Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
##Maddow blasts erroneous Benghazi reporting: ‘ABC blew it’
24 views
Skip to first unread message
Zepp
May 16, 2013, 10:40:57 AM5/16/13
to
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/16/maddow-blasts-erroneous-benghazi-
reporting-abc-blew-it/
#Maddow blasts erroneous Benghazi reporting: ‘ABC blew it’
By David Ferguson
Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:56 EDT
Skeptical Maddow is skeptical
Print Friendly and PDF
Email this page
On Wednesday night’s edition of “The Rachel Maddow Show,” host Rachel
Maddow tore into TV network ABC for its recent reporting on the Benghazi
attack and President Barack Obama’s administration’s response to the
tragedy.
Maddow opened the piece by discussing a McClatchy report that Ambassador
Chris Stevens had repeatedly turned down offers of increased security at
the consulate in Benghazi. No one is certain why, but Maddow said that
this is the only real scandal in the Benghazi attack.
“Could the attack have been prevented?” she asked. “Why wasn’t it
prevented? Why wasn’t there better security there? Why did those four
Americans die? That remains the big issue.”
Last Friday, however, reporter Jonathan Karl at ABC ran with an
anonymously sourced “scoop” in the form of a White House email chain
detailing the administration’s response to the crisis. If the ABC story
was true, the Republicans, who had been trying to make political hay of
the Benghazi attack, finally had an angle they could work.
According to ABC, the State Department (and therefore Hillary Clinton)
had desperately tried to micro-manage the talking points to be used about
the attack in order to shield the institution and its leadership from
criticism. The White House weighed on the State Department’s side, as
evidenced by emails first quoted in The Weekly Standard and then ABC.
“According to ABC News,” said Maddow, “the White House, in that email
that they quoted, clearly planned to massage the story about Benghazi at
the direction of the State Department.”
Then on Tuesday of this week, CNN’s Jake Tapper published the entirety of
the White House email, which showed ABC’s take on the story to be
completely false.
“That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong,” she explained. “ABC
blew it. Turns out they weren’t actually quoting White House emails at
all.”
--
Subscribe:
zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
zepps_news...@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:
zepps_essays...@yahoogroups.com
zepps_news-...@yahoogroups.com
Not dead, in jail or a slave? Thank a liberal!
reporting-abc-blew-it/
#Maddow blasts erroneous Benghazi reporting: ‘ABC blew it’
By David Ferguson
Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:56 EDT
Skeptical Maddow is skeptical
Print Friendly and PDF
Email this page
On Wednesday night’s edition of “The Rachel Maddow Show,” host Rachel
Maddow tore into TV network ABC for its recent reporting on the Benghazi
attack and President Barack Obama’s administration’s response to the
tragedy.
Maddow opened the piece by discussing a McClatchy report that Ambassador
Chris Stevens had repeatedly turned down offers of increased security at
the consulate in Benghazi. No one is certain why, but Maddow said that
this is the only real scandal in the Benghazi attack.
“Could the attack have been prevented?” she asked. “Why wasn’t it
prevented? Why wasn’t there better security there? Why did those four
Americans die? That remains the big issue.”
Last Friday, however, reporter Jonathan Karl at ABC ran with an
anonymously sourced “scoop” in the form of a White House email chain
detailing the administration’s response to the crisis. If the ABC story
was true, the Republicans, who had been trying to make political hay of
the Benghazi attack, finally had an angle they could work.
According to ABC, the State Department (and therefore Hillary Clinton)
had desperately tried to micro-manage the talking points to be used about
the attack in order to shield the institution and its leadership from
criticism. The White House weighed on the State Department’s side, as
evidenced by emails first quoted in The Weekly Standard and then ABC.
“According to ABC News,” said Maddow, “the White House, in that email
that they quoted, clearly planned to massage the story about Benghazi at
the direction of the State Department.”
Then on Tuesday of this week, CNN’s Jake Tapper published the entirety of
the White House email, which showed ABC’s take on the story to be
completely false.
“That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong,” she explained. “ABC
blew it. Turns out they weren’t actually quoting White House emails at
all.”
--
Subscribe:
zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
zepps_news...@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:
zepps_essays...@yahoogroups.com
zepps_news-...@yahoogroups.com
Not dead, in jail or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Steve
May 16, 2013, 12:09:30 PM5/16/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 14:40:57 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/16/maddow-blasts-erroneous-benghazi-
>reporting-abc-blew-it/
>
>#Maddow
Maddow who?
>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/16/maddow-blasts-erroneous-benghazi-
>reporting-abc-blew-it/
>
>#Maddow
Maddow who?
Transition Zone
May 16, 2013, 4:35:36 PM5/16/13
to
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
RogerN
May 16, 2013, 5:42:53 PM5/16/13
to
"Transition Zone" wrote in message
news:b41731da-22f1-4f4d...@d6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
><snip>
the stupidest thing to ever breathe air but he depends on your kind of
stupid to back him no matter what!
RogerN
news:b41731da-22f1-4f4d...@d6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
><snip>
> > “ That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong, ” she
>explained. “ ABC
>> blew it. Turns out they weren’t actually quoting White House emails at
> >all. ”
>
>I think its all just throwing right-wing media some crumbs.
Of course you think that, that's why Obama loves you. Obama thinks you are
>explained. “ ABC
>> blew it. Turns out they weren’t actually quoting White House emails at
> >all. ”
>
>I think its all just throwing right-wing media some crumbs.
the stupidest thing to ever breathe air but he depends on your kind of
stupid to back him no matter what!
RogerN
Zepp
May 16, 2013, 5:45:50 PM5/16/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:50:06 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:09:30 -0400, In article
> <8f0ap8p5iirtb7d71...@4ax.com>, steven...@yahooooo.com
> says...
>
>> Maddow who?
>
> MaddCow! Or is it MadBull?
In any event, you're scared to death of her.
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:09:30 -0400, In article
> <8f0ap8p5iirtb7d71...@4ax.com>, steven...@yahooooo.com
> says...
>
>> Maddow who?
>
> MaddCow! Or is it MadBull?
In any event, you're scared to death of her.
Ed Huntress
May 16, 2013, 5:51:22 PM5/16/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:42:53 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
wrote:
Roger, you smoke-blower, what he said is exactly right. They compared
what ABC said with the actual memo. It was vastly different.
And it's true that ABC would like to get some of that FOX News market.
There's nowhere else for them to go. They can't get anywhere by
dividing up the mass market with NBC and CBS anymore, so they have to
go after a niche -- one that has only one competitor. Look at the
Nielson ratings and you'll see for yourself.
--
Ed Huntress
>
wrote:
what ABC said with the actual memo. It was vastly different.
And it's true that ABC would like to get some of that FOX News market.
There's nowhere else for them to go. They can't get anywhere by
dividing up the mass market with NBC and CBS anymore, so they have to
go after a niche -- one that has only one competitor. Look at the
Nielson ratings and you'll see for yourself.
--
Ed Huntress
>
Steve
May 16, 2013, 6:06:12 PM5/16/13
to
"Booze and cigs were the only drugs that caused me any problems
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson Sep 19 1997
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/d51f705639486c96?hl=en&
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
RogerN
May 16, 2013, 7:46:07 PM5/16/13
to
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news:31lap81pavcjdle9p...@4ax.com...
Fox news market? People that prefer news over lies and spin? People that
prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
against the will of the people. Ted Kennedy got replaced by a Republican
running to stop Obamacare. Obama had full majority until HE screwed it up
in 2010 (or before), still never passed a budget. Obama threw Democrats
under the bus and still the morons worship the liar. He had weapons sold
illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution. Sensing
tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make". They
search out and find a video to blame the attacks on, even though they have
word it's a terrorist attack. Obama wants to fool his stupid followers into
thinking he's effective on terrorism so he lies about the terrorist attack.
Richard Nixon was removed for far less than what Obama has gotten away with.
Obama says he's clueless to all these groups acting illegally for Obama's
benefit. What kind of a moron would believe this chief of liars? No one in
their right mind!
Ed, what would have you said if you heard the IRS was targeting the Tea
Party a couple of months ago? You would have denied it. But now the IRS
comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
or patriotic.
Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
attempted abortion. The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
they set themselves.
RogerN
news:31lap81pavcjdle9p...@4ax.com...
prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
against the will of the people. Ted Kennedy got replaced by a Republican
running to stop Obamacare. Obama had full majority until HE screwed it up
in 2010 (or before), still never passed a budget. Obama threw Democrats
under the bus and still the morons worship the liar. He had weapons sold
illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution. Sensing
tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make". They
search out and find a video to blame the attacks on, even though they have
word it's a terrorist attack. Obama wants to fool his stupid followers into
thinking he's effective on terrorism so he lies about the terrorist attack.
Richard Nixon was removed for far less than what Obama has gotten away with.
Obama says he's clueless to all these groups acting illegally for Obama's
benefit. What kind of a moron would believe this chief of liars? No one in
their right mind!
Ed, what would have you said if you heard the IRS was targeting the Tea
Party a couple of months ago? You would have denied it. But now the IRS
comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
or patriotic.
Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
attempted abortion. The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
they set themselves.
RogerN
Zepp
May 16, 2013, 9:14:20 PM5/16/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 22:42:41 +0000, BeeSting Alergy wrote:
> AlleyCat wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:09:30 -0400, In article
>> <8f0ap8p5iirtb7d71...@4ax.com>, steven...@yahooooo.com
>> says...
>>
>>
>> > Maddow who?
>>
>> MaddCow! Or is it MadBull?
>
> MSNBC has taken a nose dive. This is not a good thing during MAY SWEEPS.
> AlleyCat wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:09:30 -0400, In article
>> <8f0ap8p5iirtb7d71...@4ax.com>, steven...@yahooooo.com
>> says...
>>
>>
>> > Maddow who?
>>
>> MaddCow! Or is it MadBull?
>
Gosh, you know the May ratings and it's still two weeks before the end of
the month.
Truly, you are a marvel.
>
> There is more than a good chance that CNN will beat MSNBC during the
> month of May (LAST SWEEPS OF THE SEASON).
>
> MaddCow (I like that) is down 36% & there will be no room for Chris
> Hayes come July (his numbers are horrendous).
