TRUMP: Why the Establishment is Terrified of him

[raykeller]

http://www.coachisright.com/why-the-dogs-of-hell-have-been-unleashed-on-donald-trump/

[Full article] On Trump but mostly about how "DC INC." works...


TRUMP
By Wayne Allyn Root

Some people are getting very nervous, including Barack Obama, Valerie
Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few.
And I know why.

I wrote a book titled The Murder of the Middle Class about the unholy
conspiracy between big government, big business and big media. They all
benefit by the billions of dollars from this partnership, and it's in all of
their interests to protect one another. It's one for all and all for one.
It's a heck of a filthy relationship that makes everyone filthy rich,
everyone except the American people. We get ripped off. We're the patsies.

But for once, the powerful socialist cabal and the corrupt crony capitalists
are scared. I've never seen them this outraged, this vicious, this motivated
or this coordinated. Never in all my years in politics have I seen anything
like the way the mad dogs of hell have been unleashed on Donald Trump. When
white supremacist David Duke ran for governor of Louisiana , even he wasn't
treated with this kind of outrage, vitriol and disrespect. When a known
fraud, scam artist, and tax cheat like Al Sharpton ran for president, I
never saw anything remotely close to this. The over-the-top reaction to
Trump by politicians of both parties, the media and the biggest corporations
of America has been so swift and insanely angry that it suggests they are
all threatened and frightened like never before.

Why? Duke was never going to win. Sharpton was never going to win. Ron Paul
was never going to win. Ross Perot was never going to win as a third-party
candidate. Those candidates either didn't have or couldn't spare the billion
dollars it takes to win the presidency. But Donald Trump can self-fund that
amount tomorrow and still have another billion left over to pour into the
last two-week stretch run before Election Day. No matter how much they say
to the contrary, the media, business and political elite understand that
Trump is no joke. He could actually win and upset their nice cozy apple
cart.

It's no coincidence that everyone has gotten together to destroy The Donald.
No, this is a coordinated conspiracy led by President Barack Obama himself.
Obama himself is making the phone calls and giving the orders; he's the
ultimate intimidator who plays by the rules of Chicago thug politics.

Why is this so important to Obama? It's because most of the other
politicians are part of the old boys club. They talk big, but in the end
they won't change a thing. Why? They are all beholden to big-money donors.
They are all owned by lobbyists, unions, lawyers, gigantic environmental
organizations and multinational corporations like Big Pharma or Big Oil. Or
they are owned lock, stock and barrel by foreigners like George Soros owns
Obama or foreign governments own Hillary with their Clinton Foundation
donations.

These run-of-the-mill establishment politicians are all puppets owned by big
money. But there's one man and only one man who isn't beholden to anyone.
There's one man who doesn't need foreigners, or foreign governments, or
George Soros, or the United Auto Workers, or the teachers union, or the
Service Employees International Union, or the bar association to fund his
campaign.

Billionaire tycoon and maverick Donald Trump doesn't need anyone's help.
That means he doesn't care what the media says. He doesn't care what the
corporate elites think. That makes him very dangerous to the entrenched
interests. That makes Trump a huge threat. Trump can ruin everything for the
bribed politicians and their spoiled slave masters.

Don't you ever wonder why the GOP has never tried to impeach Obama? Don't
you wonder why John Boehner and Mitch McConnell talk a big game, but never
actually try to stop Obama? Don't you wonder why Congress holds the purse
strings, yet has never tried to defund Obamacare or Obama's clearly illegal
executive action on amnesty for illegal aliens? Bizarre, right? It defies
logic, right?

Well, first, I'd guess many key Republicans are being bribed.

Second, I believe many key Republicans are being blackmailed. Whether they
are having affairs, or secretly gay, or stealing taxpayer money, the
National Security Agency knows everything. Ask former House Speaker Dennis
Hastert about that. The government even knew he was withdrawing large sums
of his own money from his own bank account. Trust me: The NSA, the SEC, the
IRS and all the other three-letter government agencies are watching every
Republican political leader. They know everything.

Third, many Republicans are petrified of being called racists.. So they are
scared to ever criticize Obama or call out his crimes, let alone demand his
impeachment.

Fourth, why rock the boat? After defeat or retirement, if you're a good boy,
you've got a $5 million-per-year lobbying job waiting. The big-money
interests have the system gamed. Win or lose, they win.

But Trump doesn't play by any of these rules. Trump breaks up this nice,
cozy relationship between big government, big media and big business. All
the rules are out the window if Trump wins the presidency. The other
politicians will protect Obama and his aides but not Trump.

Remember: Trump is the guy who publicly questioned Obama's birth
certificate. He questioned Obama's college records and how a mediocre
student got into an Ivy League university. Now, he's doing something no
Republican has the chutzpah to do. He's questioning our relationship with
Mexico; questioning why the border is wide open; questioning why no wall has
been built across the border; questioning if allowing millions of illegal
aliens into America is in our best interests; questioning why so many
illegal aliens commit violent crimes yet are not deported; and questioning
why our trade deals with Mexico, Russia and China are so bad.

Trump has the audacity to ask out loud why American workers always get the
short end of the stick. Good question.

I'm certain Trump will question what happened to the almost billion dollars
given in a rigged no-bid contract to college friends of Michelle Obama at
foreign companies to build the defective Obamacare website. By the way, that
tab is now up to $5 billion.

Trump will ask if Obamacare's architects can be charged with fraud for
selling it by lying. He will ask if Obama himself committed fraud when he
said, If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it.


Trump will investigate Obama's widespread IRS conspiracy, not to mention
Obama's college records.

Trump will prosecute Clinton and Obama for fraud committed to cover up
Benghazi before the election.

How about the fraud committed by employees of the Labor Department when they
made up dramatic job numbers in the last jobs report before the 2012
election?

Obama, the multinational corporations and the media need to stop this. They
recognize this could get out of control. If left unchecked telling the raw
truth and asking questions everyone else is afraid to ask, Trump could wake
a sleeping giant.

Trump's election would be a nightmare. Obama has committed many crimes. No
one else but Trump would dare to prosecute. He will not hesitate. Once Trump
gets in and gets a look at the cooked books and Obama's records, the game is
over. The gig is up. The goose is cooked.

Holder could wind up in prison. Jarrett could wind up in prison. Obama
bundler Jon Corzine could wind up in prison for losing $1.5 billion of
customers money.

Clinton could wind up in jail for deleting 32,000 emails, or for accepting
bribes from foreign governments while secretary of state, or for misplacing
$6 billion as the head of the State Department, or for lying about Benghazi.

The entire upper level management of the IRS could wind up in prison.

Obamacare will be defunded and dismantled.

The Obama crime family will be prosecuted for crimes against the American
people. And Obama himself could wind up ruined, his legacy in tatters.

