Re: Obama pisses the Cherokee off - They show him who's boss by kicking niggers out of tribe.

[brad herschel]

On Sep 18, 9:09 am, "Take That Obama!" <scumbag-ken...@whitehouse.gov>
wrote:
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/14/us-usa-cherokees-
> idUSTRE78D05X20110914?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews
>
> (Reuters) - The nation's second-largest Indian tribe said on
> Tuesday that it would not be dictated to by the U.S. government
> over its move to banish 2,800 African Americans from its
> citizenship rolls.
>
> "The Cherokee Nation will not be governed by the BIA," Joe
> Crittenden, the tribe's acting principal chief, said in a
> statement responding to the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs.
>
> Crittenden, who leads the tribe until a new principal chief is
> elected, went on to complain about unnamed congressmen meddling
> in the tribe's self-governance.
>
> The reaction follows a letter the tribe received on Monday from
> BIA Assistant Secretary Larry Echo Hawk, who warned that the
> results of the September 24 Cherokee election for principal
> chief will not be recognized by the U.S. government if the
> ousted members, known to some as "Cherokee Freedmen," are not
> allowed to vote.
>
> The dispute stems from the fact that some wealthy Cherokee owned
> black slaves who worked on their plantations in the South. By
> the 1830s, most of the tribe was forced to relocate to present-
> day Oklahoma, and many took their slaves with them. The so-
> called Freedmen are descendants of those slaves.
>
> After the Civil War, in which the Cherokee fought for the South,
> a treaty was signed in 1866 guaranteeing tribal citizenship for
> the freed slaves.
>
> The U.S. government said that the 1866 treaty between the
> Cherokee tribe and the U.S. government guaranteed that the
> slaves were tribal citizens, whether or not they had a Cherokee
> blood relation.
>
> The African Americans lost their citizenship last month when the
> Cherokee Supreme Court voted to support the right of tribal
> members to change the tribe's constitution on citizenship
> matters.
>
> The change meant that Cherokee Freedmen who could not prove they
> have a Cherokee blood relation were no longer citizens, making
> them ineligible to vote in tribal elections or receive benefits.
>
> Besides pressure from the BIA to accept the 1866 Treaty as the
> law of the land, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
> Development is withholding a $33 million disbursement to the
> tribe over the Freedmen controversy.
>
> Attorneys in a federal lawsuit in Washington are asking a judge
> to restore voting rights for the ousted Cherokee Freedmen in
> time for the September 24 tribal election for Principal Chief.

It's about time that Native Americans rid themselves of those Black
freeloaders.
However, it is also time for NA's to rid themselves of the bloated
retards infesting many reservations.

[Billy]

In article
<64ac8118-303d-4013...@c29g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,

With that in mind maybe we should return the country to the Indigenous
Americans who lost the continent to an infestation of greedy, diseased,
European polluters of the land, sky, and waters, and who are on track to
crash the entire planet.
--
- Billy
Both the House and Senate budget plan would have cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy.

Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for
elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans
"appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of
waste, fraud and abuse."
<http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/28/dennis-kucinich/re
p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/>

[W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And itšs not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. Thatšs hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they donšt get away with no taxation.
- Ralph Nader
<http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/19/ralph_naders_solution_to_debt_crisis>

[PainfulDischarge]

IF THE WHITE MAN HAD NOT JUSTIFIABLY DECIMATED THE INJUNS, DO YOU
BELIEVE THE AMERICAS WOULD BE AS PROSPEROUS AND CIVILIZED AS THEY ARE
TODAY?

[zayton]

um,....nor, I suppose would you sound so suave and sophisticated.

[GuvBob]

"zayton" <zay...@newgoober.net> wrote in message news:ki2...@newsfe02.iad...

Larry, is that yew?

[Billy]

In article
<6883ba6b-d50f-4b7b...@k29g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,

More so.

<http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-United-States-1492-Present/dp/0060
528370>

A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present by Howard Zinn

p20-21

20 A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES

In the villages of the Iroquois, land was owned in common and worked in
common. Hunting was done together, and the catch was divided among the
members of the village. Houses were considered common property and were
shared by several families. The concept of private ownership of land and
homes was foreign to the Iroquois. A French Jesuit priest who
encountered them in the 1650s wrote: "No poorhouses are needed among
them, because they are neither mendicants nor paupers. . . . Their
kindness, humanity and courtesy not only makes them liberal with what
they have, but causes them to possess hardly anything except in common."