Zepp
May 16, 2013, 9:31:01 PM5/16/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 17:19:28 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 21:45:50 +0000 (UTC), In article
> <kn3k2e$kms$18@dont- email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
> I can't watch someone that always talks as though it's telling teacher
> on me.
> Her and "Tingles" Chrissy Matthews. They're both nerds that happen to
> read well. Chrissy is just a fucking tattletale like that kid you always
> bullied and gave atomic wedgies to. He's a pussy.
Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
afraid of her.
We're all very impressed.
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 21:45:50 +0000 (UTC), In article
> <kn3k2e$kms$18@dont- email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
>
>> In any event, you're scared to death of her.
>
> LOL WTF? Why should I be scared of a fucking Entertainment puppet?
>> In any event, you're scared to death of her.
>
> I can't watch someone that always talks as though it's telling teacher
> on me.
> Her and "Tingles" Chrissy Matthews. They're both nerds that happen to
> read well. Chrissy is just a fucking tattletale like that kid you always
> bullied and gave atomic wedgies to. He's a pussy.
Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
afraid of her.
We're all very impressed.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
pyjamarama
May 17, 2013, 12:44:44 AM5/17/13
to
On Thursday, May 16, 2013 10:40:57 AM UTC-4, Zepp wrote:
> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/16/maddow-blasts-erroneous-benghazi-
>
>
>
> “That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong,” she explained. “ABC
>
> blew it. Turns out they weren’t actually quoting White House emails at
>
> all.”
Well, well, well...turns out Maddow DOES suck cock....
Almost as good as you do, Porky.
Glugg, glugg...
Anything to stay in the good graces of your totalitarian masters, eh?
Don't you have some family members to report for thoughts subversive to the state, or something?
> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/16/maddow-blasts-erroneous-benghazi-
>
>
>
> “That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong,” she explained. “ABC
>
> blew it. Turns out they weren’t actually quoting White House emails at
>
> all.”
Almost as good as you do, Porky.
Glugg, glugg...
Anything to stay in the good graces of your totalitarian masters, eh?
Don't you have some family members to report for thoughts subversive to the state, or something?
Tom Gardner
May 17, 2013, 12:54:48 AM5/17/13
to
let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
what they are told to see.
Zepp
May 17, 2013, 1:19:31 AM5/17/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 22:44:33 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC), In article
> <kn418k$b41$13@dont- email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
> chest is probably twice your puny little nerd's size.
Got man boobs, do you?
>
> "We're all very impressed".
>
> Nerdy nerd reply. No one's trying to impress you, your Royal Gayness.
>
> I am what I am, and that's about twice what you are. Oh yeah... I'm not
> fat,
> dork.
Yes, you probably are.
Speaking of which, your royal dorkiness, it just came to light that ABC
was fed those bullshit memo quotes by Capitol Hill GOP staffers. Thus
destroying what little cred the GOP in the House ever had.
>
> You going to tell me why I'm afraid of someone that makes me cringe at
> the sight and sound of him? Rachel Madcow. Why am I afraid of you? I
> will be cowering under my bed until you tell me.
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC), In article
> <kn418k$b41$13@dont- email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
>
>
>> Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
>> afraid of her.
>
>> We're all very impressed.
>
> LOL... just another little nerd response to try and marginalize me. My
>
>> Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
>> afraid of her.
>
>> We're all very impressed.
>
> chest is probably twice your puny little nerd's size.
Got man boobs, do you?
>
> "We're all very impressed".
>
> Nerdy nerd reply. No one's trying to impress you, your Royal Gayness.
>
> I am what I am, and that's about twice what you are. Oh yeah... I'm not
> fat,
> dork.
Yes, you probably are.
Speaking of which, your royal dorkiness, it just came to light that ABC
was fed those bullshit memo quotes by Capitol Hill GOP staffers. Thus
destroying what little cred the GOP in the House ever had.
>
> You going to tell me why I'm afraid of someone that makes me cringe at
> the sight and sound of him? Rachel Madcow. Why am I afraid of you? I
> will be cowering under my bed until you tell me.
Zepp
May 17, 2013, 1:20:53 AM5/17/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 23:18:21 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 21:45:50 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>
>> In any event, you're scared to death of her.
>
> Really? How?
Well, opinions vary. Some people think it's because you're a stupid,
servile fascist, and strong women scare you.
I think it's because she really shows up your utter intellectual
inadequacy.
It could be both, of course.
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 21:45:50 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>
>> In any event, you're scared to death of her.
>
Well, opinions vary. Some people think it's because you're a stupid,
servile fascist, and strong women scare you.
I think it's because she really shows up your utter intellectual
inadequacy.
It could be both, of course.
Zepp
May 17, 2013, 1:23:13 AM5/17/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 00:54:48 -0400, Tom Gardner wrote:
> On 5/16/2013 7:46 PM, RogerN wrote:
>> "Ed Huntress" wrote in message
>> news:31lap81pavcjdle9p...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:42:53 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Transition Zone" wrote in message
>>>> news:b41731da-22f1-4f4d-84fc-
> On 5/16/2013 7:46 PM, RogerN wrote:
>> "Ed Huntress" wrote in message
>> news:31lap81pavcjdle9p...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:42:53 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Transition Zone" wrote in message
a4d597...@d6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Richard
May 17, 2013, 4:24:47 AM5/17/13
to
On 5/16/2013 11:54 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:
> Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER let
> anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and deflect
> anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on Obama.
> Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and NOTHING
> would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get you far with
> the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why bother bantering
> with them, they are too far gone to see anything but what they are told
> to see.
Not even when he got his head handed to him on a plate yesterday
> Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER let
> anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and deflect
> anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on Obama.
> Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and NOTHING
> would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get you far with
> the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why bother bantering
> with them, they are too far gone to see anything but what they are told
> to see.
in regards to exceeded his power when he bypassed Senate to appoint
NRLB members.
Oh bloody oops...
Steve
May 17, 2013, 5:30:04 AM5/17/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 22:44:33 -0500, AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC), In article <kn418k$b41$13@dont-
>email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
>
>
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC), In article <kn418k$b41$13@dont-
>email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
>
>
>> Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
>> afraid of her.
>
>> We're all very impressed.
>
>> afraid of her.
>
>> We're all very impressed.
>
>LOL... just another little nerd response to try and marginalize me. My chest
>is probably twice your puny little nerd's size.
Zepp is short and weigh over 300 lbs. He probably has to sit to pee.
>is probably twice your puny little nerd's size.
>"We're all very impressed".
>
>Nerdy nerd reply. No one's trying to impress you, your Royal Gayness.
>
>I am what I am, and that's about twice what you are. Oh yeah... I'm not fat,
>dork.
>
Steve
May 17, 2013, 5:30:04 AM5/17/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:19:31 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 May 2013 22:44:33 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC), In article
>> <kn418k$b41$13@dont- email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
>>
>>
>>> Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
>>> afraid of her.
>>
>>> We're all very impressed.
>>
>> LOL... just another little nerd response to try and marginalize me. My
>> chest is probably twice your puny little nerd's size.
>
>Got man boobs, do you?
>>
>> "We're all very impressed".
>>
>> Nerdy nerd reply. No one's trying to impress you, your Royal Gayness.
>>
>> I am what I am, and that's about twice what you are. Oh yeah... I'm not
>> fat,
>> dork.
>
>Yes, you probably are.
>
>Speaking of which, your royal dorkiness, it just came to light that ABC
>was fed those bullshit memo quotes by Capitol Hill GOP staffers. Thus
>destroying what little cred the GOP in the House ever had.
>
It just came to light that Zepp makes up lies because he has no
>On Thu, 16 May 2013 22:44:33 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC), In article
>> <kn418k$b41$13@dont- email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
>>
>>
>>> Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
>>> afraid of her.
>>
>>> We're all very impressed.
>>
>> LOL... just another little nerd response to try and marginalize me. My
>> chest is probably twice your puny little nerd's size.
>
>Got man boobs, do you?
>>
>> "We're all very impressed".
>>
>> Nerdy nerd reply. No one's trying to impress you, your Royal Gayness.
>>
>> I am what I am, and that's about twice what you are. Oh yeah... I'm not
>> fat,
>> dork.
>
>Yes, you probably are.
>
>Speaking of which, your royal dorkiness, it just came to light that ABC
>was fed those bullshit memo quotes by Capitol Hill GOP staffers. Thus
>destroying what little cred the GOP in the House ever had.
>
facts..
--
Ignorance and irony from Zepp:
"farms were never subject to inheritance taxes. What sort of
moron are you? "
David (Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.california/msg/5c59cc2755acd39c?hl=en
trotsky
May 17, 2013, 7:05:45 AM5/17/13
to
On 5/16/13 5:42 PM, BeeSting Alergy wrote:
> AlleyCat wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:09:30 -0400, In article
>> <8f0ap8p5iirtb7d71...@4ax.com>,
>> steven...@yahooooo.com says...
>>
>>
>>> Maddow who?
>>
>> MaddCow! Or is it MadBull?
>
> MSNBC has taken a nose dive.
Compared to what? Perhaps you need to read my sig line.
> AlleyCat wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:09:30 -0400, In article
>> <8f0ap8p5iirtb7d71...@4ax.com>,
>> steven...@yahooooo.com says...
>>
>>
>>> Maddow who?
>>
>> MaddCow! Or is it MadBull?
>
> MSNBC has taken a nose dive.
--
Never post something on the internet unless you have a point of
reference. You will look like a moron otherwise.
Ed Huntress
May 17, 2013, 7:08:59 AM5/17/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 18:46:07 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
wrote:
No, the FOX News market is mostly rightists who like to hear stories
that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
> People that
>prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
>start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
Oh, here we go. You find out that you had your ass up in the air over
a phony "memo" that didn't say what you think it said, and now you're
going to use your ignorance of the memo's contents as a launching pad
for one of your tirades.
We're off to the races...
Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
You have a logic problem there, Roger. And it's far from being your
only one.
If you'd get your nose out of FOX News, you'd be a little less antic
and angry -- because you'd find out that FOX is full of crap.
>
>Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
>against the will of the people.
Nope. Every major provision of the ACA was APPROVED my large
majorities. But when you put all their favored ideas together, like
allowing young adults to continue longer on their families' plans, and
making insurance companies accept people regardless of preconditions,
and adopted the old Republica idea of mandates in universal health
care with no "freeloaders," as even Newt Gingrich and the Republican
leadership in the House promoted in the mid-'90s, and then ran it
through the FOX and Republican meat-grinder and labelled it
"Obamacare," they got their panties in a twist.