Trump will investigate. Trump will prosecute. Trump will go after everyone
involved â?" just for fun. That will all happen on Trump's first day in the
White House. Who knows what Trump will do on Day 2?

That's why the dogs of hell have been unleashed on Donald Trump.

[deep]

On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:09:14 -0700, "raykeller"
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:

>
>http://www.coachisright.com/why-the-dogs-of-hell-have-been-unleashed-on-donald-trump/
>
>[Full article] On Trump but mostly about how "DC INC." works...
>
>
>TRUMP
>By Wayne Allyn Root
>
>Some people are getting very nervous, including Barack Obama, Valerie
>Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few.
>And I know why.

This is hilarious. A total meltdown of the right wing. You are the
junkyard dogs when someone threw in a nice greasy bone. You are all
chewing each other to death. And you try to blame it all on Obama.
Too fucking funny. You don't even know who to hate.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

Oh, are we supposed to be hating someone? We don't want to be like
you, you know.

[A1ZPZ.☢_ M°i°g°h°t°y ☮ W°a°n°n°a°b°e _☢.8Q6KQ]

Who are you kidding, Klausie. You wing-nut gun-loons are full of hate.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

You mean, machine-gun-your-foes-into-a-ditch kinda hate like Dudu?

Is he a wing-nut now?

[Gunner Asch]

On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 17:18:14 -0400, A1ZPZ.?_ M迺迷退配釜 ?
W軒迸迸軒軔送 _?.8Q6KQ <Q1...@C6ERU.com> wrote:

4 insults and 3 examples of hate right in this post of yours. Seems
Klaus called it accurately.

Trump scares the shit out of you.

Gunner

[D-FENS]

On 8/30/2015 3:25 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

Indeed. The Administration is going to try to out Trump the Donald by
actually enforcing immigration laws, at least per the most egregious of
the anchor-baby resorts in California where Chinese women come to pop
out "American" Chi-Comms.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/feds-raid-california-maternity-hotels-birth-tourists-n315996

--
For every Goliath, there is a rock.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[V5BYO.☢_ M°i°g°h°t°y ☮ W°a°n°n°a°b°e _☢.6OFOY]

D-FENS wrote on 2015-08-30 18:27:
>
>
> Indeed. The Administration is going to try to out Trump the Donald by
> actually enforcing immigration laws, at least per the most egregious of
> the anchor-baby resorts in California where Chinese women come to pop
> out "American" Chi-Comms.
>
> http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/feds-raid-california-maternity-hotels-birth-tourists-n315996

These are the rich Chinese who can afford to pay $80,000 up front to the
travel agencies to fly here just to have a born-in-the-USA baby. The
babies and the mothers are not staying here. What's not to like?

I think the part about the hospital debt is a lie. The hospitals are not
stupid. You cannot fool them so many times. They must've asked for
hospital fees up front in cash before admission.

[PaxPerPoten]

Establishment hardliners of both parties are crapping bricks over
Trump.. It is possible that Trump might not be alive for the election.
Kennedy's lost two sons by bucking the established power elite. The
Bloody hands of Granny Klinton possibly unseated Vince Foster from a
Grand Jury.
>


--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster

[︰ones]

On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:09:14 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "raykeller"
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:

>Some people are getting very nervous...

I know I am because, if he's nominated, we will have President
Clinton, round 2. The *entire* minority vote swings to Hillary and
her supporters rally; moderate republicans jump ship or stay home.

If you don't want President Hillary, the GOP had best field a
moderate; however, it's looking like they're leaning more and more to
the loons!

Jones

[One Party System]

deep wrote in news:feq6ua92cq15gsm8a...@4ax.com:

Dear stupid cocksucker. Clinton is not going to win. Sanders is not going
to win. Mallet Head is not going to win.

Learn to say President Trump.

--
There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient
to get well, because as long as the disease holds out they have not only an
easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to
make themselves prominent before the public.

Booker T. Washington

[One Party System]

=?UTF-8?B?QTFaUFou4piiXyBNwrBpwrBnwrBowrB0wrB5IOKYriBXwrBhwrBu?=
=?UTF-8?B?wrBuwrBhwrBiwrBlIF/imKIuOFE2S1E=?= <Q1...@C6ERU.com> wrote in
news:sqKEx.800776$Uy.6...@fe61.am1:

And we are coming for you.

[Gunner Asch]

Odd that you would think that after both Clinton and Obama....and
blacks becoming Republicans in record numbers..and the Tea Party
People coming out in force..you would think that moderate Republicans
will stay home (snicker) and that you think that the "entire" minority
swings to the Hildabitch.

Frankly old boy...the call for getting rid of ALL Democrats and ALL
RINOS is in the air..and its causing a shit load of people to pick up
their heads and start actually thinking about voting FOR Trump.

The Obamassiah has poisoned the well for about any Democrat and any
Rino Repub. Something about one stick too many breaking the camels
back.....

Chuckle..better hope that anybody besides a far leftwinger wins the
election..because the nation is ripe and ready for bloody armed
revolution. All it will take is more Leftardism in action..and all
bets are off. We will be seeing
Liberals/Progressives/Leftwingers/Marxists hanging by the neck from
anything stiff enough to hold their weight. Bet on it..count on it.
Might be a great time to invest in rope futures.

Lets hope they dont turn on you...or maybe... lets hope they do.....

[︰ones]

On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 22:52:22 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
<gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Odd that you would think that after both Clinton and Obama....and
>blacks becoming Republicans in record numbers..and the Tea Party

>People coming out in force...

I don't know where you get those ideas. The T-baggers were "out in
force" in '12 and proved that, while they can queer the primary, they
can't carry the national vote. There was a 'bagger candidate in '08
and they lost. The GOP is in greater disarray now than they were
then.

Trump would simply be a joke; however, he's muddying the political
waters for the GOP. It's pretty obvious that Clinton will be the
Democratic nominee unless something changes... and, it might. If it
turns into a Donald Vs. Hillary national, she will trounce him. You
might find a few commentators who think otherwise, but they're wrong.

I, for one, am not just dying to see Hillary as president! I really
dislike having to choose between the devil and the deep blue sea.

Jones

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 04:52:16 -0500, ĄJones <ĄJo...@fubar.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 22:52:22 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
><gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Odd that you would think that after both Clinton and Obama....and
>>blacks becoming Republicans in record numbers..and the Tea Party
>>People coming out in force...
>
>I don't know where you get those ideas. The T-baggers

T-baggers? We now talking about queer Democrats?

were "out in
>force" in '12 and proved that, while they can queer the primary, they
>can't carry the national vote. There was a 'bagger candidate in '08
>and they lost. The GOP is in greater disarray now than they were
>then.

