10 things you should know about John McCain
Branson Hunter
are an Independent or a Democrat, read this first. I know many of us
are getting frustrated over the battle between Obama and Clinton, but
voting for McCain will be the ultimate disaster. Not only will we get
a third term Bush, but it could also be worse. Here are the 10 things
you should know about John McCain:
goto -- http://desertbrat.net/node/23
cmdr buzz corey
> voting for McCain will be the ultimate disaster.
Like voting for Osama Obama wouldn't.
When Dogs Run Free
Canoza at pi...@thedismalscience.noot says...
> Branson Hunter wrote:
> > [bullshit]
>
> Bwanson is a low-achieving, badly educated leftwing malcontent. He's a
> marginal; a null; a fuck. He hates achievers.
>
Another fine rebuttal to the argument from Rude E.
richard
What McCain and most Americans don't know about Roe V Wade is, it was
never about whether or not abortion was legal.
The pro-lifers tried getting the movie killed because it would show
the truth. The reason for the case was the fact that one certain
prosecutor was pressured into convicting a doctor for murder after
performing an abortion. Then, several more prosecutors followed suit.
It got to the point that real doctors were scared of performing
abortions that they refused to. Even though the act was legal.
Because of that, Jane Roe, among others, sought out persons in med
schools who would perform the abortion. While the case was being
heard in Supreme Court, Jane Roe died from complications. The attorney
wanted to drop the case because of that.
"Don't you think there are other women in the same condition now who
would benefit from this case?"
The case continued and the court ruled in favor of Roe. Thusly,
putting an end to illegal prosecutions.
If McCain wants the ruling overturned, then he truly does not
understand the case at all. He may be a hotheaded asshole, but I would
prefer McCain to either Clinton or Obama.
Personally, I would prefer Huckaby.
Bob Vogel
> When Dogs Run Free wrote:
>
> > In article <zMmdnWYsMr-xpKPVnZ2dnUVZ_rfin...@earthlink.com>, Rudy
> > Canoza at pi...@thedismalscience.noot says...
> >> Branson Hunter wrote:
> >>> [bullshit]
> >> Bwanson is a low-achieving, badly educated leftwing malcontent. He's a
> >> marginal; a null; a fuck. He hates achievers.
>
> > Another fine rebuttal to the argument
>
> bwanson spewed his usual malcontent's
> whine.
He made many statements of fact, and you didn't challenge them.
Your response was, well, whiney spew with a side of ad-hominem.
I half-expected to see a post saying that McCain was programmed by the
communists when he was at the Hanoi Hilton to betray his country when
he takes office, a la the Manchurian Candidate, which is the kind of
charge that nutjobs like Ann Coulter are leveling at Obama.
But I didn't, so I find no problem with what bwanson's post.
Branson Hunter
> On May 29, 9:50 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote:
>
> > >> Bwanson is a low-achieving, badly educated leftwing malcontent. He's a
> > >> marginal; a null; a fuck. He hates achievers.
Bob Vogel wrote (reformatted for easy reading:
> > > Another fine rebuttal to the argument. He made many statements of fact, and you didn't challenge them. Your > > > response was, well, whiney spew with a side of ad-hominem.
> > > But I didn't, so I find no problem with what bwanson's post.