It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
>Ted Kennedy got replaced by a Republican
>running to stop Obamacare.
They already had it in Massachusetts, and they love it. It's called
"Romneycare" up there, but it's the same thing. So maybe your logic
problem is rearing its ugly little head again, eh?
Oh, BTW, they dumped that empty suit once they got a good look at him.
Didn't they let you know that he lost re-election on FOX? Do you know
who beat him? Or did you just forget?
> Obama had full majority until HE screwed it up
>in 2010 (or before), still never passed a budget.
Presidents don't "pass" budgets. And he submitted one every year.
> Obama threw Democrats
>under the bus and still the morons worship the liar.
Uh, I think you've got your "moron" gun aimed in the wrong direction.
>He had weapons sold
>illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
>justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution.
Have you read it yet? The last time we discussed this, you didn't show
any signs of knowing what's in it.
> Sensing
>tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
>during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
>Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make".
You got that story all wrong. You probably heard it on FOX. You really
need some fresh air, Roger.
> They
>search out and find a video to blame the attacks on, even though they have
>word it's a terrorist attack. Obama wants to fool his stupid followers into
>thinking he's effective on terrorism so he lies about the terrorist attack.
>Richard Nixon was removed for far less than what Obama has gotten away with.
>Obama says he's clueless to all these groups acting illegally for Obama's
>benefit. What kind of a moron would believe this chief of liars? No one in
>their right mind!
You have that story all wrong, too.
>
>Ed, what would have you said if you heard the IRS was targeting the Tea
>Party a couple of months ago? You would have denied it.
I would have demanded evidence before believing it. That's the
difference between us on these issues, Roger. You wouldn't have
required evidence. You would have believed it as soon as you heard
someone say it on FOX. Because you'll believe any lie, rumor,
innuendo, or assusation as long as it's a negative assertion about the
current administration. And that's most of what they do.
> But now the IRS
>comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
>or patriotic.
A few points here. First, they came out an admitted it. Second, the
Treasury department rejected the IRS's claims that they've fixed it.
Third, Holder's office is pursuing criminal investigations against the
IRS offices and employees that engaged in it.
Fourth, most 501(c)(4) organizations that have political origins are
crooked and fraudulent in their pursuit of tax-exempt status. Yes,
most of them. The Tea Party units under scrutiny deserved to be
audited. But two things were wrong.
First, they should never have been targeted in isolation. There are
501(c)(4) organizations supporting the Democrats that deserve the same
scrutiny and rejection of tax-exempt status.
Second, and this is the really egregious part IMO, they obviously were
trying to tie up the organizations with unneeded demands for
information. That's the part of it that makes it criminal. And those
people should be charged with election violations and whatever else
applies.
>
>Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
>He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
>attempted abortion.
Yeah, I heard something about it.
> The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
>they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
>they set themselves.
You have that wrong, too, Roger. That person, if he's real, is the
kind of illegal abortionist you're left with when you shut down the
legal ones. He's what you get when people like you get their way.
--
Ed Huntress
>
>RogerN
>
>
wrote:
that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
> People that
>prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
>start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
a phony "memo" that didn't say what you think it said, and now you're
going to use your ignorance of the memo's contents as a launching pad
for one of your tirades.
We're off to the races...
Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
You have a logic problem there, Roger. And it's far from being your
only one.
If you'd get your nose out of FOX News, you'd be a little less antic
and angry -- because you'd find out that FOX is full of crap.
>
>Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
>against the will of the people.
majorities. But when you put all their favored ideas together, like
allowing young adults to continue longer on their families' plans, and
making insurance companies accept people regardless of preconditions,
and adopted the old Republica idea of mandates in universal health
care with no "freeloaders," as even Newt Gingrich and the Republican
leadership in the House promoted in the mid-'90s, and then ran it
through the FOX and Republican meat-grinder and labelled it
"Obamacare," they got their panties in a twist.
It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
>Ted Kennedy got replaced by a Republican
>running to stop Obamacare.
"Romneycare" up there, but it's the same thing. So maybe your logic
problem is rearing its ugly little head again, eh?
Oh, BTW, they dumped that empty suit once they got a good look at him.
Didn't they let you know that he lost re-election on FOX? Do you know
who beat him? Or did you just forget?
> Obama had full majority until HE screwed it up
>in 2010 (or before), still never passed a budget.
> Obama threw Democrats
>under the bus and still the morons worship the liar.
>He had weapons sold
>illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
>justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution.
any signs of knowing what's in it.
> Sensing
>tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
>during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
>Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make".
need some fresh air, Roger.
> They
>search out and find a video to blame the attacks on, even though they have
>word it's a terrorist attack. Obama wants to fool his stupid followers into
>thinking he's effective on terrorism so he lies about the terrorist attack.
>Richard Nixon was removed for far less than what Obama has gotten away with.
>Obama says he's clueless to all these groups acting illegally for Obama's
>benefit. What kind of a moron would believe this chief of liars? No one in
>their right mind!
>
>Ed, what would have you said if you heard the IRS was targeting the Tea
>Party a couple of months ago? You would have denied it.
difference between us on these issues, Roger. You wouldn't have
required evidence. You would have believed it as soon as you heard
someone say it on FOX. Because you'll believe any lie, rumor,
innuendo, or assusation as long as it's a negative assertion about the
current administration. And that's most of what they do.
> But now the IRS
>comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
>or patriotic.
Treasury department rejected the IRS's claims that they've fixed it.
Third, Holder's office is pursuing criminal investigations against the
IRS offices and employees that engaged in it.
Fourth, most 501(c)(4) organizations that have political origins are
crooked and fraudulent in their pursuit of tax-exempt status. Yes,
most of them. The Tea Party units under scrutiny deserved to be
audited. But two things were wrong.
First, they should never have been targeted in isolation. There are
501(c)(4) organizations supporting the Democrats that deserve the same
scrutiny and rejection of tax-exempt status.
Second, and this is the really egregious part IMO, they obviously were
trying to tie up the organizations with unneeded demands for
information. That's the part of it that makes it criminal. And those
people should be charged with election violations and whatever else
applies.
>
>Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
>He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
>attempted abortion.
> The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
>they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
>they set themselves.
kind of illegal abortionist you're left with when you shut down the
legal ones. He's what you get when people like you get their way.
--
Ed Huntress
>
>RogerN
>
>
Zepp
May 17, 2013, 9:36:18 AM5/17/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:55:11 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:20:53 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>
>> >> In any event, you're scared to death of her.
>> >
>> > Really? How?
>>
>> Well, opinions vary.
>
> Your opinions... Rachel Madcow's asshole... pee-yew.
Well, at least now we know what part of Maddow you fixate on.
Were you toileted with barbed wire and electric cattle prods or something?
But back to the subject: now it's coming to light that those memo
"quotes" that ABC so thoroughly disgraced themselves with came from GOP
staffers on the Hill. Seems the evidence wasn't doing a very good job of
supporting the presence of a scandal, so your little gang of fascists
decided to just go ahead and create some evidence.
I bet you don't even think THAT'S a scandal.
> strong. Is she kind of manly looking? Were you adopted by lesbians?
>
> Strong women don't scare me. What about Rachel ManCow is so strong to
> you? Her bench press? Just because you're a 98lb. weakling and you want
> to be dominated by butch and her lover...
> smart? She a collich gradumate? Well, hails bales...
>
> You're a pathetic little brainwashed nerd that was probably molested by
> your father. Why else would you hate so much?
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:20:53 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>
>> >> In any event, you're scared to death of her.
>> >
>> > Really? How?
>>
>> Well, opinions vary.
>
Well, at least now we know what part of Maddow you fixate on.
Were you toileted with barbed wire and electric cattle prods or something?
But back to the subject: now it's coming to light that those memo
"quotes" that ABC so thoroughly disgraced themselves with came from GOP
staffers on the Hill. Seems the evidence wasn't doing a very good job of
supporting the presence of a scandal, so your little gang of fascists
decided to just go ahead and create some evidence.
I bet you don't even think THAT'S a scandal.
>
>> Some people think it's because you're a stupid, servile fascist, and
>> strong women scare you.
>
> Spoken like a true submissive little nerdy mama's boy. Is your mommy
>> Some people think it's because you're a stupid, servile fascist, and
>> strong women scare you.
>
> strong. Is she kind of manly looking? Were you adopted by lesbians?
>
> Strong women don't scare me. What about Rachel ManCow is so strong to
> you? Her bench press? Just because you're a 98lb. weakling and you want
> to be dominated by butch and her lover...
>
>> I think it's because she really shows up your utter intellectual
>> inadequacy.
>
> Yeah... how? She's just another whining libtardian. What makes her so
>> I think it's because she really shows up your utter intellectual
>> inadequacy.
>
> smart? She a collich gradumate? Well, hails bales...
>
>> It could be both, of course.
>
> yup... eye iz both stupid and stoopid.
>> It could be both, of course.
>
>
> You're a pathetic little brainwashed nerd that was probably molested by
> your father. Why else would you hate so much?
Reaper G
May 17, 2013, 9:51:18 AM5/17/13
to
On May 16, 3:42 pm, "BeeSting Alergy" <beest...@harvard.edu> wrote:
> AlleyCat wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:09:30 -0400, In article
> > <8f0ap8p5iirtb7d711bk1hanj2ptc9j...@4ax.com>,
> AlleyCat wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:09:30 -0400, In article
> > stevencan...@yahooooo.com says...
>
> > > Maddow who?
>
> > MaddCow! Or is it MadBull?
>
> > > Maddow who?
>
> > MaddCow! Or is it MadBull?
>
> MSNBC has taken a nose dive. This is not a good thing during MAY
> SWEEPS.
How do you take a nose dive when you're already crawling on hands and
> SWEEPS.
knees?
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Transition Zone
May 17, 2013, 4:48:09 PM5/17/13
to
On May 16, 5:42 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> "Transition Zone" wrote in message
>
> news:b41731da-22f1-4f4d...@d6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On May 16, 10:40 am, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> ><snip>
> > > “ That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong, ” she
> >explained. “ ABC
> >> blew it. Turns out they weren’t actually quoting White House emails at
> > >all. ”
>
> >I think its all just throwing right-wing media some crumbs.