Odd that so many people are joing together to remove Democrats from
office. As you may recall..in embarssement...more Democraps were
thrown out of office than at any time in history but one in '12.

Sucks to be you and no recognize the crushing wheel of politics
veering hard to the Right. No matter, it will smash you like a grape
on a train track and I for one will be a really happy camper.

>
>Trump would simply be a joke; however, he's muddying the political
>waters for the GOP. It's pretty obvious that Clinton will be the
>Democratic nominee unless something changes... and, it might. If it
>turns into a Donald Vs. Hillary national, she will trounce him. You
>might find a few commentators who think otherwise, but they're wrong.

They are wrong? Snicker..the bitch will be in prison by that time.

>
>I, for one, am not just dying to see Hillary as president! I really
>dislike having to choose between the devil and the deep blue sea.
>
>Jones

So you are a Saunders groupie. Fascinating.

Tell you what...why dont you wait and see what happens? Nothing you
will vomit out will make the tinest bit of difference, so simply cut
off your blovation orfice. If I win...you cut your wrists and bleed
out. If you win..you cut your wrists and bleed out. Either way...no
one will have to read your buffoonery and your wishful thinking based
on absolute ignorance of current politics. But the DNC must be giving
you extra cash to keep posting. You have heart, son...lots of heart.

Im wondering though if you can keep it.

Gunner

[F. George McDuffee]

*OFF TOPIC*

On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 14:40:24 -0600, deep wrote:

<snip>

> You don't even know who to hate.

</snip>

Don't know why this showed up in RCM, but scapegoating and
the "blame game" accomplish nothing.

Until and unless we have a comprehensive review and critical
analysis of the functioning of a rapidly morphing and
increasingly global socioeconomy, all of us are in for a
*VERY* rough ride, as first one and then another economic
sector and/or nation-state economy "implodes."


--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"

[Jim Wilkins]

"F. George McDuffee" <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote in
message news:ocm8ua58rnjmcs1rq...@4ax.com...

> *OFF TOPIC*
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 14:40:24 -0600, deep wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> You don't even know who to hate.
> </snip>
>
> Don't know why this showed up in RCM, but scapegoating and
> the "blame game" accomplish nothing.
>
> Until and unless we have a comprehensive review and critical
> analysis of the functioning of a rapidly morphing and
> increasingly global socioeconomy, all of us are in for a
> *VERY* rough ride, as first one and then another economic
> sector and/or nation-state economy "implodes."
> --
> Unka' George

We can't critically analyze problems we choose to deny:
http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/26/democrats-complain-about-presence-of-debt-clock-on-capitol-hill/

[F. George McDuffee]

ĄIndeed! and this is only *ONE* of several synergistic,
mutually reinforcing problems, with which the many national
and new global socioeconomies and cultures must now cope.

These include, in no particular order, in addition to the
unpayable national debt, climate change [natural and/or
man-made], Über financialization (and financial
engineering), bio-engineering, demographic change (both
ethnic and age) and rapidly growing
automation/computerization driven by rapidly increasing
artifical intellegence, eliminating increasing numbers of
jobs [and the taxes these produced].

[Jay Santos]

On 8/30/2015 4:35 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
> On 8/30/2015 3:40 PM, deep wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:09:14 -0700, "raykeller"
>> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> http://www.coachisright.com/why-the-dogs-of-hell-have-been-unleashed-on-donald-trump/
>>>
>>>
>>> [Full article] On Trump but mostly about how "DC INC." works...
>>>
>>>
>>> TRUMP
>>> By Wayne Allyn Root
>>>
>>> Some people are getting very nervous, including Barack Obama, Valerie
>>> Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a
>>> few.
>>> And I know why.
>>
>> This is hilarious. A total meltdown of the right wing. You are the
>> junkyard dogs when someone threw in a nice greasy bone. You are all
>> chewing each other to death. And you try to blame it all on Obama.
>> Too fucking funny. You don't even know who to hate.
>
> Establishment hardliners of both parties are crapping bricks over
> Trump..

No one is. He's not a serious candidate, and everyone knows it.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 8/30/2015 2:19 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 17:18:14 -0400, A1ZPZ.?_ M°i°g°h°t°y ?

And like gummer dwieber, too.

[Rudy Canoza]

No, they're not.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

LOL

Moonbats are going insane that he even exists.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2015/08/30/its-dangerous-to-not-take-trump-seriously.html

> He's not a serious candidate, and everyone knows it.

You don't get to decide that.

[deep]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:07:04 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:

So just who is your "serious candidate"? Anybody electable?

[Jay Santos]

On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 21:13:35 -0500, ¡Jones <¡Jo...@fubar.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:09:14 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "raykeller"
>> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Some people are getting very nervous...
>>
>> I know I am because, if he's nominated, we will have President
>> Clinton, round 2. The *entire* minority vote swings to Hillary and
>> her supporters rally; moderate republicans jump ship or stay home.
>>
>> If you don't want President Hillary, the GOP had best field a
>> moderate; however, it's looking like they're leaning more and more to
>> the loons!
>>
>> Jones
>
> Odd that you would think that after both Clinton and Obama....and
> blacks becoming Republicans in record numbers

If seven blacks re-registered as Republicans, that would be "record
numbers" <snicker>

[Greg Smith]

"deep" wrote in message news:sor8uah34q70uklvo...@4ax.com...

####
Just someone like the last guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNAKe4lRdW4

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:07:04 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:

>Path: not-for-mail
>From: Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov>
>Newsgroups: alt.survival,misc.survivalism,rec.crafts.metalworking,talk.politics.guns
>Subject: Re: TRUMP: Why the Establishment is Terrified of him
>Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:07:04 -0700
>Organization: Citizens Auxiliary Police
>Lines: 30
>Message-ID: <ms1qfe$kkp$1...@dont-email.me>
>References: <mrvnq4$v1t$1...@dont-email.me>
> <feq6ua92cq15gsm8a...@4ax.com> <ms03te$cgs$1...@dont-email.me>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Injection-Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:05:18 +0000 (UTC)
>Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cf2e3baa3b794ecb7542fefe8d20a64a";
> logging-data="21145"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18/vh/8ZKmNo5/X4OyWECig"
>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
> Thunderbird/38.2.0
>In-Reply-To: <ms03te$cgs$1...@dont-email.me>
>Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZMOLqxOJu7bUWnrS8tkaC7PDE74=
>X-Received-Bytes: 2311
>X-Received-Body-CRC: 2652850696

And another Leftist hopes and prays......(VBG)

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:17:20 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:

>On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

Cites?

Think you have the black vote tied up? Think again.

(VBG)

Dont forget up until 1968..blacks were universally
Republican..starting at the end of the Civil War...over 100 yrs.