Women were important and respected in Iroquois society. Families were
matrilineal. That is, the family line went down through the female
members, whose husbands joined the family, while sons who married then
joined their wives' families. Each extended family lived in a "long
house." When a woman wanted a divorce, she set her husband's things
outside the door.

Families were grouped in clans, and a dozen or more clans might make up
a village. The senior women in the village named the men who represented
the clans at village and tribal councils. They also named the forty-nine
chiefs who were the ruling council for the Five Nation confederacy of
the Iroquois. The women attended clan meetings, stood behind the circle
of men who spoke and voted, and removed the men from office if they
strayed too far from the wishes of the women.

The women tended the crops and took general charge of village affairs
while the men were always hunting or fishing. And since they supplied
the moccasins and food for warring expeditions, they had some control
over military matters. As Gary B. Nash notes in his fascinating study of
early America, Red, White, and Black: "Thus power was shared between the
sexes and the European idea of male dominancy and female subordination
in all things was conspicuously absent in Iroquois society."

Children in Iroquois society, while taught the cultural heritage of
their people and solidarity with the tribe, were also taught to be
independent, not to submit to overbearing authority. They were taught
equality in status and the sharing of possessions. The Iroquois did not
use harsh punishment on children; they did not insist on early weaning
or early toilet training, but gradually allowed the child to learn
self-care.

All of this was in sharp contrast to European values as brought over by
the first colonists, a society of rich and poor, controlled by priests,
by governors, by male heads of families. For example, the pastor of the
Pilgrim colony, John Robinson, thus advised his parishioners how to deal
with their children: "And surely there is in all children ... a
stubbornness, and stoutness ot mind arising from natural pride, which
must, in the first place, be broken and beaten down; that so the
foundation of their education being laid in humility and tractableness,
other virtues may, in their time, be built thereon." Gary Nash describes
Iroquois culture:
No laws and ordinances, sheriffs and constables, judges and juries, or
courts or jails‹the apparatus ofaudiority in European societies‹were to
be found in the northeast woodlands prior to European arrival. Yet
boundaries of acceptable behavior were firmly set. Though priding
themselves on the autonomous individual, the Iroquois maintained a
strict sense of right and wrong. . . . He who stole another's food or
acted invalourously in war was "shamed" by his people and ostracized
from their company until he had atoned for his actions and demonstrated
to their satisfaction that he had morally purified himsell.

Not only the Iroquois but other Indian tribes behaved the same way. In
1635, Maryland Indians responded to the governor's demand that if any of
them killed an Englishman, the guilty one should be delivered up for
punishment according to English law. The Indians said:
It is the manner amongst us Indians, that if any such accident happen,
wee doe redeeme the life of a man that is so slaine, widi a 100 armes
length of Beades and since that you are heere strangers, and come into
our Countrey, you should rather conform yourselves to die Customes of
our Countrey, than impose yours upon us. ...

So, Columbus and his successors were not coming into an empty
wilderness, but into a world which in some places was as densely
populated as Europe itself, where the culture was complex, where human
relations were more egalitarian than in Europe, and where the relations
among men, women, children, and nature were more beautifully worked out
than perhaps any place in the world.
---

I may vote Iroquois next year.

--
- Billy
Both the House and Senate budget plan would have cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy.

Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for
elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans
"appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of
waste, fraud and abuse."
<http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/28/dennis-kucinich/re
p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/>

[W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And it¹s not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. That¹s hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they don¹t get away with no taxation.