Bob, Rudy Canoza is one of the biggest Usenet trolls of all times. He
a guy with a hugh inferiority complex. At 155 pounds and 59 years old,
he's also one of the biggest littlest bullie-cowards in the
newsgroups. He's a anarchist purist-Libertarian who believes
government serves no purpose. All that know him know this. Rudy Canoza
has quite a long list of alias names -- and forged posts. Following is
an (incomplete) list of bogus names:
Jonathan Balll
R W Emerson
Citizen
Benfez
Wilson Woods
Radical Moderate
Bingo
Edward
George
Bill
Fred
Mystery Poster
Merlin the dog
Bob the dog
sil @ onairos.com
elvira
Dieter
"Dieter d.Schmidt
prickerbush
Abner Hale
Roger Whitaker
Fucktard
Apoo
Ted Bell
notgen @ yahoo.com
Jay Santos
mortons.steakho
Rudy Canoza
Trappist
sb29
Leif Erikson
S. Maizlich
SlipperySlope
Eden
Sylvia Stevens
dh@
chico chupacabra
----
Kent Wills
wrote:
>On Wed, 28 May 2008 10:11:06 -0700 (PDT), Branson Hunter
><bh2...@netzero.net> wrote:
>
>>Before anyone rushes to vote for John McCain out of anger, whether you
>>are an Independent or a Democrat, read this first. I know many of us
>>are getting frustrated over the battle between Obama and Clinton, but
>>voting for McCain will be the ultimate disaster. Not only will we get
>>a third term Bush, but it could also be worse. Here are the 10 things
>>you should know about John McCain:
>>
>>goto -- http://desertbrat.net/node/23
>
>
>What McCain and most Americans don't know about Roe V Wade is, it was
>never about whether or not abortion was legal.
At the time, it was illegal.
>
>The pro-lifers tried getting the movie killed because it would show
>the truth. The reason for the case was the fact that one certain
>prosecutor was pressured into convicting a doctor for murder after
>performing an abortion. Then, several more prosecutors followed suit.
>It got to the point that real doctors were scared of performing
>abortions that they refused to. Even though the act was legal.
No, it wasn't.
>
>Because of that, Jane Roe, among others, sought out persons in med
>schools who would perform the abortion. While the case was being
>heard in Supreme Court, Jane Roe died from complications. The attorney
>wanted to drop the case because of that.
Wrong. Norma "Jane Roe" McCorvey is still alive.
>"Don't you think there are other women in the same condition now who
>would benefit from this case?"
>The case continued and the court ruled in favor of Roe. Thusly,
>putting an end to illegal prosecutions.
>
>If McCain wants the ruling overturned, then he truly does not
>understand the case at all. He may be a hotheaded asshole, but I would
>prefer McCain to either Clinton or Obama.
>
>Personally, I would prefer Huckaby.
>
Personally, I think you should do some fact checking before you
post.
--
A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting.
Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Branson Hunter
> richard wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 May 2008 10:11:06 -0700 (PDT), Branson Hunter
> > <bh2...@netzero.net> wrote:
>
> >> Before anyone rushes to vote for John McCain out of anger, whether you
> >> are an Independent or a Democrat, read this first. I know many of us
> >> are getting frustrated over the battle between Obama and Clinton, but
> >> voting for McCain will be the ultimate disaster. Not only will we get
> >> a third term Bush, but it could also be worse. Here are the 10 things
> >> you should know about John McCain:
>
>
> > What McCain and most Americans don't know about Roe V Wade is, it was
> > never about whether or not abortion was legal.
>
> > The pro-lifers tried getting the movie killed because it would show
> > the truth. The reason for the case was the fact that one certain
> > prosecutor was pressured into convicting a doctor for murder after
> > performing an abortion. Then, several more prosecutors followed suit.
> > It got to the point that real doctors were scared of performing
> > abortions that they refused to. Even though the act was legal.
>
> > Because of that, Jane Roe, among others, sought out persons in med
> > schools who would perform the abortion. While the case was being
> > heard in Supreme Court, Jane Roe died from complications. The attorney
> > wanted to drop the case because of that.
> > "Don't you think there are other women in the same condition now who
> > would benefit from this case?"
> > The case continued and the court ruled in favor of Roe. Thusly,
> > putting an end to illegal prosecutions.
>
> McCorvey, is alive and well and living near Dallas. She is now
> fervently anti-abortion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_McCorvey
>
> Just how fucking stupid are you trying to be, anyway? I can tell you
> that you're succeeding.- Hide quoted text -
Rudy is a fatous political idiot.
Branson
When Dogs Run Free
Canoza at pi...@thedismalscience.noot says...
> When Dogs Run Free wrote:
> whine.
>
He posted a link about John McCain. But you are so obsessed with
Branson, I guess you missed it.