>
> Of course you think that, that's why Obama loves you. Obama thinks you are
>the stupidest thing to ever breathe air but he depends on your kind
of
> stupid to back him no matter what!
I don't back Obama "no matter what". I want him to sack all pro-
> "Transition Zone" wrote in message
>
> news:b41731da-22f1-4f4d...@d6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On May 16, 10:40 am, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> ><snip>
> > > “ That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong, ” she
> >explained. “ ABC
> >> blew it. Turns out they weren’t actually quoting White House emails at
> > >all. ”
>
> >I think its all just throwing right-wing media some crumbs.
>
> Of course you think that, that's why Obama loves you. Obama thinks you are
>the stupidest thing to ever breathe air but he depends on your kind
of
> stupid to back him no matter what!
Guantanamo Bay people at the Justice Department and the Defense
Department, but he won't.
(for example)
Zepp
May 17, 2013, 5:04:17 PM5/17/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:50:52 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:30:04 -0400, Steve wrote:
>
>
>> Zepp is short and weigh over 300 lbs.
>
> Doesn't matter... he'll always be a little nerd, no matter how fat he
> gets.
>
> ;-)
I see you've found your level. It's Steve.
Good on you!
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:30:04 -0400, Steve wrote:
>
>
>> Zepp is short and weigh over 300 lbs.
>
> gets.
>
> ;-)
I see you've found your level. It's Steve.
Good on you!
Zepp
May 17, 2013, 5:05:59 PM5/17/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:47:36 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:36:18 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>
>> Well, at least now we know what part of Maddow you fixate on.
>
> Her ASSHOLE? LOL I'm not fixated on it, it just pops up on the screen
> when I change the channel to MSNBC. Oh, that's her face... coulda fooled
> me.
Thought you said you don't watch TV news there, sport...
> you to stop wetting the bed? You nerds... language all your own.
Toilet trained, bubbles. I take it this is an unfamiliar concept for you?
>
> Who rolled a +9 dork spell and summoned the beast and his quadruped?
> light" of ANYTHING about GOP staffers doing ANYTHING.
>
> (AP) Republicans press for more documents on Benghazi, Dems say case
> closed
>
> Yeah, they don't want the truth to get out.
> fascists in the HISTORY of fascism. Transparent government, my fucking
> browneye!
> memos or the like, then I'm all for calling it a scandal and putting
> people in jail. Unlike you hero worshipers, "we" put our criminals in
> jail and don't make excuses for them.
>
> Let's talk about ...
>
> You fuckers elected Marion Berry HOW many times? The Mayor is on the
> pipe! I can excuse an adulterer... at least Sanford wasn't committing
> adultery AND getting blowjobs in MY Whitehouse.
>
> Damn MAYOR is on the pipe.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3WILcavxQM
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTMif8cGlcE
>
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-f--
> vP_XSFcc/T4IF4BuBmUI/AAAAAAAAEPY/6cIIZC682TQ/s1600/marion-barry-is-a-
> crackhead.jpg
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:36:18 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>
>> Well, at least now we know what part of Maddow you fixate on.
>
> when I change the channel to MSNBC. Oh, that's her face... coulda fooled
> me.
Thought you said you don't watch TV news there, sport...
>
>> Were you toileted with barbed wire and electric cattle prods or
>> something?
>
> What the fuck is "toileted"? Is that something your mommy did to get
>> Were you toileted with barbed wire and electric cattle prods or
>> something?
>
> you to stop wetting the bed? You nerds... language all your own.
Toilet trained, bubbles. I take it this is an unfamiliar concept for you?
>
> Who rolled a +9 dork spell and summoned the beast and his quadruped?
>
>> But back to the subject: now it's coming to light that those memo
>> "quotes" that ABC so thoroughly disgraced themselves with came from GOP
>> staffers on the Hill. Seems the evidence wasn't doing a very good job
>> of
>
> Still no citing of names, places or automobiles. I saw no "coming to
>> But back to the subject: now it's coming to light that those memo
>> "quotes" that ABC so thoroughly disgraced themselves with came from GOP
>> staffers on the Hill. Seems the evidence wasn't doing a very good job
>> of
>
> light" of ANYTHING about GOP staffers doing ANYTHING.
>
> (AP) Republicans press for more documents on Benghazi, Dems say case
> closed
>
> Yeah, they don't want the truth to get out.
>
>> supporting the presence of a scandal, so your little gang of fascists
>> decided to just go ahead and create some evidence.
>
> OUR gang of fascists??? BWAHAHAHA Obama and his admin are THE biggest
>> supporting the presence of a scandal, so your little gang of fascists
>> decided to just go ahead and create some evidence.
>
> fascists in the HISTORY of fascism. Transparent government, my fucking
> browneye!
>
>> I bet you don't even think THAT'S a scandal.
>
> IF, and that's a big if... the GOP is proven to be doctoring emails,
>> I bet you don't even think THAT'S a scandal.
>
> memos or the like, then I'm all for calling it a scandal and putting
> people in jail. Unlike you hero worshipers, "we" put our criminals in
> jail and don't make excuses for them.
>
> Let's talk about ...
>
> You fuckers elected Marion Berry HOW many times? The Mayor is on the
> pipe! I can excuse an adulterer... at least Sanford wasn't committing
> adultery AND getting blowjobs in MY Whitehouse.
>
> Damn MAYOR is on the pipe.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3WILcavxQM
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTMif8cGlcE
>
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-f--
> vP_XSFcc/T4IF4BuBmUI/AAAAAAAAEPY/6cIIZC682TQ/s1600/marion-barry-is-a-
> crackhead.jpg
Message has been deleted
Steve
May 17, 2013, 5:28:21 PM5/17/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:50:52 -0500, AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:30:04 -0400, Steve wrote:
>
>
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:30:04 -0400, Steve wrote:
>
>
>> Zepp is short and weigh over 300 lbs.
>
>
>Doesn't matter... he'll always be a little nerd, no matter how fat he gets.
>
>;-)
I always imagined that a nerd was someone who had some useful skill
>
>;-)
set. Zepp can't even support himself.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
MattB .
May 17, 2013, 5:49:37 PM5/17/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 22:44:33 -0500, AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC), In article <kn418k$b41$13@dont-
>email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
>
>
>> Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
>> afraid of her.
>
>> We're all very impressed.
>
>LOL... just another little nerd response to try and marginalize me. My chest
>is probably twice your puny little nerd's size.
You seen any current pictures of him? He is way past obese. Then
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC), In article <kn418k$b41$13@dont-
>email.me>, de...@gone.com says...
>
>
>> Just keep puffing out your narrow white chest and telling us you aren't
>> afraid of her.
>
>> We're all very impressed.
>
>LOL... just another little nerd response to try and marginalize me. My chest
>is probably twice your puny little nerd's size.
again to keep in shape would take some personally responsibility and
effort. Something many liberals seem to lack.
I'm sure he blames conservatives that he can't see his toes while
standing as well as other parts of his body.
>
>"We're all very impressed".
>
>Nerdy nerd reply. No one's trying to impress you, your Royal Gayness.
>
>I am what I am, and that's about twice what you are. Oh yeah... I'm not fat,
>dork.
>
David R. Birch
May 17, 2013, 8:23:07 PM5/17/13
to
On 5/17/2013 6:08 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>> Fox news market? People that prefer news over lies and spin?
>
> No, the FOX News market is mostly rightists who like to hear stories
> that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
> so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
Pretty much like the other network's market, mostly leftists who like to
>> Fox news market? People that prefer news over lies and spin?
>
> No, the FOX News market is mostly rightists who like to hear stories
> that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
> so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
hear stories that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes
them feel so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>
>> People that
>> prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
>> start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>> It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
>
> Oh, here we go. You find out that you had your ass up in the air over
> a phony "memo" that didn't say what you think it said, and now you're
> going to use your ignorance of the memo's contents as a launching pad
> for one of your tirades.
>
> We're off to the races...
>
> Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
> you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
> they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
The problem is that none are truthful, they just lie about different
them feel so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>
>> People that
>> prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
>> start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>> It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
>
> Oh, here we go. You find out that you had your ass up in the air over
> a phony "memo" that didn't say what you think it said, and now you're
> going to use your ignorance of the memo's contents as a launching pad
> for one of your tirades.
>
> We're off to the races...
>
> Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
> you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
> they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
things. Or fail to cover news that isn't what their market wants to
hear. Read every word, believe every tenth.
>
> You have a logic problem there, Roger. And it's far from being your
> only one.
>
> If you'd get your nose out of FOX News, you'd be a little less antic
> and angry -- because you'd find out that FOX is full of crap.
>
>>
>> Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
>> against the will of the people.
>
> Nope. Every major provision of the ACA was APPROVED my large
> majorities. But when you put all their favored ideas together, like
> allowing young adults to continue longer on their families' plans, and
> making insurance companies accept people regardless of preconditions,
> and adopted the old Republica idea of mandates in universal health
> care with no "freeloaders," as even Newt Gingrich and the Republican
> leadership in the House promoted in the mid-'90s, and then ran it
> through the FOX and Republican meat-grinder and labelled it
> "Obamacare," they got their panties in a twist.
>
> It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
> Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
Rachel Maddow is on Fox? Or do they have to be on Fox to be a demagogue?
> You have a logic problem there, Roger. And it's far from being your
> only one.
>
> If you'd get your nose out of FOX News, you'd be a little less antic
> and angry -- because you'd find out that FOX is full of crap.
>
>>
>> Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
>> against the will of the people.
>
> Nope. Every major provision of the ACA was APPROVED my large
> majorities. But when you put all their favored ideas together, like
> allowing young adults to continue longer on their families' plans, and
> making insurance companies accept people regardless of preconditions,
> and adopted the old Republica idea of mandates in universal health
> care with no "freeloaders," as even Newt Gingrich and the Republican
> leadership in the House promoted in the mid-'90s, and then ran it
> through the FOX and Republican meat-grinder and labelled it
> "Obamacare," they got their panties in a twist.
>
> It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
> Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
> Presidents don't "pass" budgets. And he submitted one every year.
>
>> Obama threw Democrats
>> under the bus and still the morons worship the liar.
>
> Uh, I think you've got your "moron" gun aimed in the wrong direction.