[George Plimpton]

On 9/20/2011 10:16 PM, Billy wrote:
> In article
> <6883ba6b-d50f-4b7b...@k29g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> PainfulDischarge<lilh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> IF THE WHITE MAN HAD NOT JUSTIFIABLY DECIMATED THE INJUNS, DO YOU
>> BELIEVE THE AMERICAS WOULD BE AS PROSPEROUS AND CIVILIZED AS THEY ARE
>> TODAY?
>
> More so.
>
> <http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-United-States-1492-Present/dp/0060
> 528370>
>
> A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present by Howard Zinn
>
> p20-21
>
> 20 A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES
>
> In the villages of the Iroquois, land was owned in common and worked in
> common. Hunting was done together, and the catch was divided among the
> members of the village. Houses were considered common property and were
> shared by several families. The concept of private ownership of land and
> homes was foreign to the Iroquois.

That's why they lost out.

[Marvin the Martian]

Stone age hunter gatherer cultures have weak concepts of ownership. You
need concepts of property for agricultural societies. No one is going to
invest a lot of work in developing an area of land if it is "community
property" and your lazy parasitic neighbors are going to run off with the
goods produced.

The so called "liberals" have a bad habit of parading the lack of a
concept of ownership (and thus, a lack of a concept of theft...) in
hunter gatherer cultures as something 'advanced', but they don't mention
that cultures that don't develop these concepts die out and that the
whole earth can support no more than 6 million or so hunter gatherers, so
to support their socialist ideal requires an extermination of 99.9% of
the human species.

[GuvBob]

"Marvin the Martian" <mar...@ontomars.org> wrote in message

> The so called "liberals" have a bad habit of parading the lack of a
> concept of ownership (and thus, a lack of a concept of theft...) in
> hunter gatherer cultures as something 'advanced', but they don't mention
> that cultures that don't develop these concepts die out and that the
> whole earth can support no more than 6 million or so hunter gatherers, so
> to support their socialist ideal requires an extermination of 99.9% of
> the human species.

If you want to heer first hand from a stone age hunter gatherer type uv uh feller, they ain't none with weaker concepts than ire old buddy and swell pal, Larry "Butt" Sniffs. He's got rangs on his fangers and bells on his toes and a bone in his nose.

Ho ho,

Guv Bob

[GuvBob]

"GuvBob" <guvbo...@yahooooooooooooooo.com> wrote in message news:2PKdnUpI_okNr-fT...@earthlink.com...

Ho ho,

Guv Bob

PS -- Sorry about the bone in the nose comment, Larry. No offense intended. (Does it hurt?)

[Billy]

In article <H7OdnfERwaDUhefT...@giganews.com>,

<http://anthropology.lbcc.edu/handoutsdocs/mistake.pdf>

How do you show that the lives of people 10,000 years ago got better
when they abandoned hunting and gathering for farming? Until recently,
archaeologists had to resort to indirect tests, whose results
(surprisingly) failed to support the progressivist view. Here's one
example of an indirect test: Are twentieth century hunter-gatherers
really worse off than farmers? Scattered throughout the world, several
dozen groups of socalled primitive people, like the Kalahari Bushmen,
continue to support themselves that way. It turns out that these people
have plenty of leisure time, sleep a good deal, and work less hard than
their farming neighbors. For instance, the average time devoted each
week to obtaining food is only twelve to nineteen hours for one group of
Bushmen, fourteen hours or less for the Hadza nomads of Tanzania. One
Bushman, when asked why he hadn't emulated neighboring tribes by
adopting agriculture, replied, "Why should we, when there are so many
mongongo nuts in the world?" . . .

There are at least three sets of reasons to explain the findings that
agriculture was bad for health. First, hunter-gatherers enjoyed a varied
diet, while early farmers obtained most of their food from one or a few
starchy crops. The farmers gained cheap calories at the cost of poor
nutrition. (Today just three high-carbohydrate plants--wheat, rice, and
corn--provide the bulk of the calories consumed by the human species,
yet each one is deficient in certain vitamins or amino acids essential
to life.) Second, because of dependence on a limited number of crops,
farmers ran the risk of starvation if one crop failed. Finally, the mere
fact that agriculture encouraged people to clump together in crowded
societies, many of which then carried on trade with other crowded
societies, led to the spread of parasites and infectious disease. (Some
archaeologists think it was crowding, rather than agriculture, that
promoted disease, but this is a chicken-and-egg argument, because
crowding encourages agriculture and vice versa.) Epidemics couldn't
take hold when populations were scattered in small bands that constantly
shifted camp. Tuberculosis and diarrheal disease had to await the rise
of farming, measles and bubonic plague the appearance of large cities.