Now that shining example of Democrat buffoonery Lyndon Baines Johnson
after setting up black reverse discrimination and universal welfare
proclaimed "now we be having them niggers voting Democrat for the next
200 yrs"....yet..blacks are changing their votes once again. Must be
like that Third Reich you socialists proudly proclaimed would last
1000 yrs...but didnt survive 15. If I were you...Id not be hoping
that "dem niggers keep voting Democrat"

(VBG)

Gunner

[Jay Santos]

On 8/31/2015 10:43 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:17:20 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>
>> On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

>>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 21:13:35 -0500, ¡Jones <¡Jo...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:09:14 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "raykeller"
>>>> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Some people are getting very nervous...
>>>>
>>>> I know I am because, if he's nominated, we will have President
>>>> Clinton, round 2. The *entire* minority vote swings to Hillary and
>>>> her supporters rally; moderate republicans jump ship or stay home.
>>>>
>>>> If you don't want President Hillary, the GOP had best field a
>>>> moderate; however, it's looking like they're leaning more and more to
>>>> the loons!
>>>>
>>>> Jones
>>>
>>> Odd that you would think that after both Clinton and Obama....and
>>> blacks becoming Republicans in record numbers
>>
>> If seven blacks re-registered as Republicans, that would be "record
>> numbers" <snicker>
>
> Cites?

It was a gag, albeit with the gist of truth. You have nothing to show
that "record numbers" <chortle> of blacks are registering as
Republicans. It is virtually a certainty that you lied. Blacks
register 80% as Democrats, 11% as Republicans.

Post your source that shows "record numbers" <guffaw> of blacks are
switching party affiliation to the Republicans. Oh, I'm sorry, you
don't have any such source, do you?

[Jay Santos]

On 8/31/2015 10:37 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:07:04 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>

LOL! What the fuck is this shit supposed to mean?

Trump is not a serious candidate. You know it, too.

[Trevor Wilson]

On 31/08/2015 6:09 AM, raykeller wrote:
> http://www.coachisright.com/why-the-dogs-of-hell-have-been-unleashed-on-donald-trump/
>
> [Full article] On Trump but mostly about how "DC INC." works...
>
>
> TRUMP
> By Wayne Allyn Root
>
> Some people are getting very nervous, including Barack Obama, Valerie
> Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few.
> And I know why.

**NO. If Trump wins the Republican nomination, the Dems will win.
Easily. Trump is unelectable to every sane American. He is a viable
alternative for the morons however. I guess it depends on if there is a
majority of morons in the US.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

[Gunner Asch]

More prayer from the Lefties. He scares the shit out of you doesnt
he?

Snigger.....

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:41:05 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:

>On 8/31/2015 10:43 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:17:20 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

>>>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 21:13:35 -0500, ︰ones <︰on...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:09:14 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "raykeller"
>>>>> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Some people are getting very nervous...
>>>>>
>>>>> I know I am because, if he's nominated, we will have President
>>>>> Clinton, round 2. The *entire* minority vote swings to Hillary and
>>>>> her supporters rally; moderate republicans jump ship or stay home.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you don't want President Hillary, the GOP had best field a
>>>>> moderate; however, it's looking like they're leaning more and more to
>>>>> the loons!
>>>>>
>>>>> Jones

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/09/07/why-did-the-black-community-leave-the-gop-for-the-democratic-party/

>>>>
>>>> Odd that you would think that after both Clinton and Obama....and
>>>> blacks becoming Republicans in record numbers
>>>
>>> If seven blacks re-registered as Republicans, that would be "record
>>> numbers" <snicker>
>>
>> Cites?
>
>It was a gag, albeit with the gist of truth. You have nothing to show
>that "record numbers" <chortle> of blacks are registering as
>Republicans. It is virtually a certainty that you lied. Blacks
>register 80% as Democrats, 11% as Republicans.

Cites?

>
>Post your source that shows "record numbers" <guffaw> of blacks are
>switching party affiliation to the Republicans. Oh, I'm sorry, you
>don't have any such source, do you?

Is this the reason black kids are 40% in poverty and its increaseing?

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/the-grade/2015/07/roundup_poverty_rate_for_black056701.php

Or this?

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/378087/black-americans-are-worse-under-obama-deroy-murdock

just to name a few "issues"

Then perhaps those are why this is happening...

Google "blacks are leaving the Democratic Party"
about 38,300,000 results (0.42 seconds)

http://godfatherpolitics.com/18111/blacks-rejecting-democrat-party/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/1/blacks-are-abandoning-the-democratic-party/

http://www.wnd.com/2014/10/blacks-turn-on-democrats-in-new-video/

http://americaswire.org/drupal7/?q=content/young-blacks-unlikely-rally-behind-democrats

https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/category/blacks-leave-democrat-party/

http://mic.com/articles/52535/why-i-am-leaving-the-democratic-party

Want me to post a few more of those 38 MILLION hits? Hummmm?

[︰ones]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 03:13:36 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
<gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>T-baggers? We now talking about queer Democrats?

Oh, I have always taken you for a significant fool; however, please
tell me that you are not *that* great of a fool. You don't really
think "T-baggers" are Democrats, do you? I mean...

Never mind.

[Jay Santos]

Nope.

> He scares the shit out of you doesnthe?

Hardly. He'd have to be a serious candidate to do that, and he isn't.

[Jay Santos]

On 8/31/2015 4:42 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:41:05 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>
>> On 8/31/2015 10:43 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:17:20 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

>>>>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 21:13:35 -0500, ¡Jones <¡Jo...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:09:14 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "raykeller"
>>>>>> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some people are getting very nervous...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know I am because, if he's nominated, we will have President
>>>>>> Clinton, round 2. The *entire* minority vote swings to Hillary and
>>>>>> her supporters rally; moderate republicans jump ship or stay home.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you don't want President Hillary, the GOP had best field a
>>>>>> moderate; however, it's looking like they're leaning more and more to
>>>>>> the loons!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jones
>
> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/09/07/why-did-the-black-community-leave-the-gop-for-the-democratic-party/
>>>>>
>>>>> Odd that you would think that after both Clinton and Obama....and
>>>>> blacks becoming Republicans in record numbers
>>>>
>>>> If seven blacks re-registered as Republicans, that would be "record
>>>> numbers" <snicker>
>>>
>>> Cites?
>>
>> It was a gag, albeit with the gist of truth. You have nothing to show
>> that "record numbers" <chortle> of blacks are registering as
>> Republicans. It is virtually a certainty that you lied. Blacks
>> register 80% as Democrats, 11% as Republicans.
>
> Cites?

