and the SCotUS had to hear ALL
> of them each term?
If we ratify the 28th Amendment we don't have to fuck around with the
rightwing of the US Supreme Court. I look forward to the day that
Chief Justice Kagan affirms gay marriage and the 28th Amendment on the
same day!
POINT PROVABLE!
--
NRACLAPTRAP
Ray Fischer
>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>>>
>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>>>>
>>>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
>>>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>>>
>>>Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>>"racist"?
>>
>> Why? Are you stupid?
>
>IOW, you can't answer.
IOW, yes, you are stupid.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
5511 Dead, 644 since 1/20/09
There's hundreds of proposed amendments, mostly by the same right wingers
who proudly declare themselves to be strict constitutionalists. Most of
them are pretty fucking daft. The Townsend amendment, for example,
"weights" votes by personal income. Someone who makes, say, $20,000 gets
a vote, someone who makes a million gets 50 votes. Congress entertained
some 750 proposals to change the constitution just between 1990 and
2000.
There's a list of some of them here: http://www.usconstitution.net/
constamprop.html
Not all are goofy, but some are utterly demented. One, for example,
would give the Senate the power to reject any elected President-elect
during the 120 days following the election. Or another prohibiting
incarceration for minor traffic offenses. (Seems like a case of
overkill, that.)
And grass-roots ones can be utterly absurd. There have been proposed
constitutional amendments dealing with flying saucers, cow farts, and
neutering cats.
Why, they even had one early last century that proposed banning the sale
or transport of all alcoholic beverages! Hee, hee. Can you IMAGINE?
Gray Ghost
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
No are you? Or are you looking for racists under your bed again?
His middle name is Hussein. His parents named him that. That is part of his
identity. The fact that it is the same as Saddam Hussein's last name is a sad
coincidence.
So tell me if calling the Obamao by his middelk name is racist, what is
calling GW Bush a deserter despite there really no evidence to support it?
What is calling GW all sorts of vile names for 8 years?
Acceptable behavior? Truth as you see it? You are deranged.
Phlip
wrote:
> So tell me if calling the Obamao by his middelk name is racist
It's like a verbal tic, right? You can't help yourself, like Tourette
Syndrome, right?
Foxtrot
>Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >Try to disassociate yourself from the racist right, Cocksnot. They're
>> >the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
>>
>> To begin with, I'm not on the right, Loon. I'm an anti-liberal. My
>> beliefs often overlap the right's however.
>
>You're anti-liberal, which makes you a Progressive? Welcome to our
>merry band.
Many libs now call themselves progressives. The word liberal
has become stigmatized. Libs are so ashamed of themselves
that they needed to change their names. LOL
>> It has
>> isolated kooks just as the left has isolated kooks
>
>But not many racists like you have in the teabagger and rightwing
>republican fringe. A long, carefully twisted fringe.
Like your perceived bigotry in the subject line? A principal
wanted to remove the shadowing to make the subjects look
happier? That passed for a racist attack in your book, didn't it,
Crap Flap?
>> Which brings us back to the mural article. Since there
>> is no widespread racism on the right
>
>That just means no Teabagger surge in the 2010 elections, thus no
>teabagger surge ever again.
Another lib brings up the Tea Party out of nowhere again. They
frighten you and we can feel it.
JohnJohnsn
> Scout <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> "Ray Fischer" <rfisc...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>> On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>
>>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>
>>>>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
>>>>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>
>>>> Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>>> "racist"?
>
>>> Why? Are you stupid?
>
>> IOW, you can't answer.
>
> IOW, yes, you are stupid.
Says racist leftist Ray Fischer.
Fifth Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes
for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him denigrating
the intelligence of the poster approaches infinity∞.
JohnJohnsn
wrote:
> rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c141972$0$1642
> $742ec...@news.sonic.net:
>> JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>
>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>
"Yoss" ????
>>>> ...there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
>>>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>
>>> Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>> "racist"?
>
>> Why? Are you stupid?
"Stupid is as stupid does," And you, Ray Fischer, stupidly reveal your
racist Nazi roots with every posting.
> No are you? Or are you looking for racists under your bed again?
Racists like Ray Fischer, Lee Harrison, Matt, mrLookOut, et al.,
always manage to unwittingly project their racism upon their
opponents.
> His middle name is Hussein. His parents named him that. That is part of his
> identity. The fact that it is the same as Saddam Hussein's last name is a sad
> coincidence.
Actually,, "Saddam Hussein" is short for his _real_ name of Saddam
Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti.
> So tell me if calling the Obamao by his middle name is racist, what is
> calling GW Bush a deserter despite there really no evidence to support it?
> What is calling GW all sorts of vile names for 8 years?
>
> Acceptable behavior? Truth as you see it? You are deranged.
>
> --
> "Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be
> construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be
> sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything
> or nothing at pleasure."
> --Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 1823
RD Sandman
news:0JVQn.98606$0B5....@newsfe05.iad:
Bingo!!
--
Sleep well tonight,
RD (The Sandman)
Life is like a bowl of habeneros...what you do today
may well burn your ass tomorrow.
RD Sandman
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
Not at all. Inquiring minds wish to know. How is calling Obama by his
middle name racist? Please be specific.