>
>> He had weapons sold
>> illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
>> justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>> has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>> as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution.
>
> Have you read it yet? The last time we discussed this, you didn't show
> any signs of knowing what's in it.
Dunno about Roger, but I've read it and reread it. It now takes less
>> Obama threw Democrats
>> under the bus and still the morons worship the liar.
>
> Uh, I think you've got your "moron" gun aimed in the wrong direction.
>
>> He had weapons sold
>> illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
>> justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>> has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>> as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution.
>
> Have you read it yet? The last time we discussed this, you didn't show
> any signs of knowing what's in it.
time to read because I can skip the parts ignored by the Reps and Dems
and SCOTUS.
>> But now the IRS
>> comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
>> or patriotic.
>
> A few points here. First, they came out an admitted it. Second, the
> Treasury department rejected the IRS's claims that they've fixed it.
> Third, Holder's office is pursuing criminal investigations against the
> IRS offices and employees that engaged in it.
>
> Fourth, most 501(c)(4) organizations that have political origins are
> crooked and fraudulent in their pursuit of tax-exempt status. Yes,
> most of them. The Tea Party units under scrutiny deserved to be
> audited. But two things were wrong.
>
> First, they should never have been targeted in isolation. There are
> 501(c)(4) organizations supporting the Democrats that deserve the same
> scrutiny and rejection of tax-exempt status.
>
> Second, and this is the really egregious part IMO, they obviously were
> trying to tie up the organizations with unneeded demands for
> information. That's the part of it that makes it criminal. And those
> people should be charged with election violations and whatever else
> applies.
I'm eagerly waiting to see what happens, remembering how short an
> Fourth, most 501(c)(4) organizations that have political origins are
> crooked and fraudulent in their pursuit of tax-exempt status. Yes,
> most of them. The Tea Party units under scrutiny deserved to be
> audited. But two things were wrong.
>
> First, they should never have been targeted in isolation. There are
> 501(c)(4) organizations supporting the Democrats that deserve the same
> scrutiny and rejection of tax-exempt status.
>
> Second, and this is the really egregious part IMO, they obviously were
> trying to tie up the organizations with unneeded demands for
> information. That's the part of it that makes it criminal. And those
> people should be charged with election violations and whatever else
> applies.
attention span most of the public has.
>
>>
>> Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
>> He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
>> attempted abortion.
>
> Yeah, I heard something about it.
>
>> The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
>> they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
>> they set themselves.
>
> You have that wrong, too, Roger. That person, if he's real, is the
> kind of illegal abortionist you're left with when you shut down the
> legal ones. He's what you get when people like you get their way.
Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>
>> Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
>> He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
>> attempted abortion.
>
> Yeah, I heard something about it.
>
>> The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
>> they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
>> they set themselves.
>
> You have that wrong, too, Roger. That person, if he's real, is the
> kind of illegal abortionist you're left with when you shut down the
> legal ones. He's what you get when people like you get their way.
stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
product still being available, but without quality control.
David
>
Ed Huntress
May 17, 2013, 9:44:38 PM5/17/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>On 5/17/2013 6:08 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>
>>> Fox news market? People that prefer news over lies and spin?
>>
>> No, the FOX News market is mostly rightists who like to hear stories
>> that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
>> so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>
>Pretty much like the other network's market, mostly leftists who like to
>hear stories that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes
>them feel so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
If you're talking about MSNBC, there's some truth in that. But most of
<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>On 5/17/2013 6:08 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>
>>> Fox news market? People that prefer news over lies and spin?
>>
>> No, the FOX News market is mostly rightists who like to hear stories
>> that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
>> so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>
>Pretty much like the other network's market, mostly leftists who like to
>hear stories that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes
>them feel so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
the media is what the right calls the "MSM," and, collectively, it's
larger than either extreme.
People watch the MSM news to be informed. And they are, fairly well,
if they pay attention.
(BTW, FOX just announced today that Allen West will be a commentator.
I'll have to start watching again just for the insanity of it. <g>)
>>
>>> People that
>>> prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
>>> start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>>> It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
>>
>> Oh, here we go. You find out that you had your ass up in the air over
>> a phony "memo" that didn't say what you think it said, and now you're
>> going to use your ignorance of the memo's contents as a launching pad
>> for one of your tirades.
>>
>> We're off to the races...
>>
>> Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
>> you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
>> they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
>
>The problem is that none are truthful, they just lie about different
>things. Or fail to cover news that isn't what their market wants to
>hear. Read every word, believe every tenth.
>>
>> You have a logic problem there, Roger. And it's far from being your
>> only one.
>>
>> If you'd get your nose out of FOX News, you'd be a little less antic
>> and angry -- because you'd find out that FOX is full of crap.
>>
>>>
>>> Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
>>> against the will of the people.
>>
>> Nope. Every major provision of the ACA was APPROVED my large
>> majorities. But when you put all their favored ideas together, like
>> allowing young adults to continue longer on their families' plans, and
>> making insurance companies accept people regardless of preconditions,
>> and adopted the old Republica idea of mandates in universal health
>> care with no "freeloaders," as even Newt Gingrich and the Republican
>> leadership in the House promoted in the mid-'90s, and then ran it
>> through the FOX and Republican meat-grinder and labelled it
>> "Obamacare," they got their panties in a twist.
>>
>> It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
>> Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
>
>Rachel Maddow is on Fox? Or do they have to be on Fox to be a demagogue?
opinion about her, but not because he watches her.
>
>
>> Presidents don't "pass" budgets. And he submitted one every year.
>
>Maybe he should have submitted a budget that Congress was willing to pass
>>
>>> Obama threw Democrats
>>> under the bus and still the morons worship the liar.
>>
>> Uh, I think you've got your "moron" gun aimed in the wrong direction.
>>
>>> He had weapons sold
>>> illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
>>> justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>>> has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>>> as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution.
>>
>> Have you read it yet? The last time we discussed this, you didn't show
>> any signs of knowing what's in it.
>
>Dunno about Roger, but I've read it and reread it. It now takes less
>time to read because I can skip the parts ignored by the Reps and Dems
>and SCOTUS.
>
>>> But now the IRS
>>> comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
>>> or patriotic.
>>
>> A few points here. First, they came out an admitted it. Second, the
>> Treasury department rejected the IRS's claims that they've fixed it.
>> Third, Holder's office is pursuing criminal investigations against the
>> IRS offices and employees that engaged in it.
>
>Will that be after Holder arrests himself for contempt of Congress?
David R. Birch
May 17, 2013, 11:27:29 PM5/17/13
to
On 5/17/2013 8:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/17/2013 6:08 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Fox news market? People that prefer news over lies and spin?
>>>
>>> No, the FOX News market is mostly rightists who like to hear stories
>>> that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
>>> so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>>
>> Pretty much like the other network's market, mostly leftists who like to
>> hear stories that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes
>> them feel so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>
> If you're talking about MSNBC, there's some truth in that. But most of
> the media is what the right calls the "MSM," and, collectively, it's
> larger than either extreme.
>
> People watch the MSM news to be informed. And they are, fairly well,
> if they pay attention.
All of them are informative in their own way, as long as you view what
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/17/2013 6:08 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Fox news market? People that prefer news over lies and spin?
>>>
>>> No, the FOX News market is mostly rightists who like to hear stories
>>> that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
>>> so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>>
>> Pretty much like the other network's market, mostly leftists who like to
>> hear stories that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes
>> them feel so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>
> If you're talking about MSNBC, there's some truth in that. But most of
> the media is what the right calls the "MSM," and, collectively, it's
> larger than either extreme.
>
> People watch the MSM news to be informed. And they are, fairly well,
> if they pay attention.
they say critically, even Fox, from what little I've seen of it. The Fox
owned local station doesn't use the Fox national news show, so if I see
some specific complaint about Fox news, I view it online. So far, their
veracity is little different from MSM, they just lie about different
things, as I've said.
>
> (BTW, FOX just announced today that Allen West will be a commentator.
> I'll have to start watching again just for the insanity of it. <g>)
OK, haven't heard much of him, so now I gotta Google him.
> (BTW, FOX just announced today that Allen West will be a commentator.
> I'll have to start watching again just for the insanity of it. <g>)
Oh, yeah, him.
Poli Sci MA, which at least puts him a step above Hawwke-Ptooey.
No experience as community organizer unlike current POTUS plus real
military career unlike previous POTUS, so no POTUS potential.
>>> Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
>>> you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
>>> they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
>>
>> The problem is that none are truthful, they just lie about different
>> things. Or fail to cover news that isn't what their market wants to
>> hear. Read every word, believe every tenth.
>
> I don't think so.
>>> It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
>>> Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
>>
>> Rachel Maddow is on Fox? Or do they have to be on Fox to be a demagogue?
>
> I don't think that Roger watches Maddow. Of course, I'm sure he has an
> opinion about her, but not because he watches her.
Limbaugh.
>
>>
>>
>>> Presidents don't "pass" budgets. And he submitted one every year.
>>
>> Maybe he should have submitted a budget that Congress was willing to pass
>
> And what would that be?
We won't know until he tries.
>>
>>
>>> Presidents don't "pass" budgets. And he submitted one every year.
>>
>> Maybe he should have submitted a budget that Congress was willing to pass
>
> And what would that be?
>> Dunno about Roger, but I've read it and reread it. It now takes less
>> time to read because I can skip the parts ignored by the Reps and Dems
>> and SCOTUS.
>
> And what parts does the Supreme Court ignore?
>>>> But now the IRS
>>>> comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
>>>> or patriotic.
>>>
>>> A few points here. First, they came out an admitted it. Second, the
>>> Treasury department rejected the IRS's claims that they've fixed it.
>>> Third, Holder's office is pursuing criminal investigations against the
>>> IRS offices and employees that engaged in it.
>>
>> Will that be after Holder arrests himself for contempt of Congress?
>
> Everyone is in contempt of Congress. Their approval rating is 16.6%.
His position as AG and therefore part of the executive branch makes his
duty to Congress ambiguous, not to mention that the US Attorney for
civil law in the District of Columbia, in effect his subordinate, would
make the arrest. OTOH, Holder was also held in criminal contempt. I'm
not sure who would enforce that.