Stupid fuck
http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/

>> Post your source that shows "record numbers" <guffaw> of blacks are
>> switching party affiliation to the Republicans. Oh, I'm sorry, you
>> don't have any such source, do you?
>
> Is this the reason black kids are 40% in poverty and its increaseing?
>
> http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/the-grade/2015/07/roundup_poverty_rate_for_black056701.php
>
> Or this?
>
> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/378087/black-americans-are-worse-under-obama-deroy-murdock

Stupid nutless fuck: those don't show any "record numbers" of blacks
switching party affiliation to Republican.

So, as I said: you don't have any numbers that show that. You just
lied, that's all.

[Jay Santos]

Looks like there's a new item to be added to the Cliff Notes.

[Jay Santos]

LOL!
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/07/14/331298996/why-did-black-voters-flee-the-republican-party-in-the-1960s

And they're not returning to the Republican Party in your lifetime. Bet
on it. Bet the whole $28K annual income and the $15K weed-choked
property with the double-wide at 326 Olive Av.

[Gunner Asch]

Denial is just a runaway by a weak mind. Typical of the Left.

[︰ones]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 10:43:25 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
<gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Cites?
>
>Think you have the black vote tied up? Think again.

OK.

< thinking >

I think Trump will *not* carry any of the "minority" vote and, if they
actually decide to come out and vote, Trump is toast! Stick a fork in
him!!! *All* of the Hispanic vote goes against him; all of the Black
vote (save the dozen or so who made it "record" numbers) goes against
him. No self-respecting queer would vote for Trump on a bet. Yeah,
he'll get a few White wingers. He has completely alienated everyone
else.

I'm a moderate Democrat who is not a fan of Hillary. If you're going
to win in November, you need me and people like me badly! Got
anything better for me than Trump?

How 'bout Jeb? He's not a Bagger's poster child; however, he *is* a
Republican... and he's not Hillary! Wouldn't that be better than
losing completely? Trump is a complete loser.

Jones

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 16:56:05 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:

>On 8/31/2015 4:42 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:41:05 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/31/2015 10:43 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:17:20 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

More denial..and you even snipped out the cites because they turned
your argument into pond scum.

ROFLMAO!! Is that the BEST you can do??

Come back when you get diaper trained

[Gunner Asch]

More denial from the Leftist queer

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teabagging

Teabagger" is yet another shining example of "civil discourse" by left
wingers in America. The etymology of the word "teabagging" involves a
slang term originating in American homosexual subculture (ref-NSFW)
involving a specific (typically humiliating based on context) sexual
activity between two homosexual males.

[Jay Santos]

No denial. Trump is not a serious candidate. He's just having some fun.

You like him because he's a blowhard - like you. Of course, he isn't a
big enough blowhard to claim he has ridden a motorcycle 264mph or kicked
a lightbulb out of a fixture on an eight foot ceiling.

[Jay Santos]

On 8/31/2015 5:11 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 16:56:05 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>
>> On 8/31/2015 4:42 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:41:05 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/31/2015 10:43 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:17:20 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

I didn't snip them. I mocked them because they don't show what you claimed.

Your bullshit claim: "blacks becoming Republicans in record numbers".
You have nothing that supports your bullshit claim. You have nothing
that supports it because it *is* bullshit: blacks are as firmly
committed the Democratic Party as they have been for the last 50 years.

[Jay Santos]

On 8/31/2015 10:43 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:

>

> Dont forget up until 1968..blacks were universally
> Republican

Nope. They left the Republican Party /en masse/ (look it up, fuckwit)
in 1964. Four years later, when Nixon refined Goldwater's southern
strategy, there were virtually no blacks left in the Republican Party.

It is worth noting that even *before* Goldwater got the Republican
nomination in 1964, only 1/3 of registered black voters were Republican;
2/3 were already Democrats.

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

"Teabaggers" is what they called themselves when the movement started.

http://christiannightmares.tumblr.com/post/392207022/teabagging-for-jesus-found-at

--
Ed Huntress

[Rudy Canoza]

On 8/31/2015 5:35 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>

>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 18:50:28 -0500, ¡Jones <¡Jo...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 03:13:36 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
>>> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> T-baggers? We now talking about queer Democrats?
>>>
>>> Oh, I have always taken you for a significant fool; however, please
>>> tell me that you are not *that* great of a fool. You don't really
>>> think "T-baggers" are Democrats, do you? I mean...
>>>
>>> Never mind.
>>
>> More denial from the Leftist queer
>>
>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teabagging
>>
>> Teabagger" is yet another shining example of "civil discourse" by left
>> wingers in America. The etymology of the word "teabagging" involves a
>> slang term originating in American homosexual subculture (ref-NSFW)
>> involving a specific (typically humiliating based on context) sexual
>> activity between two homosexual males.
>
> "Teabaggers" is what they called themselves when the movement started.

Bullshit. It was an epithet that was hung on them by smarmy proggies.

Stop lying.

[Ed Huntress]

You're full of it, Ball. Fox News was even calling them "teabaggers"
until they learned what it meant.

From National Review, "Rise of an Epithet":

"The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15. And
organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the
Oval Office. One of the exhortations was “Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.” A
protester was spotted with a sign saying, “Tea Bag the Liberal Dems
Before They Tea Bag You.” So, conservatives started it: started with
this terminology."

--
Ed Huntress

[Gunner Asch]

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:09:26 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:

>On 8/31/2015 4:56 PM, Jay Santos wrote:
>> On 8/31/2015 4:42 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:41:05 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/31/2015 10:43 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:17:20 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

(VBG)

And here we go again....

(plink)

Im surprised they let you out of the Home this early in the week

Gunner

[PaxPerPoten]

On 8/31/2015 3:55 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 31/08/2015 6:09 AM, raykeller wrote:
>> http://www.coachisright.com/why-the-dogs-of-hell-have-been-unleashed-on-donald-trump/
>>
>>
>> [Full article] On Trump but mostly about how "DC INC." works...
>>
>>
>> TRUMP
>> By Wayne Allyn Root
>>
>> Some people are getting very nervous, including Barack Obama, Valerie
>> Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a
>> few.
>> And I know why.

>
> **NO. If Trump wins the Republican nomination, the Dems will win.
> Easily. Trump is unelectable to every sane American. He is a viable
> alternative for the morons however. I guess it depends on if there is a
> majority of morons in the US.

you are just Jealous. Australia hasn't had a decent leader in decades...
And no you cannot have Trump! Australia does have
a history of making use of criminals in its institutions. You can have
the Klintons, Kennedy's and the Bush's. All experienced crime families.
>
>


--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster

[Jay Santos]

No, blowhard. You're the one in denial here.

[Mohammed was a pedophile]

On 8/31/2015 7:25 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:09:26 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>
>> On 8/31/2015 4:56 PM, Jay Santos wrote:
>>> On 8/31/2015 4:42 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:41:05 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/31/2015 10:43 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:17:20 -0700, Jay Santos <j...@cap.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8/30/2015 10:52 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

Gummer whiffs off again. What's that, about 150 or more times?