JohnJohnsn
> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>Try to disassociate yourself from the racist right, Cocksnot. They're
>>>>the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
>
>>> To begin with, I'm not on the right, Loon. I'm an anti-liberal. My
>>> beliefs often overlap the right's however.
>
>> You're anti-liberal, which makes you a Progressive?
>
> Many libs now call themselves progressives. The word liberal
> has become stigmatized. Libs are so ashamed of themselves
> that they needed to change their names. LOL
And their "colors", as when they "hijacked" the color "blue" from
Republicans when they _finally_ realized that printing all their
campaign signs, literature, etc., in red caused knowing voters to
associate the Democrats with the _original_ "Reds": the Communist
Party.
>>> It has isolated kooks just as the left has isolated kooks
>
>> But not many racists like you have in the teabagger and rightwing
>> republican fringe. A long, carefully twisted fringe.
>
> Like your perceived bigotry in the subject line? A principal
> wanted to remove the shadowing to make the subjects look
> happier? That passed for a racist attack in your book, didn't it,
> Crap Flap?
"Racist is as racist perceives."
>>> Which brings us back to the mural article. Since there
>>> is no widespread racism on the right
>
>> That just means no Teabagger surge in the 2010 elections,
>> thus no teabagger surge ever again.
>
> Another lib brings up the Tea Party out of nowhere again.
> They frighten you and we can feel it.
Lee Harrison tries his best to use the term "TEA (and not `Tea')
Party" as a pejorative, hence:
Phlip
> And their "colors", as when they "hijacked" the color "blue" from
> Republicans when they _finally_ realized that printing all their
> campaign signs, literature, etc., in red caused knowing voters to
> associate the Democrats with the _original_ "Reds": the Communist
> Party.
Uh, also with the "blood of Patriots" stripes on the US flag.
Buncha liberals!
Phlip
wrote:
Good idea! It sounds like a real Worker's Paradise there.
Seriously, there's certain people out there, if you want them for your
colleague that's up to you, but I don't want them around dragging _my_
productivity down. They can get a perfectly good job in a Zoo in the
Homo Sapiens exhibit...
(And why my spell-checker does not know "Sapiens" but knows "Homo"?..)
> "Congress shall make no law that applies to any citizen of the United
> States that does not apply equally to all US Senators and
> Representatives. Congress shall make no law that applies to any US
> Senator or Representative that does not apply equally to all citizens
> of the United States.
Great - just make the loopholes harder to identify. Another billion
pages of paperwork, coming right up!
> All existing laws and regulations that do not
> meet these criteria shall be declared null and void!"
And that's how you take careful aim at your foot while squeezing the
trigger. Even a radical communist like Hussein Obama knows the only
valid reforms are incremental, not revolutionary.
> And another:
>
> "• The Federal Government must not have a budget deficit, except in
> times of war or national emergency as annually declared by 2/3 of both
> chambers of the United States Congress.
Oh, awesome. Now we have ANOTHER incentive for a state of perpetual
warfare!
Phlip
> You're anti-liberal, which makes you a Progressive? Welcome to our
> merry band.
Hehehe.
We just don't have that "marching in lockstep" thing down yet!
Phlip
> Fifth Law of Leftist Debate
> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
> to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes
> for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him denigrating
> the intelligence of the poster approaches infinity∞.
Is the Fourth "projectivity"?
Phlip
> Actually,, "Saddam Hussein" is short for his _real_ name of Saddam
> Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti.
Pleased to meet you. Have you guessed my name?
Ah, but what's confusing you is the NATURE of my GAME!
-- Mic Jagger, "Sympathy for the Devil"
JohnJohnsn
Fourth Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes
for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him denying
he originally made the assertion he did approaches infinity∞.
JohnJohnsn
True; and I like it better than:
"The red, historically, represents the British while the white stripes
cutting through the red is a political statement against Great Britain
and its rule over the colonies."
Nevertheless, that's not the reason the Democrats abandoned the color
red.
But THANKS for providing a good reason for conservatives to EMBRACE
the color! :D
r_c_...@hushmail.com
wrote:
Last I heard, there have been something like 9000 proposed amendments
(if I recall correctly) since the Constitution was ratified. Only 27
have become actual amendments. I like the fact that it is difficult
to amend the Constitution.
> Most of them are pretty fucking daft.
The anti-flag burning amendment proposal is a perennial favorite.
> The Townsend amendment, for example,
> "weights" votes by personal income. Someone who makes, say, $20,000 gets
> a vote, someone who makes a million gets 50 votes.
I haven't heard about that one. Do you have a cite for this
abomination?
> Congress entertained some 750 proposals to change the constitution just between 1990 and
> 2000.
>
> There's a list of some of them here:http://www.usconstitution.net/
> constamprop.html
>
> Not all are goofy, but some are utterly demented. One, for example,
> would give the Senate the power to reject any elected President-elect
> during the 120 days following the election. Or another prohibiting
> incarceration for minor traffic offenses. (Seems like a case of
> overkill, that.)
>
> And grass-roots ones can be utterly absurd. There have been proposed
> constitutional amendments dealing with flying saucers, cow farts, and
> neutering cats.
>
> Why, they even had one early last century that proposed banning the sale
> or transport of all alcoholic beverages! Hee, hee. Can you IMAGINE?