Or you are a liar.
richard
<pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote:
>You are *COMPLETELY* full of shit. "Jane Roe", whose real name is Norma
>McCorvey, is alive and well and living near Dallas. She is now
>fervently anti-abortion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_McCorvey
>
>
First, the wikipedia is not factual. It is written by wannabes,
Ms. McCovey proclaimed herself as "Jane Roe" although the real "Jane
Roe" was never publicly identified.
Then, the wikipedia says the supreme court ruled abortion is a
constitutional right. This is bullshit. The court said no such thing.
The court merely said that the texas law was unconstitutional.
In the movie version, some things may have been changed but it still
showed the facts surrounding the case.
Then McCain wants to have the ruling overturned? Then who would
perform any medical surgery in fear of being prosecuted for doing so?
Thank God the President of the United States can't act on his own.
Kent Wills
wrote:
[...]
>First, the wikipedia is not factual. It is written by wannabes,
It's not the *best* source one can cite, but in this case, it's
accurate. Norma is alive and well.
>Ms. McCovey proclaimed herself as "Jane Roe" although the real "Jane
>Roe" was never publicly identified.
When Norma McCorvey identified herself as Jane Roe, it means Jane
Roe was publicly identified. To the best of my knowledge, no one has
come forward to challenge her claim.
If you know of a cite where someone has, please present it. I'd
like to examine it.
>Then, the wikipedia says the supreme court ruled abortion is a
>constitutional right. This is bullshit. The court said no such thing.
>The court merely said that the texas law was unconstitutional.
Which makes the previously illegal action Constitutional. SCOTUS
can only rule on Constitutional matters.
>
>In the movie version, some things may have been changed but it still
>showed the facts surrounding the case.
If it claimed Norma died, it can't be too accurate.
>
>Then McCain wants to have the ruling overturned?
Many people do.
>Then who would
>perform any medical surgery in fear of being prosecuted for doing so?
It's foolish to suggest that a surgeon, performing something
like a tonsillectomy would risk a conviction for doing so.
>
>Thank God the President of the United States can't act on his own.
He's not able to over turn a SOCTUS ruling, at least.
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Branson Hunter
> hope to be. You're an illiterate marginal. You can't spell, you can't
> write, you can't engage in abstract thinking - you're a marginal across
> the board.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oh, and I thought this was about John McCain and his parallel
political views to President Bush. The Ten Things You Should Know
About John McCain pretty much duct tapes McCain to a Bush third term.
If McCain's record doesn't speak for itself, let get it out here.
Otherwise, you're making a troll ass of yourself.
Branson Hunter
> about me as your only comment in response to my setting that fuckwit
> "richard" straight, bwannie, you illiterate marginal? The stupid
> fuckwit "richard" lied and said "Jane Roe" had died of "complications",
> and I set the fuckwit straight. How does that make me a "political
> idiot", bwannie? How is your writing that I'm a "political idiot" keep
> the focus on John McCain and his views, bwannie?
>
> YOU are the idiot, bwannie, and not just about politics. You really are
> an overwrought, illiterate marginal. Your histrionics give you away as
> a dope.- Hide quoted text -
You're a political idiot because you stray from issue; are a infamous
newsgroup troll; avoided what this thread is all about -- John McCain
and his parallel political views to Bush; your inferiority complex
manifested through your garbage mouth; your self-programmed political
stupidity; your antisocial sickness, misogyny; your abject
misanthropic rants; the overpowering homophobia you so love to
demonstrate; and much, much more.
Branson Hunter
> You're a leftwing extremist, and it's all emotion - no knowledge or
> theory. You're an idiot across the board, but mostly we see that you're
> a political idiot because you run your mouth, ignorantly, about politics.
>
> The biggest reason you're an idiot, bwannie, is because you represent
> yourself as something other than what you really are. You're a marginal
> - a low-achieving marginal - but you try to pass yourself off as a
> "professional researcher" (that one was the most comical), a country
> squire, a political analyst. You're none of those - you're a
> politically naive marginal.
Do you charge for personal consultations?