[︰ones]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
<gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>More denial from the Leftist queer

As usual... no thought put into the reply; you just spew some
homosexual epithet. What am I supposed to say when one of our
intellectual giants calls me a "queer" because I happen to disagree
with him politically? Does he have any position to argue?

All he has is: "You're a queer!" That's... uuuh... certainly piquant
and probably proves something. What should I say to the lad?

I know! I'll say: "Have a nice day!"

Jones

[︰ones]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:35:05 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Ed Huntress
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>"Teabaggers" is what they called themselves when the movement started.

Wasn't it originally named after some early tea smugglers who threw
non-contraband tea into a harbor thereby driving up their profit
margins?

Jones

[︰ones]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:58:50 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Ed Huntress
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>You're full of it, Ball. Fox News was even calling them "teabaggers"
>until they learned what it meant.
>
>From National Review, "Rise of an Epithet":
>
>"The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15. And
>organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the
>Oval Office. One of the exhortations was “Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.” A
>protester was spotted with a sign saying, “Tea Bag the Liberal Dems
>Before They Tea Bag You.” So, conservatives started it: started with
>this terminology."

Yeah, I remember that... send a tea bag. Their slogan was: "We will
tea bag them." Early, early on, it was... now they're whining because
the slogan they picked stuck!

Jones

[Rudy Canoza]

On 8/31/2015 5:58 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:39:21 -0700, Rudy Canoza
> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
>> On 8/31/2015 5:35 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 18:50:28 -0500, ¡Jones <¡Jo...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 03:13:36 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
>>>>> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> T-baggers? We now talking about queer Democrats?
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, I have always taken you for a significant fool; however, please
>>>>> tell me that you are not *that* great of a fool. You don't really
>>>>> think "T-baggers" are Democrats, do you? I mean...
>>>>>
>>>>> Never mind.
>>>>
>>>> More denial from the Leftist queer
>>>>
>>>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teabagging
>>>>
>>>> Teabagger" is yet another shining example of "civil discourse" by left
>>>> wingers in America. The etymology of the word "teabagging" involves a
>>>> slang term originating in American homosexual subculture (ref-NSFW)
>>>> involving a specific (typically humiliating based on context) sexual
>>>> activity between two homosexual males.
>>>
>>> "Teabaggers" is what they called themselves when the movement started.
>>
>> Bullshit. It was an epithet that was hung on them by smarmy proggies.
>>
>> Stop lying.
>

> You're full of it, Prof. Canoza. Fox News was even calling them "teabaggers"

> until they learned what it meant.
>
> From National Review, "Rise of an Epithet":

Stop lying, shitbag. That article, which I have already read, does
*not* say that Tea Party members ever referred to themselves as
"teabaggers". It was always an epithet based on left-wing assholes -
like you - and your ridiculous self-flattery that knowing the names of
lots of acts of sexual depravity makes you "sophisticated."

Fuck you as always, not-so-fast eddy, you shitbag.

[Rudy Canoza]

"Now to the question of what to do. How should conservatives handle this
matter? Should we challenge the language, let it slide, adopt it? Many
conservatives — most, I would say — are of a mind to fight. According to
this point of view, people who use 'teabagger' and such should be called
on it, especially if they smirk. 'What do you mean by that?' one might
ask. 'What do you mean by "teabagger," and why do you smirk?' In other
words, conservatives want to introduce a little shame. And the responses
of liberals could be kind of interesting."

What the fuck do you mean by "teabagger", nsf eddy, and why are you
smirking? Would love to see you say it to my face, nsf eddy - you'd be
shitting your teeth about 10 hours later.

[Ed Huntress]

It's complicated.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 17:12:05 -0700, Rudy Canoza

If you say you're going to "tea bag" someone as they did, and as the
National Review article recounted, then they're "teabaggers."

And the famous woman wearing the sign "Tea bagging for Jesus" was
typical -- until someone told them about its other meaning.

Your endless attempts to bail yourself out through bluster have worn
pretty thin, Ball. Are you still claiming that the Founders opposed
free public education? Bluster didn't get you very far with that one,
either.

http://blogd.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Tea-Bagger.jpg

http://s848.photobucket.com/user/wbepmn/media/TeabaggingforJesus.jpg.html

http://blogd.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/screen-shot-teabagger-calls-self.png

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 17:16:54 -0700, Rudy Canoza

Ha-ha! The nym-shifter has been picking up blowhard habits from
Gunner.

So, you're going to start threatening people now, eh, Ball? Maybe you
can get together with Larry. He's into threats, too. He's looking for
someone to hold a gun on elected representatives who don't toe the
teabagger line.

--
Ed Huntress

[Rudy Canoza]

They dropped it right away. "teabagger" is exclusively used as a smarmy
epithet by smirking left-wing shitbags - you, for one - and that's that.

[Rudy Canoza]

Stop crying.

> So, you're going to start threatening people now, eh,

No threats, you squat-to-piss fairy. Just a statement of what I'd do if
you ever were stupid enough to call me that to my face. You know I can
do it, too.

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 07:45:20 -0700, Rudy Canoza

They stuck their foot in it. Then for three more years, they flipped
around, trying to decide if they wanted to try to co-opt it anyway.
They were selling "Proud Teabagger" buttons as late as 2010. They
hardly "dropped it right away." You elitists decided to drop it, but
the real tea partiers did not.

Here's a guy selling "Nobama" buttons and "Teabagger" buttons at the
Taxpayer March on Washington in 2009:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7bKF-9IPCM

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 07:46:24 -0700, Rudy Canoza

>>Ha-ha! The nym-shifter has been picking up blowhard habits from
>>Gunner.
>

>Stop crying.

Why would I cry? You share more in common with Gunner than you'll
admit.

>
>> So, you're going to start threatening people now, eh, Ball? Maybe you
>>can get together with Larry. He's into threats, too. He's looking for
>>someone to hold a gun on elected representatives who don't toe the
>>teabagger line.
>

>No threats, you squat-to-piss fairy. Just a statement of what I'd do if
>you ever were stupid enough to call me that to my face. You know I can
>do it, too.

No, that's a threat. And you make it, hiding behind your phony and
ridiculous nyms, because you know you'll never have to face me.

--
Ed Huntress

[RD Sandman]

ĄJones <ĄJo...@fubar.com> wrote in news:q1fcuap4bmee7ki03ln29u1fne63u2a73r@
4ax.com:

And the direction of tax monies, some of which was on tea. It was a
patriotically intended plea relying on the memories of the Boston Tea Party
which resulted in a lot of tea being dumped in the Boston Harbor.