Yes, that one worked out about as well as the current War On (some)
Drugs.
r_c_...@hushmail.com
The point is that none of the Amendment 28 proposals presented in my
earlier post support Mr. Harrison's assertion that "when Amendment 28
is ratified THEN YOU WILL HAVE A FUCKING RIGHT TO BE HEARD."
As an aside, I trust that you are not under the misapprehension that
any of the previously posted proposals were supported by me.
JohnJohnsn
Kagan would sit out some big Supreme Court cases
by Mark Sherman, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – It's a simple matter of math: Elena Kagan's nomination to
the Supreme Court has complicated the government's effort to force the
tobacco industry to cough up nearly $300 billion.
If confirmed by the Senate as a justice, Kagan would have to sit out
high court review of the government's decade-old racketeering lawsuit
against cigarette makers. That's because she already has taken sides
as solicitor general, signing the Obama administration's Supreme Court
brief in the case — an automatic disqualifier.
Kagan is expected to step aside from 11 of the 24 cases the court has
so far agreed to hear beginning in October.
Without her, the government and anti-tobacco advocates could find it
difficult, if not impossible, to find a fifth vote to allow the
government to seek $280 billion of past tobacco profits and $14
billion for a national campaign to curb smoking.
The justices are expected to consider whether to take up the tobacco
lawsuit at their private conference on June 24. If they decide to go
ahead, they would hear argument in the fall or winter.
A justice's decision not to participate in a case, called a recusal,
can have a dramatic effect on a nine-person court. The court has split
4-4 on several occasions in recent years when justices did not take
part in a case because they owned stock in an affected company, had a
relative involved in some way or had participated in the case either
as a lawyer or judge.
A 4-4 outcome leaves the lower court ruling in place, creates no
national precedent and generally is regarded as a waste of the court's
time.
Kagan might eventually have to excuse herself from two to three dozen
cases over the next few years. When Thurgood Marshall moved directly
to the court from solicitor general in 1967, he did not take part in a
majority of the cases the court heard in his first term, said Thomas
Goldstein, a Washington lawyer and Supreme Court expert.
Kagan won't face as many recusals as Marshall because she served for a
shorter time as solicitor general and stepped aside from those duties
earlier than Marshall did, Goldstein said. In addition, some of
Marshall's recusals related to his service on the federal appeals
court in New York.
But Kagan's anticipated absence could affect several important cases.
It won't be known for some time whether she did enough legal work
defending President Barak Obama's health care legislation to require
her to step aside if and when that issue comes to the Supreme Court.
Appeals in civil lawsuits over anti-terror policies begun in the Bush
administration and, in some cases, continued under Obama, could be
affected.
The federal appeals court in Washington recently limited the rights of
detainees at the U.S. base in Bagram, Afghanistan, to use federal
courts to challenge their detention. Justice John Paul Stevens, whom
Kagan would replace, was part of a bare five-justice majority that
sided with detainees at the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Again, because she signed the government's briefs in the appeals
court, Kagan would not be part of the high court's consideration of
the Bagram case, and it is by no means clear that she would vote as
Stevens did.
The same consideration probably will doom the high court hopes of
Maher Arar, the Canadian engineer who was mistakenly labeled a Muslim
extremist, detained by U.S. authorities when he tried to change planes
at Kennedy Airport in New York and sent to Syria. Arar claims he was
tortured in Syria and wants to hold former Attorney General John
Ashcroft and other officials liable for the decision to send him
there.
The court could say as early as Monday whether it will hear Arar's
appeal of a ruling against him by the federal appeals court in New
York. One consideration for the justices is that there probably would
be only seven of them available to hear Arar's case, meaning as few as
four justices could hold sway.
In addition to Kagan, Justice Sonia Sotomayor would be out of the
case. Sotomayor was a member of the appeals court that heard the case,
although she did not take part in the decision.
Kagan's ties to the tobacco issue predate her time as solicitor
general. She was the Clinton administration's chief negotiator in a
drawn out and ultimately failed attempt to craft comprehensive tobacco
legislation in the late 1990s.
The racketeering lawsuit against the industry came about after the
effort in Congress collapsed. "One thing I can say for certain is
nobody worked harder to try to bring people together," recalled
Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. The
group is one of several public health organizations that joined the
lawsuit on the government's side.
Now, Kagan would be unable to be part of a final resolution of the
case in the form of a Supreme Court opinion and her absence from the
case could prevent the government from extracting hundreds of billions
of dollars from tobacco companies. "This case is filled with irony,"
Myers said.
But he said it is not certain that the court would split along
ideological lines. The government and the public health groups assert
that a divided federal appeals court panel misread a provision of the
racketeering law, creating a conflict with other appeals courts that
have allowed trial judges to order payment, or disgorgement, of past
profits.
That ruling preceded a nine-month trial that ended with a federal
judge's harsh 1,600-page opinion that found the industry engaged in
racketeering and fraud over several decades.
Leading tobacco companies accounting for 90 percent of U.S. cigarette
sales want the justices to wipe away court holdings that the industry
illegally concealed the dangers of cigarette smoking. If they succeed,
the attack on their profits also would be halted.