Besides malnutrition, starvation, and epidemic diseases, farming helped
bring another curse upon humanity: deep class divisions.
Hunter-gatherers have little or no stored food, and no concentrated food
sources, like an orchard or a herd of cows: they live off the wild
plants and animals they obtain each day. Therefore, there can be no
kings, no class of social parasites who grow fat on food seized from
others. Only in a farming population could a healthy, nonproducing elite
set itself above the disease-ridden masses. Skeletons from Greek tombs
at Mycenae c.1500 B.C. suggest that royals enjoyed a better diet than
commoners, since the royal skeletons were two or three inches taller and
had better teeth (on average, one instead of six cavities or missing
teeth). Among Chilean mummies from c. A.D. 1000, the elite were
distinguished not only by ornaments and gold hair clips but also by a
fourfold lower rate of bone lesions caused by disease.
---


So to get out of Eden, all we had to do was follow the plow. It lead to
civilization, and social stratification. Moreover, our population has
grown dramatically with the introduction of chemical fertilizers and oil
powered equipment.

One way of getting back to Eden is smaller families. Another is
renewable energy, not fossil fuels. It will be a slow trip.

[Ray Fischer]

I could be more prosperous by killing you and taking all of your
property.

--
Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
rfis...@sonic.net | The new GOP ideal

[Marvin the Martian]

1) You've misstated the progressive view that has been approved for mass
consumption. They are making the argument to kill off 11/12ths of the
human population.

2) It is funny that anthropologist, who are so sensitive to not make
judgments against primitive cultures, make the idiot's argument against
modern western culture. Stupid Jews. <- That was a reference to Boas, who
was surprised that the Eskimos didn't hate him because he was Jewish, and
thus he preached that people must not judge cultures, and then went on to
judge the Eskimo culture as superior mostly because they didn't hate
him). How stupid is that?

3) Using their standard of sitting on your ass time as being the standard
by which cultures are to be judged, then prisoners in solitary
confinement have archived Nirvana. They ignore that the life span was
short, starvation and death by exposure was common, and the lives of
women was near slavery.

4) The socialist thing about class divisions exposes their political
agenda. The concept here is that modern society is bad because the "upper
class" have a boat while the lower classes only have wide screen TV,
cable Television, microwave ovens; it would be much better if everyone
sat in the dirt and owned nothing because then there are no class
divisions. It is absurd on the face of it. Then if you consider that
women were treated like property and that there WERE class divisions
based on gender, the whole stupidity of the assessment is shown.

[NotMe]

"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4e7adb9e$0$1689$742e...@news.sonic.net...

> PainfulDischarge <lilh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>IF THE WHITE MAN HAD NOT JUSTIFIABLY DECIMATED THE INJUNS, DO YOU
>>BELIEVE THE AMERICAS WOULD BE AS PROSPEROUS AND CIVILIZED AS THEY ARE
>>TODAY?
>
> I could be more prosperous by killing you and taking all of your
> property.

Good joke except I think Jackson pissed on and off the Cherokee a lot more.

[Billy]

In article <H7OdnfERwaDUhefT...@giganews.com>,
Marvin the Martian <mar...@ontomars.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:52:45 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>
> > On 9/20/2011 10:16 PM, Billy wrote:
> >> In article
> >> <6883ba6b-d50f-4b7b...@k29g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> >> PainfulDischarge<lilh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> IF THE WHITE MAN HAD NOT JUSTIFIABLY DECIMATED THE INJUNS, DO YOU
> >>> BELIEVE THE AMERICAS WOULD BE AS PROSPEROUS AND CIVILIZED AS THEY ARE
> >>> TODAY?
> >>
> >> More so.
> >>
> >> <http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-United-States-1492-Present/
> dp/0060
> >> 528370>
> >>
> >> A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present by Howard Zinn
> >>
> >> p20-21
> >>
> >> 20 A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES
> >>
> >> In the villages of the Iroquois, land was owned in common and worked in
> >> common. Hunting was done together, and the catch was divided among the
> >> members of the village. Houses were considered common property and were
> >> shared by several families. The concept of private ownership of land
> >> and homes was foreign to the Iroquois.
> >
> > That's why they lost out.
>
> Stone age hunter gatherer cultures have weak concepts of ownership.