Branson
Bob Vogel
>
> He didn't make a single statement of fact, you stupid douchebag. He
> posted a link to a partisan web site. What the fuck is wrong with you?
I think my one weakness in life is giving trolls like you the time of
day.
Sounds like you have a dosage problem, might want to see your doctor
about that.
Rudy Canoza
> On May 29, 2:37 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote:
>
>
>
> > He didn't make a single statement of fact, you stupid douchebag. He
> > posted a link to a partisan web site. What the fuck is wrong with you?
>
> I think my one weakness in life is giving trolls like you the time of
> day.
No, your weakness is your inability to read for comprehension.
Look again, douchebag - he didn't make a single statement of fact. He
offered some overwrought juvenile opinion, and a web link.
Bob Vogel
>
> Look again, douchebag - he didn't make a single statement of fact. He
> offered some overwrought juvenile opinion, and a web link.
You look again, you concrete-bound little punk. The web link
effectively substitutes for the statements of fact of which it is your
job to challenge.
And I fail to see what it is about this:
"Before anyone rushes to vote for John McCain out of anger, whether
you
are an Independent or a Democrat, read this first. I know many of us
are getting frustrated over the battle between Obama and Clinton, but
voting for McCain will be the ultimate disaster. Not only will we get
a third term Bush, but it could also be worse. Here are the 10 things
you should know about John McCain: "
that is so juvenile.
Please get a clue.
Poetic Justice
> On May 29, 2:37 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote:
>
>> He didn't make a single statement of fact, you stupid douchebag. He
>> posted a link to a partisan web site. What the fuck is wrong with you?
>
Schizophrenia is truly an entertaining disability, it's almost as if he
really thinks there is another person out here responding to him.... I
can't wait to see what he call himself/their self next.
Rudy Canoza
> On Jun 2, 6:14 pm, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Look again, douchebag - he didn't make a single statement of fact. He
> > offered some overwrought juvenile opinion, and a web link.
>
> You look again, you concrete-bound little punk. The web link
> effectively substitutes for the statements of fact of which it is your
> job to challenge.
We're talking about the snarky little fuck Bwanson's post, you stupid
shitbag, not the link. You said his *post* had "statements of fact",
and it did not.
As to that web site: about 50% extremist opinion and 45% innuendo
based on 5% of carefully selected and misinterpreted factlettes.
Example: "The Children's Defense Fund rated McCain as the worst
senator in Congress for children." Big fucking deal. I suppose it's
a "fact" - a factlette - that the "Children's Defense Fund", some
partisan far-left bunch of self-styled do-gooders, made such a rating;
but their judgment is an *opinion*, not a fact. And it's an opinion
given and highlighted purely because McCain is the presumptive
Republican nominee.
All the other "facts" - factlettes - on that page are of the same low
importance and shitty quality.
> And I fail to see what it is about this:
>
> "Before anyone rushes to vote for John McCain out of anger, whether
> you are an Independent or a Democrat, read this first. I know many of us
> are getting frustrated over the battle between Obama and Clinton, but
> voting for McCain will be the ultimate disaster. Not only will we get
> a third term Bush, but it could also be worse. Here are the 10 things
> you should know about John McCain: "
>
> that is so juvenile.
Bwanson is always juvenile. He's a naive, politically unsophisticated
and ignorant twit. The fact that he would link that horseshit page is
proof.
You're rapidly revealing yourself to be just as bad.
ne...@millions.com
<notg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jun 2, 7:16 pm, Bob Vogel <bobvogel2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 6:14 pm, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Look again, douchebag - he didn't make a single statement of fact. He
>> > offered some overwrought juvenile opinion, and a web link.
>>
>> You look again, you concrete-bound little punk. The web link
>> effectively substitutes for the statements of fact of which it is your
>> job to challenge.
>
>We're talking about the snarky little fuck Bwanson's post, you stupid
>shitbag, not the link. You said his *post* had "statements of fact",
>and it did not.
>
>As to that web site: about 50% extremist opinion and 45% innuendo
>based on 5% of carefully selected and misinterpreted factlettes.