Philip Morris USA, the nation's largest tobacco maker; its parent
company Altria Group Inc.; R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; British American
Tobacco Investments Ltd. and Lorillard Tobacco Co. filed separate but
related appeals that take issue with the opinion from U.S. District
Judge Gladys Kessler and a unanimous appeals court ruling that largely
upheld her.
Kessler ruled that the companies engaged in a scheme to defraud the
public by falsely denying the adverse health effects of smoking,
concealing evidence that nicotine is addictive and lying about their
manipulation of nicotine in cigarettes to create addiction.
The justices have several options. They could decide to hear the
appeal from one side or the other, or both. Or neither.
An argument for rejecting the entire case is that the appeals court
that sided with Kessler was made up of Democratic and Republican
appointees. Also, the high court has previously turned down a chance
to review the appellate ruling on profits.
-30-
How's that Obama "Hope and Change" working out for OBAMA?!?
Gray Ghost
@40g2000pry.googlegroups.com:
Since you appear to be so freaking uneducated obaMAO MAO as in MAO Ze Dung.
So calling him a communist is now racist? You relly are pathetically stupid.
Just in case you develop the courage to answer the basic quesion:
His middle name is Hussein. His parents named him that. That is part of his
identity. The fact that it is the same as Saddam Hussein's last name is a sad
coincidence.
So tell me if calling the Obamao by his middelk name is racist, what is
calling GW Bush a deserter despite there really no evidence to support it?
What is calling GW all sorts of vile names for 8 years?
Acceptable behavior? Truth as you see it? You are deranged.
Oh and Lookout doesn't like Clarence Thomas. Lookout has said he hopes Thomas
would die soon so he could be replaced by a more, hmm maybe he meant white
justice.
When are you going to call him a racist?
--
"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be
construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be
sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything
or nothing at pleasure."
�Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 1823
Gray Ghost
@z15g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
Chuckle, snort. Not with you lot.
Gray Ghost
@6g2000prg.googlegroups.com:
No you illiterate:
Fourth Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his
preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it
without losing face the chance of him denying he originally made the assertion
he did approaches infinity.
Gray Ghost
ff7df7...@b15g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
Another wombat tries to show everyone how deep he is. Chuckle, snort.
--
"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be
construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be
sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything
or nothing at pleasure."
—Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 1823
Gray Ghost
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
> Gray Ghost <grey_ghost47...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>I realize that being a leftist is really mentally debilitating,
>
> As opposed to being an America-hating fascist such as yourself?
>
Have you actually read any of my posts? I'll leave the America hating aside
since that is just SOP for those who have no arrows left in thier intellectual
quiver. But I take special pleasure in abusing all the anti-semite, anti-
Isreal soon to be hog food pieces of detrius on this board. In fact I am most
fipmd of pointing out that the 1,000 Year Reich only lasted 13 years. I also
reccomend they emulate thier hero by taking poison and shooting themselves in
the temple, just to make sure.
As a group I can't imagine anyone I'd rather see dead than the modern
neofacists.
You'd think a card carrying facist would be more sensitive to those things.
Gray Ghost
news:f9778daf-5649-44c1...@42g2000prb.googlegroups.com:
I thnk that the issue is he was showing you what other proposals were out
there none of which matches the Loony Weasel' interpetation. I saw no
endorsement for this one, in fact I dislike it as well.
>
> (And why my spell-checker does not know "Sapiens" but knows "Homo"?..)
Don't ask, don't spell.
>
>> "Congress shall make no law that applies to any citizen of the United
>> States that does not apply equally to all US Senators and
>> Representatives. Congress shall make no law that applies to any US
>> Senator or Representative that does not apply equally to all citizens
>> of the United States.
>
> Great - just make the loopholes harder to identify. Another billion
> pages of paperwork, coming right up!
Huh, I'm sorry making the lords live under thier own rules isn't a godd idea?
What planet are you from the planet Aristocracy and Proviliege?
Exactly how does this increase paperwork, or is this just the preprogrammed
response for when you don't have a real answer?
>
>> All existing laws and regulations that do not
>> meet these criteria shall be declared null and void!"
>
> And that's how you take careful aim at your foot while squeezing the
> trigger. Even a radical communist like Hussein Obama knows the only
> valid reforms are incremental, not revolutionary.
Yeah, taking over the economy, banks, insurance companies, car companies, the
entire health care industry in one year. Very "incremental". We need to take a
chain saw to the Federal Government, not a scalpel.
>
>> And another:
>>
>> "� The Federal Government must not have a budget deficit, except in
>> times of war or national emergency as annually declared by 2/3 of both
>> chambers of the United States Congress.
>
> Oh, awesome. Now we have ANOTHER incentive for a state of perpetual
> warfare!
>
Only for lefties who need more and more money to buy votes with.
Gray Ghost
news:d7427408-28b3-40bb...@t34g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
I think he is under psychiactric care.
Ray Fischer
>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>I realize that being a leftist is really mentally debilitating,
>>>
>>> As opposed to being an America-hating fascist such as yourself?
>>
>> Which comment simply proves his point.
>
>Bingo!!
You're just stupid hypocrites.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>On Jun 13, 9:53 am, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 13, 6:51 am, JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Fifth Law of Leftist Debate
>>> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
>>> to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes
>>> for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him denigrating
>>> the intelligence of the poster approaches infinity∞.