Reference please. How do you support this contention?

>You
> need concepts of property for agricultural societies. No one is going to
> invest a lot of work in developing an area of land if it is "community
> property" and your lazy parasitic neighbors are going to run off with the
> goods produced.

You never heard of the "commons"? Moreover, what of bankers, and stock
brokers that should have destroyed their companies, but instead they
ran-off with tax-payer's money? It matters little to me, if these
thieves call themselves progressive or conservative. Perhaps we need to
return to being an agricultural society, and then we could string these
bastards up as they deserve.

>
> The so called "liberals" have a bad habit of parading the lack of a
> concept of ownership (and thus, a lack of a concept of theft...)

Reference please. How do you support this contention?

>in
> hunter gatherer cultures as something 'advanced', but they don't mention
> that cultures that don't develop these concepts die out and that the
> whole earth can support no more than 6 million or so hunter gatherers, so
> to support their socialist ideal requires an extermination of 99.9% of
> the human species.

Who calls for exterination? What is the source of your "opinions", or
are you just shoveling this out of your back-side?

--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_vN0--mHug>

[Billy]

In article <DbudnWb4jbQ3xebT...@giganews.com>,

Listen knucklehead, I am responding to that sick intercourse, "Ray
Fischer", who said,"IF THE WHITE MAN HAD NOT JUSTIFIABLY DECIMATED THE

INJUNS, DO YOU BELIEVE THE AMERICAS WOULD BE AS PROSPEROUS AND CIVILIZED

AS THEY ARE TODAY? Apparently, for Ray, gun powder and iron pass for
being civilized. As far as being prosperous, everyone's portion of the
national debt is $47,252.02. America has weapons, and debt. Civilized? I
don't think so.

>
> 2) It is funny that anthropologist, who are so sensitive to not make
> judgments against primitive cultures, make the idiot's argument against
> modern western culture. Stupid Jews. <- That was a reference to Boas, who
> was surprised that the Eskimos didn't hate him because he was Jewish, and
> thus he preached that people must not judge cultures, and then went on to
> judge the Eskimo culture as superior mostly because they didn't hate
> him). How stupid is that?

To demean a field of study because of one person is ludicrous. What can
be disproved by science is rejected, and knowledge is refined in the
process. The Bible says that the world was created in 6 days. Does that
make everything else in it wrong? I don't think so.

>
> 3) Using their standard of sitting on your ass time as being the standard
> by which cultures are to be judged, then prisoners in solitary
> confinement have archived Nirvana. They ignore that the life span was
> short, starvation and death by exposure was common, and the lives of
> women was near slavery.

You are obviously comfortable with the work you have, if any, but
seriously lack any imagination. If you only worked 20 hr./week, you
would have 20 more hours to explore, paint caves, chase women, and get
silly with your friends.

"Life expectancy at birth in the preagricultural community was about
twenty-six years," says Armelagos, "but in the post agricultural
community it was nineteen years.
<http://anthropology.lbcc.edu/handoutsdocs/mistake.pdf>

You obviously can't read. There have been many matriarchies in the
world, just not in Europe. Try reading my post about the Iroquois again.

http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-United-States-1492-Present/dp/00605
28370

A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present
by Howard Zinn

p20-21

Women were important and respected in Iroquois society. Families were
matrilineal. That is, the family line went down through the female
members, whose husbands joined the family, while sons who married then
joined their wives' families. Each extended family lived in a "long
house." When a woman wanted a divorce, she set her husband's things
outside the door.

Families were grouped in clans, and a dozen or more clans might make up
a village. The senior women in the village named the men who represented
the clans at village and tribal councils. They also named the forty-nine
chiefs who were the ruling council for the Five Nation confederacy of
the Iroquois. The women attended clan meetings, stood behind the circle
of men who spoke and voted, and removed the men from office if they
strayed too far from the wishes of the women.

---

This was extracted from the book "Red, White, and Black" by Gary B. Nash
a study of early America.

Sounds down right uncivilized, eh?