--
Sleep well tonight.......

RD (The Sandman}

"Inside every old person is a young person
wondering what the hell happened!"

Terry Pratchett in The Times/UK

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 02 Sep 2015 12:57:45 -0500, RD Sandman
<rdsandman[remove]comcast.net> wrote:

>ĄJones <ĄJo...@fubar.com> wrote in news:q1fcuap4bmee7ki03ln29u1fne63u2a73r@
>4ax.com:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:35:05 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Ed Huntress
>> <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"Teabaggers" is what they called themselves when the movement started.
>>
>> Wasn't it originally named after some early tea smugglers who threw
>> non-contraband tea into a harbor thereby driving up their profit
>> margins?
>
>And the direction of tax monies, some of which was on tea. It was a
>patriotically intended plea relying on the memories of the Boston Tea Party
>which resulted in a lot of tea being dumped in the Boston Harbor.

The objection that led to the Boston Tea Party was not about the
imposition of taxes. In fact, the Brits had just reformed the tax laws
so that legal tea was slightly cheaper than contraband tea that was
being smuggled in.

The objection was about how the taxes were to be used. They were used
to pay the government officials in the colonies, with the express
purpose of making them beholden to Britain rather than to colonial tax
payers.

This was seen as an attempt to undermine colonial authority over their
own government.

As I said, it was complicated. There were some smugglers involved who
found the new British tax rates as a threat to their incomes, because
the cost of smuggled tea was now higher than that of legal tea.

But they weren't the driving force. The force that drove it over the
edge was the colonists' perception that they were being cut off from
all representation and authority over their own governance.

--
Ed Huntress

[Rudy Canoza]

Because you're a fucking baby.

>>
>>> So, you're going to start threatening people now, eh, Ball? Maybe you
>>> can get together with Larry. He's into threats, too. He's looking for
>>> someone to hold a gun on elected representatives who don't toe the
>>> teabagger line.
>>
>> No threats, you squat-to-piss fairy. Just a statement of what I'd do if
>> you ever were stupid enough to call me that to my face. You know I can
>> do it, too.
>
> No, that's a threat.

No, it's not a threat, you big baby.

> And you make it, hiding behind your phony and
> ridiculous nyms, because you know you'll never have to face me.

You claim to know where I live. Come on out and toss your insults at me
in person.

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 11:36:53 -0700, Rudy Canoza

Yeah, it's a threat.

>
>> And you make it, hiding behind your phony and
>> ridiculous nyms, because you know you'll never have to face me.
>
>You claim to know where I live. Come on out and toss your insults at me
>in person.

Man, you sound more like Gunner every day. And how fast do *you* ride
on a motorcycle? <g>

And what insults? You're the full-time insult champion here.

--
Ed Huntress

[RD Sandman]

Ed Huntress <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in
news:d0feuaplou8953tj4...@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 02 Sep 2015 12:57:45 -0500, RD Sandman
> <rdsandman[remove]comcast.net> wrote:
>

>>︰ones <︰on...@fubar.com> wrote in

Thank you, I was in school a lot longer ago than you. Memory fades,
IIRC. ;)

[Rudy Canoza]

On 9/2/2015 12:40 PM, Ed Huntress cried:

> On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 11:36:53 -0700, Rudy Canoza
> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>

>> On 9/2/2015 8:23 AM, Ed Huntress cried:

>>> On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 07:46:24 -0700, Rudy Canoza
>>> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>>>

>>>> On 9/1/2015 6:30 PM, Ed Huntress cried:

>>>>> On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 17:16:54 -0700, Rudy Canoza
>>>>> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>>>>>

>>>>>> On 8/31/2015 5:58 PM, Ed Huntress cried:

>>>>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:39:21 -0700, Rudy Canoza
>>>>>>> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> On 8/31/2015 5:35 PM, Ed Huntress cried:

No, it's not a threat, you fucking crybaby.

>>
>>> And you make it, hiding behind your phony and
>>> ridiculous nyms, because you know you'll never have to face me.
>>
>> You claim to know where I live. Come on out and toss your insults at me
>> in person.
>
> Man, you sound more like Gunner every day.

No.

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 02 Sep 2015 15:14:54 -0500, RD Sandman

I don't think I remembered that from school. I started seriously
studying American history and the Constitution when I was around 30.

I still keep up with the Supreme Court, but the rest is from memory.

--
Ed Huntress

[︰ones]

On Wed, 02 Sep 2015 12:57:45 -0500, in talk.politics.guns RD Sandman
<rdsandman[remove]comcast.net> wrote:

>And the direction of tax monies, some of which was on tea. It was a
>patriotically intended plea relying on the memories of the Boston Tea Party
>which resulted in a lot of tea being dumped in the Boston Harbor.

Well... OK; whatever.

The point was that the political movement known as the "tea party" had
an initial campaign that used a tea bag as their symbol... and,
originally, they called themselves the "tea baggers" because their
supporters sent thousands of tea bags as a show of solidarity.

Dunno about the other one; that happened before my time.

Jones

[news13]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:51:43 -0500, F. George McDuffee wrote:

> *OFF TOPIC*
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 14:40:24 -0600, deep wrote:
>
> <snip>

>> You don't even know who to hate.

> </snip>
>
> Don't know why this showed up in RCM, but scapegoating and the "blame
> game" accomplish nothing.

Because there is always some moron in that group that will reply to these
cross posted piles of crap.

Do your self a favour and simple invoke automatic filtering on the
original poster. The group S/N will improve and the quality of
metalworking information will as well.

[︰ones]

On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 20:39:09 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Ed Huntress
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>It's complicated.

High five, dude!

[Tom Gardner]

On 8/31/2015 10:23 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
> More denial from the Leftist queer
>

Is he cute? I might be interested, as long as he's a "catcher".

[Rudy Canoza]

On 9/3/2015 5:52 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 14:40:24 -0600, deep wrote:

>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 "raykeller@looser_losers.com wrote:
>
>>> http://www.coachisright.com/why-the-dogs-of-hell-have-been-unleashed-on-donald-trump/

>>> Some people are getting very nervous, including Barack Obama, Valerie
>>> Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few.
>>> And I know why.
>
>> This is hilarious. A total meltdown of the right wing.
>

> NPR is calling him "the far right-wing, white-nationalist candidate".
> Unbiased reporting, you understand.

LOL! To NPR, anyone to the right of Bernie Sanders is a Nazi.

Every election cycle, I'm always struck by how NPR becomes an official
media mouthpiece for the Democratic nominee. There not only is gushing
fawning coverage of the Democrat, but we hear the candidate over and
over in lengthy excerpts of his campaign blabber.

[Gunner Asch]

What...you think I was insulting you? Hardly. It was a very simple
statement of fact.