>>
>> Is the Fourth "projectivity"?
>
>Fourth Law of Leftist Debate
>The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
First lie of rightard debate:
1) Lie. Lie some more. Lie about your lies. Lie about people you
hate. Lie about your "evidence".
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
JohnJohnsn
> (And why my spell-checker does not know "Sapiens" but knows "Homo"?..)
Try clicking the "Add To" button on your spell-checker, numbnuts.
As to `homo': "Homo is the genus that includes modern humans and
species closely related to them. The genus is estimated to be about
2.3 to 2.4 million years old." --The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human
Evolution
As well as: "One quart of homo wholesale in glass equals one quart
equivalent." --Purdue University Agricultural Experiment Station; 1956
Station Bulletin
Additionally: "Regular homo milk was being sold out of stores in half
gallons for 33 cents against 44 cents on regular homo milk on home
delivery." --American Milk Review And Milk Plant Monthly, v. 20, 1958
Moreover, "Homo Erectus" <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_erectus>
does not mean what YOU think is means!
"Go away fool, you bother me." --William Claude Dukenfield, aka W.C.
Fields
Will Rogers never met a man he didn't like; however, he never met
"Philip2005".
Ray Fischer
>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c141972$0$1642
>> JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>>>
>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>>>>
>>>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
>>>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>>>
>>>Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>>"racist"?
>>
>> Why? Are you stupid?
>
I don't need to look there when there are so many here.
>His middle name is Hussein. His parents named him that.
But is it not the convention in this country to call people by their
middle names, or even to make any note of them, so when a group
obsesses over a middle name which also happens to coincide with a
recently executed dictator, then it become quite obvious that that
group is trying a racist/religious smear based upon a name.
And if you weren't a dumbass bigot you'd know all of that. If you
didn't have your head up your ass you'd realize that everybody knows
what game you're playing.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>>>On Jun 12, 1:21�pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26�am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>>>
>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>>>>
>>>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who
>call
>>>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>>>
>>>Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>>"racist"?
>>
>> Why? Are you stupid?
>
>Not at all. Inquiring minds wish to know.
So you _are_ stupid.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>The Lone Weasel <lee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>>> The Lone Weasel <leeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >the one who'll make you wish you'd never spoken.
>>>
>>> To begin with, I'm not on the right, Loon. I'm an anti-liberal. My
>>> beliefs often overlap the right's however.
>>
>>merry band.
>
Many fascists call themselves conservatives.
Or "libertarian" (now there's a joke).
> The word liberal
>has become stigmatized.
By rabid right-wing bigots.
> Libs are so ashamed of themselves
Do you wear the fascist label with pride?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
5511 Dead, 644 since 1/20/09
9,000 sounds about right. And yes, I'm glad it's hard to amend, as
well. It isn't infallable--prohibition got through, after all--but it
does stop 99.99% of the idiocy.
>
>> Most of them are pretty fucking daft.
>
> The anti-flag burning amendment proposal is a perennial favorite.
>
>> The Townsend amendment, for example,
>> "weights" votes by personal income. Someone who makes, say, $20,000
>> gets a vote, someone who makes a million gets 50 votes.
>
> I haven't heard about that one. Do you have a cite for this
> abomination?
Not off-hand. You could Google "The Townsend Plan" and see what comes
up. It was one of those John Birch things designed to save America from
communism by excluding working people from power.
>
>> Congress entertained some 750 proposals to change the constitution
>> just between 1990 and
>> 2000.
>>
>> There's a list of some of them here:http://www.usconstitution.net/
>> constamprop.html
>>
>> Not all are goofy, but some are utterly demented. One, for example,
>> would give the Senate the power to reject any elected President-elect
>> during the 120 days following the election. Or another prohibiting
>> incarceration for minor traffic offenses. (Seems like a case of
>> overkill, that.)
>>
>> And grass-roots ones can be utterly absurd. There have been proposed
>> constitutional amendments dealing with flying saucers, cow farts, and
>> neutering cats.
>>
>> Why, they even had one early last century that proposed banning the
>> sale or transport of all alcoholic beverages! Hee, hee. Can you
>> IMAGINE?
>
> Yes, that one worked out about as well as the current War On (some)
> Drugs.
That one just simply defies the Constitution.
Ray Fischer
>Kagan would sit out some big Supreme Court cases
>by Mark Sherman, Associated Press Writer
No evidence for that.
>WASHINGTON – It's a simple matter of math: Elena Kagan's nomination to
>the Supreme Court has complicated the government's effort to force the
>tobacco industry to cough up nearly $300 billion.
>
>If confirmed by the Senate as a justice, Kagan would have to sit out
>high court review of the government's decade-old racketeering lawsuit
>against cigarette makers. That's because she already has taken sides
>as solicitor general, signing the Obama administration's Supreme Court
>brief in the case — an automatic disqualifier.
Says who?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
JohnJohnsn
Actually, you just posted the "Tenth Law of Leftist Debate."
RD Sandman
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
Thanks for proving his point. No need to lie about evidence, you just
provided all that was needed. ;)
--
Sleep well tonight,
RD (The Sandman)
Life is like a bowl of habeneros...what you do today
may well burn your ass tomorrow.
RD Sandman
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
We certainly best you hands down.