>
> 4) The socialist thing about class divisions exposes their political
> agenda. The concept here is that modern society is bad because the "upper
> class" have a boat while the lower classes only have wide screen TV,
> cable Television, microwave ovens; it would be much better if everyone
> sat in the dirt and owned nothing because then there are no class
> divisions. It is absurd on the face of it. Then if you consider that
> women were treated like property and that there WERE class divisions
> based on gender, the whole stupidity of the assessment is shown.

WTF are you ranting about? The only thing absurd is your charaterization
of class differences. Ray was advocating the benefits of smashing your
neighbor in the head and taking everything he had, a.k.a., "the new
American way".

This is what you are talking about.
<http://www.startribune.com/opinion/otherviews/129804813.html?page=all&pr
epage=1&c=y#continue>

And it is an extension of
<http://truthdamntruthandstatistics.blogspot.com/2008/03/corporate-vs-soc
ial-welfare.html>

The common usage definition of social welfare includes welfare checks
and food stamps. Welfare checks are supplied through a federal program
called Temporary Aid for Needy Families. Total welfare spending of this
nature was about $63 billion in 2002. For some perspective, that’s about
3 percent of the total federal budget.

Now, let’s consider the other kind of welfare.

Definition: corporate welfare
n. Financial aid, such as a subsidy, provided by a government to
corporations or other businesses.

The Cato Institute estimated that, in 2002, $93 billion were devoted to
corporate welfare. This is approximately 5 percent of the federal budget.

(cont.)
---

I can't help but notice that you have no citations, which leads be to
the conclusion that you are shoveling your "facts" out of your behind.

Your opinions don't interest me.

[GuvBob]

"NotMe" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:j5fm03$cji$1...@dont-email.me...

Are we talking Andrew, Jesse or Action?

[NotMe]

"GuvBob" <guvbo...@yahooooooooooooooo.com> wrote in message

news:NbKdnZqHEvJ4FODT...@earthlink.com...

Andres but Action wouold have been more entertaining.

BTW the Cherokee have reversed the ban.

[GuvBob]

"NotMe" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:j5kv60$nf5$1...@dont-email.me...

Indian givers, eh?

[Harold Burton]

In article <H7OdnfERwaDUhefT...@giganews.com>,
Marvin the Martian <mar...@ontomars.org> wrote:

There ya go pointing out inconvenient facts to leftards.



snicker

[Billy]

In article <hal.i.burton-43C9...@news.newsguy.com>,

Where do you find any defendable facts in this mental midget's post?

--
- Billy
Both the House and Senate budget plan would have cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy.

Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for
elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans
"appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of
waste, fraud and abuse."
<http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/28/dennis-kucinich/re
p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/>

[W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And it零 not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. That零 hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they don靖 get away with no taxation.

[George Plimpton]

See the sentence "Stone age hunter gatherer cultures have weak concepts
of ownership" and proceed from there. The two paragraphs contain
numerous facts that ought to shame leftards like you, but don't because
you are shameless in your dishonesty.

[Harold Burton]

In article
<Wildbilly-73779...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,

Try rereading it.


snicker

[Harold Burton]

In article <RNednf3dWNw36xHT...@giganews.com>,

Indeed!

[Ray Fischer]

Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:

>> Where do you find any defendable facts in this mental midget's post?
>
>Try rereading it.

You don't know, do you?

[Harold Burton]

In article <4e8ff515$0$1705$742e...@news.sonic.net>,

rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:
>
> >> Where do you find any defendable facts in this mental midget's post?
> >
> >Try rereading it.
>
> You don't know, do you?

Yep, I do, which is why I suggested rereading it, you should try it.




snicker

[Ray Fischer]

Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <4e8ff515$0$1705$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> Where do you find any defendable facts in this mental midget's post?
>> >
>> >Try rereading it.
>>
>> You don't know, do you?
>
>
>Yep, I do

Then why couldn't you answer the question and why are you trying to
run away?