Hmmm...my brother was once an Assistant US Attorney for civil law in the
District of Columbia, among several hats he wore at the time. Only
argued before SCOTUS once, though. He did appear before Hinckley's
parole hearings several times to say, in effect, "Not while Nancy is
still alive."
David
Gunner Asch
May 18, 2013, 8:02:20 AM5/18/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 00:54:48 -0400, Tom Gardner <Mars@Tacks> wrote:
>On 5/16/2013 7:46 PM, RogerN wrote:
>> "Ed Huntress" wrote in message
>> news:31lap81pavcjdle9p...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:42:53 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
>> running to stop Obamacare. Obama had full majority until HE screwed it up
>> in 2010 (or before), still never passed a budget. Obama threw Democrats
>> under the bus and still the morons worship the liar. He had weapons sold
trash.
--
"You guess the truth hurts?
Really?
"Hurt" aint the word.
For Liberals, the truth is like salt to a slug.
Sunlight to a vampire.
Raid® to a cockroach.
Sheriff Brody to a shark
Bush to a Liberal
The truth doesn't just hurt. It's painful, like a red hot poker shoved
up their ass. Like sliding down a hundred foot razor blade using their
dick as a brake.
They HATE the truth."
>On 5/16/2013 7:46 PM, RogerN wrote:
>> "Ed Huntress" wrote in message
>> news:31lap81pavcjdle9p...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Transition Zone" wrote in message
>>>> news:b41731da-22f1-4f4d...@d6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>> On May 16, 10:40 am, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>> > " That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong, " she
>>>>> explained. " ABC
>>>>>> blew it. Turns out they weren't actually quoting White House emails at
>>>>>> all. "
>>>>>
>>>>> I think its all just throwing right-wing media some crumbs.
>>>>
>>>> Of course you think that, that's why Obama loves you. Obama thinks you are
>>>> the stupidest thing to ever breathe air but he depends on your kind of
>>>> stupid to back him no matter what!
>>>>
>>>
>>>> "Transition Zone" wrote in message
>>>> news:b41731da-22f1-4f4d...@d6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>> On May 16, 10:40 am, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>> > " That ABC article, turns out, was totally wrong, " she
>>>>> explained. " ABC
>>>>>> blew it. Turns out they weren't actually quoting White House emails at
>>>>>> all. "
>>>>>
>>>>> I think its all just throwing right-wing media some crumbs.
>>>>
>>>> Of course you think that, that's why Obama loves you. Obama thinks you are
>>>> the stupidest thing to ever breathe air but he depends on your kind of
>>>> stupid to back him no matter what!
>>>>
>>>> RogerN
>>>
>>> Roger, you smoke-blower, what he said is exactly right. They compared
>>> what ABC said with the actual memo. It was vastly different.
>>>
>>> And it's true that ABC would like to get some of that FOX News market.
>>> There's nowhere else for them to go. They can't get anywhere by
>>> dividing up the mass market with NBC and CBS anymore, so they have to
>>> go after a niche -- one that has only one competitor. Look at the
>>> Nielson ratings and you'll see for yourself.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ed Huntress
>>>
>>
>> Fox news market? People that prefer news over lies and spin? People that
>>>
>>> Roger, you smoke-blower, what he said is exactly right. They compared
>>> what ABC said with the actual memo. It was vastly different.
>>>
>>> And it's true that ABC would like to get some of that FOX News market.
>>> There's nowhere else for them to go. They can't get anywhere by
>>> dividing up the mass market with NBC and CBS anymore, so they have to
>>> go after a niche -- one that has only one competitor. Look at the
>>> Nielson ratings and you'll see for yourself.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ed Huntress
>>>
>>
>> prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
>> start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>> It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
>>
>> start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>> It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
>>
>> Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
>> against the will of the people. Ted Kennedy got replaced by a Republican
>> running to stop Obamacare. Obama had full majority until HE screwed it up
>> in 2010 (or before), still never passed a budget. Obama threw Democrats
>> under the bus and still the morons worship the liar. He had weapons sold
>> illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
>> justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>> has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>> as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution. Sensing
>> justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>> has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>> tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
>> during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
>> Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make". They
>> during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
>> search out and find a video to blame the attacks on, even though they have
>> word it's a terrorist attack. Obama wants to fool his stupid followers into
>> thinking he's effective on terrorism so he lies about the terrorist attack.
>> Richard Nixon was removed for far less than what Obama has gotten away with.
>> Obama says he's clueless to all these groups acting illegally for Obama's
>> benefit. What kind of a moron would believe this chief of liars? No one in
>> their right mind!
>>
>> word it's a terrorist attack. Obama wants to fool his stupid followers into
>> thinking he's effective on terrorism so he lies about the terrorist attack.
>> Richard Nixon was removed for far less than what Obama has gotten away with.
>> Obama says he's clueless to all these groups acting illegally for Obama's
>> benefit. What kind of a moron would believe this chief of liars? No one in
>> their right mind!
>>
>> Ed, what would have you said if you heard the IRS was targeting the Tea
>> Party a couple of months ago? You would have denied it. But now the IRS
>> comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
>> or patriotic.
>>
>> or patriotic.
>>
>> Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
>> He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
>> attempted abortion. The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
>> He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
>> they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
>> they set themselves.
>>
>> RogerN
>> they set themselves.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER
>let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
>deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
>Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
>NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
>you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
>bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
>what they are told to see.
Thats why the Great Cull is almost here. One has to take out the
>>
>>
>
>Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER
>let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
>deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
>Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
>NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
>you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
>bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
>what they are told to see.
trash.
--
"You guess the truth hurts?
Really?
"Hurt" aint the word.
For Liberals, the truth is like salt to a slug.
Sunlight to a vampire.
Raid® to a cockroach.
Sheriff Brody to a shark
Bush to a Liberal
The truth doesn't just hurt. It's painful, like a red hot poker shoved
up their ass. Like sliding down a hundred foot razor blade using their
dick as a brake.
They HATE the truth."
Gunner Asch
May 18, 2013, 8:03:03 AM5/18/13
to
sickening to the extreme.
Gunner Asch
May 18, 2013, 8:05:02 AM5/18/13
to
>Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>product still being available, but without quality control.
>
>David
You mean there is quality control now?
>stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>product still being available, but without quality control.
>
>David
About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
aborting babies........
NoBody
May 18, 2013, 9:33:08 AM5/18/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:47:36 -0500, AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:36:18 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:36:18 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>
>> Well, at least now we know what part of Maddow you fixate on.
>
>
>Her ASSHOLE? LOL I'm not fixated on it, it just pops up on the screen when I
>change the channel to MSNBC. Oh, that's her face... coulda fooled me.
>
>change the channel to MSNBC. Oh, that's her face... coulda fooled me.
>
>> Were you toileted with barbed wire and electric cattle prods or something?
>
>
>What the fuck is "toileted"? Is that something your mommy did to get you to
>stop wetting the bed? You nerds... language all your own.
>
>stop wetting the bed? You nerds... language all your own.
>
>Who rolled a +9 dork spell and
>summoned the beast and his quadruped?
>
>summoned the beast and his quadruped?
>
>> But back to the subject: now it's coming to light that those memo
>> "quotes" that ABC so thoroughly disgraced themselves with came from GOP
>> staffers on the Hill. Seems the evidence wasn't doing a very good job of
>
>> "quotes" that ABC so thoroughly disgraced themselves with came from GOP
>> staffers on the Hill. Seems the evidence wasn't doing a very good job of
>
>Still no citing of names, places or automobiles. I saw no "coming to light" of
>ANYTHING about GOP staffers doing ANYTHING.
Zepp just makes it all up as he goes along. If you challenge him to
>ANYTHING about GOP staffers doing ANYTHING.
prove his nonsense, he will call you a name and run away.
Zepp
May 18, 2013, 10:09:53 AM5/18/13
to
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/05/so-who-lied-abc-news-
about-benghazi-emails/65350/
You may scamper away now.
Michael A. Terrell
May 18, 2013, 11:23:50 AM5/18/13
to
Gunner Asch wrote:
>
> Tom Gardner wrote:
> >
> >Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER
> >let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
> >deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
> >Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
> >NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
> >you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
> >bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
> >what they are told to see.
>
> That's why the Great Cull is almost here. One has to take out the
> Tom Gardner wrote:
> >
> >Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER
> >let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
> >deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
> >Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
> >NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
> >you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
> >bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
> >what they are told to see.
>
> trash.
It will be more like the biggest job Roto-Rooter ever got.
Transition Zone
May 18, 2013, 1:57:45 PM5/18/13
to
asked to go over to Europe to teach them the same tactics.
> >>> Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
> >>> you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
> >>> they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
>
> >> The problem is that none are truthful, they just lie about different
> >> things. Or fail to cover news that isn't what their market wants to
> >> hear. Read every word, believe every tenth.
>
> > I don't think so.
>
> Believe less than every tenth? I admit I was being generous.
>
> >>> It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
> >>> Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
>
> >> Rachel Maddow is on Fox? Or do they have to be on Fox to be a demagogue?
>
> > I don't think that Roger watches Maddow. Of course, I'm sure he has an
> > opinion about her, but not because he watches her.
>
> I watched her enough to form an opinion, now I ignore her like I
do
>Limbaugh.
opel
May 18, 2013, 2:05:52 PM5/18/13
to
Transition Zone
May 18, 2013, 2:19:55 PM5/18/13
to
David R. Birch
May 18, 2013, 2:22:13 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>
>> David
>
> You mean there is quality control now?
Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>
>> David
>
> You mean there is quality control now?
one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>
> About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
> aborting babies........
actually was killing viable babies after far too late term abortions.
David
David R. Birch
May 18, 2013, 2:30:36 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 12:57 PM, Transition Zone wrote:
> On May 17, 11:27 pm, "David R. Birch" <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>> (BTW, FOX just announced today that Allen West will be a commentator.
>>> I'll have to start watching again just for the insanity of it. <g>)
>>
>> OK, haven't heard much of him, so now I gotta Google him.
>>
>> Oh, yeah, him.
>>
>> Poli Sci MA, which at least puts him a step above Hawwke-Ptooey.
>>
> >No experience as community organizer unlike current POTUS plus real
>> military career unlike previous POTUS, so no POTUS potential.
>
> Saul Alinsky was a community organizer, too. So good that he was
> asked to go over to Europe to teach them the same tactics.