RD Sandman
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
That's not real specific. Nor is it honest but that is what we have come
to expect from you. Let me restore what you responding to so that you
cannot claim different:
Not at all. Inquiring minds wish to know. How is calling Obama by his
middle name racist? Please be specific.
See where you clipped it? ;)
r_c_...@hushmail.com
wrote:
The only thing I came up with a Google search of "The Townsend Plan"
was the 1930's proposal for a pension benefit of $200 per month (it's
true that I didn't look through all three hundred thousand hits). Dr.
Townsend's plan influenced the establishment of Social Security.
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Congress entertained some 750 proposals to change the constitution
> >> just between 1990 and
> >> 2000.
>
> >> There's a list of some of them here:http://www.usconstitution.net/
> >> constamprop.html
>
> >> Not all are goofy, but some are utterly demented. One, for example,
> >> would give the Senate the power to reject any elected President-elect
> >> during the 120 days following the election. Or another prohibiting
> >> incarceration for minor traffic offenses. (Seems like a case of
> >> overkill, that.)
>
> >> And grass-roots ones can be utterly absurd. There have been proposed
> >> constitutional amendments dealing with flying saucers, cow farts, and
> >> neutering cats.
>
> >> Why, they even had one early last century that proposed banning the
> >> sale or transport of all alcoholic beverages! Hee, hee. Can you
> >> IMAGINE?
>
> > Yes, that one worked out about as well as the current War On (some)
> > Drugs.
>
> That one just simply defies the Constitution.
Well, yes, in my opinion, depending to which part you refer. The War
On (some) Drugs covers a lot of ground.
Gray Ghost
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
Well Ray since you've given us your intelelctual achievment let me give you
mine. See if you recognize yourself anywhere.
Tauss's Laws of Leftist Debate
First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his
preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it
without losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot, homophobe
approaches infinity.
This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned race or sexual
preference in any way that is relevant to the subject.
Second Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his
preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it
without losing face the chance of him using vulgarity and profanity in an
effort to "shout down" his tormentor approaches infinity.
Third Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his
preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it
without losing face the chance of him changing his criteria (goal post move)
approaches infinity.
Fourth Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his
preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it
without losing face the chance of him denying he originally made the assertion
he did approaches infinity.
Fifth Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his
preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it
without losing face the chance of him denigrating the intelligence of the
poster approaches infinity.
Sixth Law of Leftist Debate
Leftists who want to make sweeping social change generally have very little
understanding of human nature.
Seventh Law of Leftist Debate
Leftists often ascribe to others the most debased motives for their actions
when in fact they are only reflecting their own inner reality.
Eighth Law of Leftist Debate
Leftists will often cheer the deaths of people they are opposed to displaying
an inhumane side to the personality.
Ninth Law of Leftist Debate
If the subject is firearms the likelihood that the leftist will confuse
firearms and sexual organs reaches infinity squared.
As you can see Ray, well thought out and quite accurate. It always gives me a
chuckle when you lower life forms follow your scripts so well.
Gray Ghost
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
Alright Ray, we'll p[lay your silly game.
Yes, we are all stupid, benighted fools.
Now, intellectual giant, excplain to us how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s
middle name is "racist".
Ray Fischer
>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c1513f6$0$1591
>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>> "Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>>> Gray Ghost <grey_ghost47...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>I realize that being a leftist is really mentally debilitating,
>>>>>
>>>>> As opposed to being an America-hating fascist such as yourself?
>>>>
>>>> Which comment simply proves his point.
>>>
>>>Bingo!!
>>
>> You're just stupid hypocrites.
>
>We certainly best you hands down.
Well then we both agree that you're better hypocrites than I could
ever be.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c14199f$0$1642
>$742e...@news.sonic.net:
>
>> Gray Ghost <grey_ghost47...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>I realize that being a leftist is really mentally debilitating,
>>
>> As opposed to being an America-hating fascist such as yourself?
>
>Have you actually read any of my posts?
Yes.
> I'll leave the America hating aside
>since that is just SOP for those who have no arrows left in thier intellectual
Usual fascist whine: hate hate hate liberals.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
Ray Fischer
>$742e...@news.sonic.net:
>
>> JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>On Jun 13, 9:53 am, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 13, 6:51 am, JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Fifth Law of Leftist Debate
>>>>> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
>>>>> to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes
>>>>> for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him
>denigrating
>>>>> the intelligence of the poster approaches infinity∞.
>>>>
>>>> Is the Fourth "projectivity"?
>>>
>>>Fourth Law of Leftist Debate
>>>The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
>>
>> First lie of rightard debate:
>> 1) Lie. Lie some more. Lie about your lies. Lie about people you
>> hate. Lie about your "evidence".
>>
>
>Thanks for proving his point. No need to lie about evidence, you just
>provided all that was needed. ;)
Thank you for proving my point.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>> RD Sandman <rdsandman@comcast[remove].net> wrote:
>>>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c141972$0$1642
>>>> JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who
>>>call
>>>>>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>>>>>
>>>>>Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>>>>"racist"?
>>>>
>>>> Why? Are you stupid?
>>>
>>>Not at all. Inquiring minds wish to know.
>>
>> So you _are_ stupid.