>Example: "The Children's Defense Fund rated McCain as the worst
>senator in Congress for children." Big fucking deal. I suppose it's
>a "fact" - a factlette - that the "Children's Defense Fund", some
>partisan far-left bunch of self-styled do-gooders, made such a rating;
>but their judgment is an *opinion*, not a fact. And it's an opinion
>given and highlighted purely because McCain is the presumptive
>Republican nominee.
>
>All the other "facts" - factlettes - on that page are of the same low
>importance and shitty quality.
stuff clipped
Rudy, remember Jafo? He often used the word factoid to give the
correct flavor of someone claiming to post facts and truths.
DCI
Rudy Canoza
Sure I do. I was just talking about him with my wife yesterday.
> He often used the word factoid to give the
> correct flavor of someone claiming to post facts and truths.
I don't specifically remember him using it, but I'm familiar with the
word. To me, it doesn't have quite the derision quotient I want to
achieve with "factlette". Factoid seems to suggest a fact that might
be somewhat small and dry, but not inherently unimportant. It could
be a fact that is very important in one context, not so important in
another.
A factlette, on the other hand, is something that may be trivially
true, but is never important; it's light and fluffy. The fact the
"Children's Defense Fund", whoever the fuck those whiners are, labeled
McCain the "worse senator in Congress for children" may be technically
true - that is, they perhaps did issue such a rating - but it's
unimportant crap.
Just like Bwanson's unsubstantiated opinions. Remember he reflexively
used to call Jafo a "neo-con"? Jafo was conservative, but he was
anything /BUT/ a neo-conservative. Bwanson is just swearing when he
calls anyone a "neo-con"; he doesn't even know what neo-conservatism
is.
Bwanson's entire existence is a factlette - he exists, but he's
trivial; unimportant lightweight fluff. And he's a political - in
fact, a general purpose - idiot.
Governor Swill
>> He made many statements of fact, and you didn't challenge them.
>
>posted a link to a partisan web site. What the fuck is wrong with you?
It's not posted in this thread.
Swill
--
Shift Happens
"Welcome to reality. Enjoy your visit.
Slow thinkers keep right." - Peter Principle
(US)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljbI-363A2Q&feature=related
http://preview.tinyurl.com/33cvso
(UK)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeoKQbT8BKs&feature=related
http://preview.tinyurl.com/6nd7kr
Governor Swill
>> This is Rudy Canoza's brain on drugs:
>>>> He made many statements of fact, and you didn't challenge them.
>>> He didn't make a single statement of fact, you stupid douchebag. He
>>> posted a link to a partisan web site. What the fuck is wrong with you?
>>
>> It's not posted in this thread.
>
>this thread? Could you please tell me where it (whatever the fuck is
>wrong with Bob) is posted, please?
You wrote: "He posted a link to a partisan web site." I was just
asking for that link.
Swill
--
Gobama! Gobama! Gobama! Gobama!
Governor Swill
>thread subject; it originally was "10 things you should know about John
>McCain". I'm sure you can find it if you look.
I don't think so. The traffic is high enough in here to take up too
much time as it is. Since I still have a full time job, I don't have
time to search google looking for it.
Branson doesn't post from this group and somebody else crossposted the
thread to here some time after the link had been edited out of
responding posts so it never made it here.
Governor Swill
>The original post by bwanson was posted to the same five newsgroups as
>your post to which I am replying right now, and I gave you the subject
>line of his post, so you should be able to find his original post
>without a massive Google effort. You're using Forte Agent to post and,
>presumably, read Usenet posts, and I believe FA has the ability to
>organize a thread hierarchically. Thunderbird does, and I can easily
>see bwanson's post at the top of *this* thread, even though I changed
>the subject line.
>
>Here is the message ID of bwanson's post:
><3386b656-1742-4b69...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
Translation: "I know where the link is but I don't want you to
actually see it."
Fuck off, pork chop.
Branson Hunter
> Branson Hunter wrote:
> grandmother's five acres, renter.
Another one liner from a rightrwing inbred, homophobe, misogynist,
misanthropic Troll.