Yet he was not chosen to run for POTUS. I doubt that he would have been
> On May 17, 11:27 pm, "David R. Birch" <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>> (BTW, FOX just announced today that Allen West will be a commentator.
>>> I'll have to start watching again just for the insanity of it. <g>)
>>
>> OK, haven't heard much of him, so now I gotta Google him.
>>
>> Oh, yeah, him.
>>
>> Poli Sci MA, which at least puts him a step above Hawwke-Ptooey.
>>
> >No experience as community organizer unlike current POTUS plus real
>> military career unlike previous POTUS, so no POTUS potential.
>
> Saul Alinsky was a community organizer, too. So good that he was
> asked to go over to Europe to teach them the same tactics.
so easily manipulated.
>>
>>>> Rachel Maddow is on Fox? Or do they have to be on Fox to be a demagogue?
>>
>>> I don't think that Roger watches Maddow. Of course, I'm sure he has an
>>> opinion about her, but not because he watches her.
>>
>> I watched her enough to form an opinion, now I ignore her like I
>> do Limbaugh.
>
> Well there are plenty enough out there who do *not* ignore her.
David
opel
May 18, 2013, 2:34:11 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 12:19 PM, Transition Zone wrote:
> you repukes
you libitards
> you repukes
you libitards
RogerN
May 18, 2013, 2:39:31 PM5/18/13
to
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news:2irep892gi2i6f5td...@4ax.com...
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
><dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>product still being available, but without quality control.
>>
>>David
>
>You mean there is quality control now?
>
>About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>aborting babies........
>
>
>--
Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
RogerN
news:2irep892gi2i6f5td...@4ax.com...
>On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
><dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>product still being available, but without quality control.
>>
>>David
>
>You mean there is quality control now?
>
>About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>aborting babies........
>
>
>--
It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
RogerN
Ed Huntress
May 18, 2013, 3:19:38 PM5/18/13
to
On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:39:31 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
wrote:
I think you'd better look into the history of abortion, and find out
what it was like before it was legal. There were lots of Gosnells. Now
they're rare enough that they make national news.
We don't need those backroom abortions. And we don't need superstition
about undifferented lumps of tissue being called "babies," dictating
our laws.
--
Ed Huntress
wrote:
what it was like before it was legal. There were lots of Gosnells. Now
they're rare enough that they make national news.
We don't need those backroom abortions. And we don't need superstition
about undifferented lumps of tissue being called "babies," dictating
our laws.
--
Ed Huntress
Gunner Asch
May 18, 2013, 3:53:36 PM5/18/13
to
Stock up now.
Zepp
May 18, 2013, 4:06:07 PM5/18/13
to
they've been provided, and never ever posts any of his own.
Zepp
May 18, 2013, 4:07:24 PM5/18/13
to
means, let us know.
Gunner Asch
May 18, 2013, 4:49:38 PM5/18/13
to
On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:22:13 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>
>> About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>> aborting babies........
>
>Yes, unlike the usual pro-life drivel, this was a case where a doctor
>actually was killing viable babies after far too late term abortions.
>
>David
There are 2 more cases coming to the forefront in the next couple
weeks. Very similar cases.
Gosnell Case Launches Congressional Probe Into Abortion in America
Matt Vespa
May 13, 2013 - 10:30 am
Philly Abortionist Kermit Gosnell�s atrocities are well-documented in
the grand jury report, and the case�s sparse coverage in the news has
set up a rather powerful narrative concerning media bias and
censorship. Even the left has admitted that the media covered up
Gosnell to protect abortion. Yet, conservatives shamed the mainstream
media to cover the case. It now has national attention, with a
congressional probe into abortion in America. Yes, feminists,
pro-aborts, and liberals aren�t going to be happy, and this could
bring up the ever irritating �war on women� narrative from 2012.
Nevertheless, Steven Ertelt at Life News reported on May 9 that:
A House committee has launched a nationwide investigation in
response to the trial of Kermit Gosnell, the abortion practitioner
charged with multiple counts of murder for gruesome abortions and
infanticides.
The move follows letters from another committee to public health
officials in all 50 states asking them what they are doing to prevent
�House of Horrors� abortion clinics like the one Kermit Gosnell ran in
Pennsylvania.
Because the Gosnell Grand Jury report identified a �regulatory
collapse� that allowed Gosnell to go undetected for decades, the House
Judiciary Committee sent a letter to all 50 state attorneys general
asking questions about efforts to protect the civil rights of newborns
and their mothers.
[...]
Responding to that, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob
Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee
Chairman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) have sent a letter to all 50 state
attorneys general seeking to find out if state and local governments
are being stymied in their efforts to protect the civil rights of
newborns and their mothers and if the federal government might be able
to partner with states to prevent newborn homicides.
The letter asks the state attorneys general to respond to several
questions and to provide copies of any official written procedures or
guidance that relate to the gathering of information on, or the
prosecution of, newborn homicides by June 1, 2013.
This comes after Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut
blocked Sen. Mike Lee�s resolution to have hearing on Gosnell and
abortion. As a result, the House wants to know what the states are
doing to prevent more Gosnells from operating freely, and committing
infanticide. Do you hear that? It�s the sound of angry feminists and
pro-aborts on the horizon.
<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> You mean there is quality control now?
>
>Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
>one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>
Odd that the doctor in question was running a clinic isnt it?
>On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> You mean there is quality control now?
>
>Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
>one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>
>>
>> About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>> aborting babies........
>
>Yes, unlike the usual pro-life drivel, this was a case where a doctor
>actually was killing viable babies after far too late term abortions.
>
>David
weeks. Very similar cases.
Gosnell Case Launches Congressional Probe Into Abortion in America
Matt Vespa
May 13, 2013 - 10:30 am
Philly Abortionist Kermit Gosnell�s atrocities are well-documented in
the grand jury report, and the case�s sparse coverage in the news has
set up a rather powerful narrative concerning media bias and
censorship. Even the left has admitted that the media covered up
Gosnell to protect abortion. Yet, conservatives shamed the mainstream
media to cover the case. It now has national attention, with a
congressional probe into abortion in America. Yes, feminists,
pro-aborts, and liberals aren�t going to be happy, and this could
bring up the ever irritating �war on women� narrative from 2012.
Nevertheless, Steven Ertelt at Life News reported on May 9 that:
A House committee has launched a nationwide investigation in
response to the trial of Kermit Gosnell, the abortion practitioner
charged with multiple counts of murder for gruesome abortions and
infanticides.
The move follows letters from another committee to public health
officials in all 50 states asking them what they are doing to prevent
�House of Horrors� abortion clinics like the one Kermit Gosnell ran in
Pennsylvania.
Because the Gosnell Grand Jury report identified a �regulatory
collapse� that allowed Gosnell to go undetected for decades, the House
Judiciary Committee sent a letter to all 50 state attorneys general
asking questions about efforts to protect the civil rights of newborns
and their mothers.
[...]
Responding to that, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob
Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee
Chairman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) have sent a letter to all 50 state
attorneys general seeking to find out if state and local governments
are being stymied in their efforts to protect the civil rights of
newborns and their mothers and if the federal government might be able
to partner with states to prevent newborn homicides.
The letter asks the state attorneys general to respond to several
questions and to provide copies of any official written procedures or
guidance that relate to the gathering of information on, or the
prosecution of, newborn homicides by June 1, 2013.
This comes after Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut
blocked Sen. Mike Lee�s resolution to have hearing on Gosnell and
abortion. As a result, the House wants to know what the states are
doing to prevent more Gosnells from operating freely, and committing
infanticide. Do you hear that? It�s the sound of angry feminists and
pro-aborts on the horizon.
Gunner Asch
May 18, 2013, 4:50:35 PM5/18/13
to
RogerN
May 18, 2013, 5:21:13 PM5/18/13
to
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news:vbqfp85kka791g0dg...@4ax.com...
<snip>
>>
>>Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were
>>outlawed.
>>It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>
>>RogerN
>>
>
>Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>
>
>--
This is a joke article from the Onion but it's so true of the typical left
>>Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were
>>outlawed.
>>It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>
>>RogerN
>>
>
>Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>
>
>--
winger here.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-supporter-has-perfectly-improbable-explanati,32462/?ref=auto
RogerN
Steve
May 18, 2013, 6:07:32 PM5/18/13
to
Michael A. Terrell
May 18, 2013, 8:03:41 PM5/18/13
to
Gunner Asch wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 11:23:50 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Gunner Asch wrote:
> >>
> >> Tom Gardner wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER
> >> >let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
> >> >deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
> >> >Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
> >> >NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
> >> >you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
> >> >bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
> >> >what they are told to see.
> >>
> >> That's why the Great Cull is almost here. One has to take out the
> >> trash.
> >
> >
> > It will be more like the biggest job Roto-Rooter ever got.
>
> Got ammo or rope?...or barbed wire?
>
> Stock up now.
slime. Just don't mix them, if you aren't a liberal.
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 9:00:00 PM5/18/13
to
>> Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER
>> let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
>> deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
>> Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
>> NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
>> you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
>> bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
>> what they are told to see.
>
>> let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
>> deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
>> Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
>> NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
>> you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
>> bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
>> what they are told to see.
>
> Sure is fun listening to you whine. Why, I could do that all day.
>
Make a tape loop. You can play it back on your free phone.
>
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 9:04:22 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/17/2013 4:24 AM, Richard wrote:
> in regards to exceeded his power when he bypassed Senate to appoint
> NRLB members.
>
> Oh bloody oops...
>
The NLRB is so far under the thumb that union locals now use the threat
of Arbitration at the drop of a hat because they know they will most
likely win with this NLRB.
> On 5/16/2013 11:54 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:
>
>> Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER let
>> anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and deflect
>> anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on Obama.
>> Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and NOTHING
>> would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get you far with
>> the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why bother bantering
>> with them, they are too far gone to see anything but what they are told
>> to see.
>
> Not even when he got his head handed to him on a plate yesterday
>
>> Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER let
>> anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and deflect
>> anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on Obama.
>> Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and NOTHING
>> would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get you far with
>> the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why bother bantering
>> with them, they are too far gone to see anything but what they are told
>> to see.
>
> in regards to exceeded his power when he bypassed Senate to appoint
> NRLB members.
>
> Oh bloody oops...
>
The NLRB is so far under the thumb that union locals now use the threat
of Arbitration at the drop of a hat because they know they will most
likely win with this NLRB.