As for the term "queer"....are you one of those that uses a different
term? Ive a number of gay friends who use queer regularly.

Ive been on the road taking down yet another of Americas
factories...for the past 7 days...yet Ill bet you are still gay. Or
is it "queer"?

Gunner

[Gunner Asch]

Hardly. They never called themselves "teabaggers". Thats a term for a
gay sexual practice (as you should know). They have called themselves
the Tea Party.

[One Party System]

ˇJones <ˇJo...@fubar.com> wrote in news:49fcuatdeaghq1ilpqle4u6f3lfp22i71t@
4ax.com:

> "We will tea bag them.

That was your fantasy.

--
There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient
to get well, because as long as the disease holds out they have not only an
easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to make
themselves prominent before the public.

Booker T. Washington

[Charles d'Autrement]

On 9/8/2015 12:20 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 19:00:37 -0500, ¡Jones <¡Jo...@fubar.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
>> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> More denial from the Leftist queer
>>
>> As usual... no thought put into the reply; you just spew some
>> homosexual epithet. What am I supposed to say when one of our
>> intellectual giants calls me a "queer" because I happen to disagree
>> with him politically? Does he have any position to argue?
>>
>> All he has is: "You're a queer!" That's... uuuh... certainly piquant
>> and probably proves something. What should I say to the lad?
>>
>> I know! I'll say: "Have a nice day!"
>>
>> Jones
>
> What...you think I was insulting you?

Of course you're attempting to insult him.

[Gunner Asch]

On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:16:41 -0700, Charles d'Autrement
<gummy...@blows.large.cocks> wrote:

>On 9/8/2015 12:20 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:

>> On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 19:00:37 -0500, ︰ones <︰on...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
>>> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> More denial from the Leftist queer
>>>
>>> As usual... no thought put into the reply; you just spew some
>>> homosexual epithet. What am I supposed to say when one of our
>>> intellectual giants calls me a "queer" because I happen to disagree
>>> with him politically? Does he have any position to argue?
>>>
>>> All he has is: "You're a queer!" That's... uuuh... certainly piquant
>>> and probably proves something. What should I say to the lad?
>>>
>>> I know! I'll say: "Have a nice day!"
>>>
>>> Jones
>>
>> What...you think I was insulting you?
>
>Of course you're attempting to insult him.

Cites?

[Charles d'Autrement]

On 9/8/2015 12:16 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:16:41 -0700, Charles d'Autrement
> <gummy...@blows.large.cocks> wrote:
>
>> On 9/8/2015 12:20 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:

>>> On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 19:00:37 -0500, ¡Jones <¡Jo...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
>>>> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> More denial from the Leftist queer
>>>>
>>>> As usual... no thought put into the reply; you just spew some
>>>> homosexual epithet. What am I supposed to say when one of our
>>>> intellectual giants calls me a "queer" because I happen to disagree
>>>> with him politically? Does he have any position to argue?
>>>>
>>>> All he has is: "You're a queer!" That's... uuuh... certainly piquant
>>>> and probably proves something. What should I say to the lad?
>>>>
>>>> I know! I'll say: "Have a nice day!"
>>>>
>>>> Jones
>>>
>>> What...you think I was insulting you?
>>
>> Of course you're attempting to insult him.
>
> Cites?

LOL! You think that's an all-purpose trump card for everything, don't
you? Ha ha ha ha ha! It isn't.

Yes, you were attempting to insult him; that's not in dispute.

[Gunner Asch]

On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 16:10:08 -0700, Charles d'Autrement

<gummy...@blows.large.cocks> wrote:

>On 9/8/2015 12:16 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:16:41 -0700, Charles d'Autrement
>> <gummy...@blows.large.cocks> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/8/2015 12:20 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:

>>>> On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 19:00:37 -0500, ︰ones <︰on...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
>>>>> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> More denial from the Leftist queer
>>>>>
>>>>> As usual... no thought put into the reply; you just spew some
>>>>> homosexual epithet. What am I supposed to say when one of our
>>>>> intellectual giants calls me a "queer" because I happen to disagree
>>>>> with him politically? Does he have any position to argue?
>>>>>
>>>>> All he has is: "You're a queer!" That's... uuuh... certainly piquant
>>>>> and probably proves something. What should I say to the lad?
>>>>>
>>>>> I know! I'll say: "Have a nice day!"
>>>>>
>>>>> Jones
>>>>
>>>> What...you think I was insulting you?
>>>
>>> Of course you're attempting to insult him.
>>
>> Cites?
>
>LOL! You think that's an all-purpose trump card for everything, don't
>you? Ha ha ha ha ha! It isn't.
>
>Yes, you were attempting to insult him; that's not in dispute.

You think your verbal blandishments are an all-purpose trump card for
everything, dont you? Ha ha ha ha ha...it aint.

So once again I ask...Cites?

Gunner

[Charles d'Autrement]

On 9/8/2015 8:12 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 16:10:08 -0700, Charles d'Autrement
> <gummy...@blows.large.cocks> wrote:
>
>> On 9/8/2015 12:16 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:16:41 -0700, Charles d'Autrement
>>> <gummy...@blows.large.cocks> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/8/2015 12:20 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:

>>>>> On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 19:00:37 -0500, ¡Jones <¡Jo...@fubar.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:15:17 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Gunner Asch
>>>>>> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More denial from the Leftist queer
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As usual... no thought put into the reply; you just spew some
>>>>>> homosexual epithet. What am I supposed to say when one of our
>>>>>> intellectual giants calls me a "queer" because I happen to disagree
>>>>>> with him politically? Does he have any position to argue?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All he has is: "You're a queer!" That's... uuuh... certainly piquant
>>>>>> and probably proves something. What should I say to the lad?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know! I'll say: "Have a nice day!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jones
>>>>>
>>>>> What...you think I was insulting you?
>>>>
>>>> Of course you're attempting to insult him.
>>>
>>> Cites?
>>
>> LOL! You think that's an all-purpose trump card for everything, don't
>> you? Ha ha ha ha ha! It isn't.
>>
>> Yes, you were attempting to insult him; that's not in dispute.
>
> You think your verbal blandishments

Misuse of word.

You were trying to insult your better by calling him a "queer." That's
obvious; no "cites" [sic] needed.

[Gunner Asch]

On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 23:40:38 -0700, Charles d'Autrement
<gummy...@blows.large.cocks> wrote:

>>
>> You think your verbal blandishments
>
>Misuse of word.

Misuse of name.

(Plink)

Starting the stopwatch to see how long it takes you to change nyms

Gunner

[David Kain]

Who cares how long it takes? You will absolutely respond to the next
one - guaranteed.

You're just wrong about Trump, bitch-boi.