>
>That's not real specific. Nor is it honest but that is what we have come
Since you're a bigoted dumbass I'll copy what I already posted:
Ray Fischer
>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c151444$0$1591
>$742e...@news.sonic.net:
>
>> JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>On Jun 13, 9:53 am, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 13, 6:51 am, JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Fifth Law of Leftist Debate
>>>>> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
>>>>> to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes
>>>>> for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him denigrating
>>>>> the intelligence of the poster approaches infinity∞.
>>>>
>>>> Is the Fourth "projectivity"?
>>>
>>>Fourth Law of Leftist Debate
>>>The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
>>
>> First lie of rightard debate:
>> 1) Lie. Lie some more. Lie about your lies. Lie about people you
>> hate. Lie about your "evidence".
>
>Well Ray since you've given us your intelelctual achievment let me give you
>mine. See if you recognize yourself anywhere.
>
>Tauss's Laws of Leftist Debate
Fascist hate liberalism.
>First Law of Leftist Debate
>The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his
>preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it
>without losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot, homophobe
>approaches infinity.
See above re: 1st law of rightard debate.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c15152c$0$1591
>> RD Sandman <rdsandman@comcast[remove].net> wrote:
>>>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c141972$0$1642
>>>> JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who
>>>>>> call Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>>>>>
>>>>>Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>>>>"racist"?
>>>>
>>>> Why? Are you stupid?
>>>
>>>Not at all. Inquiring minds wish to know.
>>
>> So you _are_ stupid.
>
>Alright Ray, we'll p[lay your silly game.
>
>Yes, we are all stupid, benighted fools.
>
>Now, intellectual giant, excplain to us how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s
>middle name is "racist".
And now, reposted for the THIRD dumbass...
Gray Ghost
REalyy? I see no hate in the sentence you left after snipping. I do see
dishonesty and stupidity in your 7 words though.
Gray Ghost
> Gray Ghost <grey_ghost47...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c151444$0$1591
>>$742e...@news.sonic.net:
>>
>>> JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>On Jun 13, 9:53 am, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 13, 6:51 am, JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Fifth Law of Leftist Debate
>>>>>> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
>>>>>> to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes
>>>>>> for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him
>>>>>> denigrating the intelligence of the poster approaches infinity∞.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is the Fourth "projectivity"?
>>>>
>>>>Fourth Law of Leftist Debate
>>>>The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter
>>>
>>> First lie of rightard debate:
>>> 1) Lie. Lie some more. Lie about your lies. Lie about people you
>>> hate. Lie about your "evidence".
>>
>>Well Ray since you've given us your intelelctual achievment let me give
>>you mine. See if you recognize yourself anywhere.
>>
>>Tauss's Laws of Leftist Debate
>
> Fascist hate liberalism.
Everybody hates liberalism.
>
>>First Law of Leftist Debate
>>The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to
>>his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to
>>refute it without losing face the chance of him calling you a racist,
>>bigot, homophobe approaches infinity.
>
> See above re: 1st law of rightard debate.
>
Aww, couldn't come up with an intelligent answer? So sad.
RD Sandman
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
Probably, you are just a simple liar.
Gray Ghost
Is that your own stutteering stupidty or did you palgarize it from elsewhere?
'Cuz if it's your own stuttering stupidity then it proves nothing. Well
exceopt that your inteelctual depth is about that of an open air latrine.
RD Sandman
Just what game is that, Ray? Please be specific. ;)
Foxtrot
>Gray Ghost <grey_ghost47...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>No are you? Or are you looking for racists under your bed again?
>
>I don't need to look there when there are so many here.
>
>>His middle name is Hussein. His parents named him that.
>
>But is it not the convention in this country to call people by their
>middle names, or even to make any note of them, so when a group
>obsesses over a middle name which also happens to coincide with a
>recently executed dictator, then it become quite obvious that that
>group is trying a racist/religious smear based upon a name.
>
>And if you weren't a dumbass bigot you'd know all of that. If you
>didn't have your head up your ass you'd realize that everybody knows
>what game you're playing.
Libs hunt for racism anywhere they can find it. Like the time a
poor sap used the word "niggardly" a few years ago. It gives
them an excuse to portray themselves as victims.
Scout
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman@comcast[remove].net> wrote in message
news:Xns9D966C765...@216.196.97.130...
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c15152c$0$1591
> $742e...@news.sonic.net:
>
>> RD Sandman <rdsandman@comcast[remove].net> wrote:
>>>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c141972$0$1642
>>>> JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who
>>>call
>>>>>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>>>>>
>>>>>Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>>>>"racist"?
>>>>
>>>> Why? Are you stupid?
>>>
>>>Not at all. Inquiring minds wish to know.
>>
>> So you _are_ stupid.
>>
>
> That's not real specific. Nor is it honest but that is what we have come
> to expect from you. Let me restore what you responding to so that you
> cannot claim different:
>
> Not at all. Inquiring minds wish to know. How is calling Obama by his
> middle name racist? Please be specific.
>
> See where you clipped it? ;)
I think pretty much everyone has seen Ray's basic dishonesty, and I'm
thinking it's just about time to throw him back in the twit filter.
Foxtrot
>>>>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote
>>>>> Why? Are you stupid?
>> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote
>>> So you _are_ stupid.