[Harold Burton]

In article <4e914921$0$1723$742e...@news.sonic.net>,

rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <4e8ff515$0$1705$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >
> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> Where do you find any defendable facts in this mental midget's post?
> >> >
> >> >Try rereading it.
> >>
> >> You don't know, do you?
> >
> >
> >Yep, I do
>
> Then why couldn't you answer the question

I did answer it. Too bad you're too stupid to understand the answer.



snicker

[Ray Fischer]

Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <4e914921$0$1723$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >In article <4e8ff515$0$1705$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
>> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> >
>> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> Where do you find any defendable facts in this mental midget's post?
>> >> >
>> >> >Try rereading it.
>> >>
>> >> You don't know, do you?
>> >
>> >
>> >Yep, I do
>>
>> Then why couldn't you answer the question
>
>I did answer it.

And again you resort to stupid lies while trying to run away.

[Harold Burton]

In article <4e925c93$0$1680$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <4e914921$0$1723$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >
> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >In article <4e8ff515$0$1705$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> >> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >> Where do you find any defendable facts in this mental midget's post?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Try rereading it.
> >> >>
> >> >> You don't know, do you?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Yep, I do
> >>
> >> Then why couldn't you answer the question

> >I did answer it.

> And again you resort to stupid lies while trying to run away.

And again you resort to stupid lies while trying to run away. What part
of "I did answer it" didn't you understand?

snicker

[Billy]

In article <hal.i.burton-0A1E...@news.newsguy.com>,
Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:

Your ignorance is to be laughed at ;O)

--
- Billy
Both the House and Senate budget plan would have cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy.

Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for
elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans
"appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of
waste, fraud and abuse."
<http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/28/dennis-kucinich/re
p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/>

[W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And it�s not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. That�s hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they don�t get away with no taxation.

[Billy]

In article <4e8ff515$0$1705$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:
>
> >> Where do you find any defendable facts in this mental midget's post?
> >
> >Try rereading it.
>
> You don't know, do you?

He hasn't a clue.

--
- Billy
Both the House and Senate budget plan would have cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy.

Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for
elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans
"appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of
waste, fraud and abuse."
<http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/28/dennis-kucinich/re
p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/>

[W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And it�s not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. That�s hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they don�t get away with no taxation.

[Billy]

In article <RNednf3dWNw36xHT...@giganews.com>,
George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:

Maybe we are just ignorant. Instead of hiding in the smoke and mirrors,
why don't you just enumerate the numerous facts that you dumbtards
believe exist in those 2 paragraphs ;O)

--
- Billy
Both the House and Senate budget plan would have cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy.

Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for
elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans
"appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of
waste, fraud and abuse."
<http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/28/dennis-kucinich/re
p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/>

[W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And it�s not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. That�s hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they don�t get away with no taxation.

[Billy]

In article <hal.i.burton-A8AF...@news.newsguy.com>,
Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:

I don't suppose you would care to expand on your supremely dumbtard
comment?

--
- Billy
Both the House and Senate budget plan would have cut Social Security and Medicare, while cutting taxes on the wealthy.

Kucinich noted that none of the government programs targeted for
elimination or severe cutback in House Republican spending plans
"appeared on the GAO's list of government programs at high risk of
waste, fraud and abuse."
<http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/28/dennis-kucinich/re
p-dennis-kucinich-says-gop-budget-cuts-dont-targ/>

[W]e have the situation with the deficit and the debt and spending and jobs. And it�s not that difficult to get out of it. The first thing you do is you get rid of corporate welfare. That�s hundreds of billions of dollars a year. The second is you tax corporations so that they don�t get away with no taxation.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/12/2011 9:59 PM, Billy wrote:
> In article<RNednf3dWNw36xHT...@giganews.com>,

You're that, too - ignorant but also brazenly dishonest.

[Harold Burton]

In article
<Wildbilly-737F4...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:

I don't supposed you'd be able to understand it if I did.

snicker

[Harold Burton]

In article
<Wildbilly-682AF...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
Billy <Wild...@withouta.net> wrote:

As is yours.

snicker

[Ray Fischer]

Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:

> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>> And again you resort to stupid lies while trying to run away.
>
>And again you resort to stupid lies while trying to run away.

burton drops another pile of lying shit and runs away.

As usual.

[Harold Burton]

In article <4e9a6d72$0$1714$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:


> burton drops another pile of shit and . . .


. . . Ray Fischer eats it up.



snicker