>I think pretty much everyone has seen Ray's basic dishonesty, and I'm
>thinking it's just about time to throw him back in the twit filter.
He usually just accuses people of fascism or some other ugly
unfounded allegation. He seldom contributes anything of value
and he becomes tiresome.
I usually plonk him for 30 days then give him another chance.
He's on the verge again.
JohnJohnsn
> Gray Ghost <grey_ghost471-newsgro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c141972$0$1642
>>
>>> JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 12, 1:21 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 12, 10:26 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Secondly there's no widespread racism on the right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now all you have to do is get people to believe you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yoss, there's no widespread racism on the right, among people who call
>>>>> Obama "Obammy, Hussein, Urkel," etc...
>>>>
>>>> Please explain how using Barack Hussein Obama Jr,'s middle name is
>>>> "racist"?
>>>
>>> Why? Are you stupid?
>>
>> No are you? Or are you looking for racists under your bed again?
>
> I don't need to look there when there are so many here.
>
>> His middle name is Hussein. His parents named him that.
>
> But is it not the convention in this country to call people by their
> middle names, or even to make any note of them...
How about Tommy Lee Jones, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Bryan Zepp
Jamieson, George Washington Carver, Sandra Day O'Conner, J ohn Paul
Stevens, Jaquelyn Kennedy Onasis, Andrew Lloyd Webber, Daniel Day
Lewis, Catherine Zeta Jones, Billy Bob Thorton, Billy Ray Cyrus,
James Earl Jones, David Lee Roth, Charles Nelson Reilly, Sara
Jessica Parker, Billie Jean King, Sally Jesse Rafael, Doris Kerns
Goodwin, Jada Pinket Smith, Hillary Rodem Clinton, Fiorence
Griffiths Joyner, Mary Chapin Carpenter, Mary Higgins Clark, Lyndon
Baines Johnson, Lisa Marie Presley, Lady Bird Johnson, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, Mary Tyler Moore, Martin Luther King, Jonathan Taylor
Thomas, Arthur Conon Doyle, John Paul Jones, Olivia Newton John,
June Carter Cash, Phyllis Reynolds Naylor, Shirley Temple Black,
Neil Patrick Harris, Mary Kay Place, Mary Kate Olson, Mary Kay
Latourneau, John Wilkes Booth, John Wayne Gacy, Mary Todd Lincoln,
Francis Ford Copolla, Lou Diamond Phillips, Anna Nicole Smith, Anna
Beth Gish, Judy Norton Taylor, Jane Velez Mitchell, Paul Michael
Glasser, Margaret Wise Brown, Jaime Lynn Spears, Nicole Brown
Smith, Francis Scott Key, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Mary Stewart
Masterson. Courtney Thorne Smith, James Earl Ray, Jerry Lee Lewis,
Stevie Ray Vaughn, Emmy Lou Harris, J ulia Louis Dryfus, David James
Elliot, Camilla Parker Bowles, Tammy Faye Baker, Joe Don Baker,
Jennifer Love Hewitt, Linda Day George, Lesley Ann Warren, Michael
Marisi Ornstein, Oni Faida Lampley, Samuel Ray Gates, Richard
Joseph Paul, Chris Henry Coffey, Summer Crockett Moore, Mark Linn
Baker, Dana Wheeler Nicholson, Tom Riis Farrell, Nikki Michelle
James, Peter Van Wagner, David Wilson Barnes, Keith Randolph
Smith, Stephanie Roth Haberle, Tyrone Mitchell Henderson, Julienne
Hanzelka Kim, Ed Onipede Blunt, Sam Breslin Wright, Myra Lucretia
Taylor, Michael Sackler Berner, Cheryse Nicol Pickens, Tracey
Conyer Lee, Julie Fain Lawrence, Daniel Stewart Sherman, Ty Thomas
Reed, Marc Damon Johnson, Ronald Lew Harris, Tia Dionne Hodge,
James Lloyd Reynolds, John Joseph Gallagher, Craig Alan Edwards,
Jim True Frost, Kamar DeLos Reyes, Stevie Ray Dallimore, John
Leonard Thompson, Christine Toy Johnson, Lucas Caleb Rooney, Carlos
Alberto Valencia, Turron Kofi Alleyne, Beth Ellen Patrick, Kate
Williams Stone, Mikal Saint George, Joe Huu Nguyen, Mary Rae
Thewlis, John David Coles, Hibah Sherif Frisina, Shannon Von
Ronne, Shannon Robert Bowen, Richard Vilas Montesanto, Adam
Goodnoff Cernese, Kimberly Shannon Murphy, John Fitzgerald Kennedy,
Jeffrey Lee Gibson, Johnny Erbes Chan, Jeff Bay Smith, Elvis Aaron
Presley, George Santo Pietro, Peter Vietro Hannum, Luis Sanchez
Cañete, Lynne Maureen Curtis, Shawn Marcus Taylor, Felicia Mignon
Livingston, Lydia Mayberry Friedman, John David Coles, Juan José
Campanella, Jesús Salvador Treviño. et al.?
Just think, all those "three-name people", both famous and infamous,
all calling Ray Fischer a stupid flaming liberal idiot!
Steve
Fischer will be a waste of time forever... he's also a waste of
space... Bitter and angry, he's lashing out at everything to try to
spin away his own failures...