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 9:07:12 PM5/18/13
to
"Great Enlightenment" is what you interpret as the "cull"
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 9:09:32 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 3:53 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 11:23:50 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>
>>> Tom Gardner wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER
>>>> let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
>>>> deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
>>>> Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
>>>> NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
>>>> you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
>>>> bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
>>>> what they are told to see.
>>>
>>> That's why the Great Cull is almost here. One has to take out the
>>> trash.
>>
>>
>> It will be more like the biggest job Roto-Rooter ever got.
>
> Got ammo or rope?...or barbed wire?
>
> Stock up now.
>
How about Rosary Beads of the right caliber? (Good dual-purpose?)
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 11:23:50 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>
>>> Tom Gardner wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Can you hear the sound of wagons circling? The sycophants will NEVER
>>>> let anything tarnish their love for Obama and will deny, divert and
>>>> deflect anything that doesn't praise and shower love and rose petals on
>>>> Obama. Nothing new. Obama could eat live babies on prime time TV and
>>>> NOTHING would change. OK, I accept that. A free phone will sure get
>>>> you far with the low-information/ignore-information left. So, why
>>>> bother bantering with them, they are too far gone to see anything but
>>>> what they are told to see.
>>>
>>> That's why the Great Cull is almost here. One has to take out the
>>> trash.
>>
>>
>> It will be more like the biggest job Roto-Rooter ever got.
>
> Got ammo or rope?...or barbed wire?
>
> Stock up now.
>
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 9:14:06 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/17/2013 7:08 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 18:46:07 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
> a phony "memo" that didn't say what you think it said, and now you're
> going to use your ignorance of the memo's contents as a launching pad
> for one of your tirades.
>
> We're off to the races...
> only one.
>
> If you'd get your nose out of FOX News, you'd be a little less antic
> and angry -- because you'd find out that FOX is full of crap.
> majorities. But when you put all their favored ideas together, like
> allowing young adults to continue longer on their families' plans, and
> making insurance companies accept people regardless of preconditions,
> and adopted the old Republica idea of mandates in universal health
> care with no "freeloaders," as even Newt Gingrich and the Republican
> leadership in the House promoted in the mid-'90s, and then ran it
> through the FOX and Republican meat-grinder and labelled it
> "Obamacare," they got their panties in a twist.
> "Romneycare" up there, but it's the same thing. So maybe your logic
> problem is rearing its ugly little head again, eh?
>
> Oh, BTW, they dumped that empty suit once they got a good look at him.
> Didn't they let you know that he lost re-election on FOX? Do you know
> who beat him? Or did you just forget?
> any signs of knowing what's in it.
> need some fresh air, Roger.
> difference between us on these issues, Roger. You wouldn't have
> required evidence. You would have believed it as soon as you heard
> someone say it on FOX. Because you'll believe any lie, rumor,
> innuendo, or assusation as long as it's a negative assertion about the
> current administration. And that's most of what they do.
> Treasury department rejected the IRS's claims that they've fixed it.
> Third, Holder's office is pursuing criminal investigations against the
> IRS offices and employees that engaged in it.
>
> Fourth, most 501(c)(4) organizations that have political origins are
> crooked and fraudulent in their pursuit of tax-exempt status. Yes,
> most of them. The Tea Party units under scrutiny deserved to be
> audited. But two things were wrong.
>
> First, they should never have been targeted in isolation. There are
> 501(c)(4) organizations supporting the Democrats that deserve the same
> scrutiny and rejection of tax-exempt status.
>
> Second, and this is the really egregious part IMO, they obviously were
> trying to tie up the organizations with unneeded demands for
> information. That's the part of it that makes it criminal. And those
> people should be charged with election violations and whatever else
> applies.
> kind of illegal abortionist you're left with when you shut down the
> legal ones. He's what you get when people like you get their way.
>
I think you spilled some on ya' Ed. You shouldn't try to carry that
much at a time! But, you do the boys proud!
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 18:46:07 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
> No, the FOX News market is mostly rightists who like to hear stories
> that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
> so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>
> that agree with their grievances and prejudices. It makes them feel
> so...affirmed, and good, and righteous.
>
>> People that
>> prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
>> start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>> It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
>
> Oh, here we go. You find out that you had your ass up in the air over
>> prefer news over Obama's ministry of propaganda? It's easy, if they just
>> start reporting unbiased news then people that don't suck Obama would watch.
>> It's funny that true news became a "niche"!
>
> a phony "memo" that didn't say what you think it said, and now you're
> going to use your ignorance of the memo's contents as a launching pad
> for one of your tirades.
>
> We're off to the races...
>
> Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
> you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
> they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
>
> You have a logic problem there, Roger. And it's far from being your
> Let's see...if you know the other news outlets tell lies, then why do
> you watch them? And if you don't watch them, how do you know that
> they're telling lies and FOX is telling the truth?
>
> only one.
>
> If you'd get your nose out of FOX News, you'd be a little less antic
> and angry -- because you'd find out that FOX is full of crap.
>
>>
>> Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
>> against the will of the people.
>
> Nope. Every major provision of the ACA was APPROVED my large
>>
>> Obama - didn't care about the will of the people, he forced Obamacare on us
>> against the will of the people.
>
> majorities. But when you put all their favored ideas together, like
> allowing young adults to continue longer on their families' plans, and
> making insurance companies accept people regardless of preconditions,
> and adopted the old Republica idea of mandates in universal health
> care with no "freeloaders," as even Newt Gingrich and the Republican
> leadership in the House promoted in the mid-'90s, and then ran it
> through the FOX and Republican meat-grinder and labelled it
> "Obamacare," they got their panties in a twist.
>
> It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
> Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
>
> It's because too many people, like you, are vulnerable to demagogues.
> Maybe it's because you watch too much FOX News.
>
>> Ted Kennedy got replaced by a Republican
>> running to stop Obamacare.
>
> They already had it in Massachusetts, and they love it. It's called
>> running to stop Obamacare.
>
> "Romneycare" up there, but it's the same thing. So maybe your logic
> problem is rearing its ugly little head again, eh?
>
> Oh, BTW, they dumped that empty suit once they got a good look at him.
> Didn't they let you know that he lost re-election on FOX? Do you know
> who beat him? Or did you just forget?
>
>> Obama had full majority until HE screwed it up
>> in 2010 (or before), still never passed a budget.
>
> Presidents don't "pass" budgets. And he submitted one every year.
>> Obama had full majority until HE screwed it up
>> in 2010 (or before), still never passed a budget.
>
>
>> Obama threw Democrats
>> under the bus and still the morons worship the liar.
>
> Uh, I think you've got your "moron" gun aimed in the wrong direction.
>> Obama threw Democrats
>> under the bus and still the morons worship the liar.
>
>
>> He had weapons sold
>> illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
>> justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>> has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>> as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution.
>
> Have you read it yet? The last time we discussed this, you didn't show
>> He had weapons sold
>> illegally to Mexican drug cartel and used executive privilege to obstruct
>> justice. He used the IRS to attack those that didn't agree with him. He
>> has attacked the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights of Americans. He acts
>> as if we have no constitution or he is above the constitution.
>
> any signs of knowing what's in it.
>
>> Sensing
>> tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
>> during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
>> Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make".
>
> You got that story all wrong. You probably heard it on FOX. You really
>> Sensing
>> tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
>> during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
>> Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make".
>
> need some fresh air, Roger.
>
>
>> They
>> search out and find a video to blame the attacks on, even though they have
>> word it's a terrorist attack. Obama wants to fool his stupid followers into
>> thinking he's effective on terrorism so he lies about the terrorist attack.
>> Richard Nixon was removed for far less than what Obama has gotten away with.
>> Obama says he's clueless to all these groups acting illegally for Obama's
>> benefit. What kind of a moron would believe this chief of liars? No one in
>> their right mind!
>
> You have that story all wrong, too.
>
>> They
>> search out and find a video to blame the attacks on, even though they have
>> word it's a terrorist attack. Obama wants to fool his stupid followers into
>> thinking he's effective on terrorism so he lies about the terrorist attack.
>> Richard Nixon was removed for far less than what Obama has gotten away with.
>> Obama says he's clueless to all these groups acting illegally for Obama's
>> benefit. What kind of a moron would believe this chief of liars? No one in
>> their right mind!
>
>
>>
>> Ed, what would have you said if you heard the IRS was targeting the Tea
>> Party a couple of months ago? You would have denied it.
>
> I would have demanded evidence before believing it. That's the
>>
>> Ed, what would have you said if you heard the IRS was targeting the Tea
>> Party a couple of months ago? You would have denied it.
>
> difference between us on these issues, Roger. You wouldn't have
> required evidence. You would have believed it as soon as you heard
> someone say it on FOX. Because you'll believe any lie, rumor,
> innuendo, or assusation as long as it's a negative assertion about the
> current administration. And that's most of what they do.
>
>> But now the IRS
>> comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
>> or patriotic.
>
> A few points here. First, they came out an admitted it. Second, the
>> But now the IRS
>> comes out and even admits they did indeed target groups that were tea party
>> or patriotic.
>
> Treasury department rejected the IRS's claims that they've fixed it.
> Third, Holder's office is pursuing criminal investigations against the
> IRS offices and employees that engaged in it.
>
> Fourth, most 501(c)(4) organizations that have political origins are
> crooked and fraudulent in their pursuit of tax-exempt status. Yes,
> most of them. The Tea Party units under scrutiny deserved to be
> audited. But two things were wrong.
>
> First, they should never have been targeted in isolation. There are
> 501(c)(4) organizations supporting the Democrats that deserve the same
> scrutiny and rejection of tax-exempt status.
>
> Second, and this is the really egregious part IMO, they obviously were
> trying to tie up the organizations with unneeded demands for
> information. That's the part of it that makes it criminal. And those
> people should be charged with election violations and whatever else
> applies.
>
>>
>> Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
>> He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
>> attempted abortion.
>
> Yeah, I heard something about it.
>>
>> Did you hear there's another abortionist/murderer they are going after now?
>> He's been killing babies by cutting their throat after delivery during
>> attempted abortion.
>
>
>> The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
>> they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
>> they set themselves.
>
> You have that wrong, too, Roger. That person, if he's real, is the
>> The pro-infant murderers drew the line at birth and
>> they are so damned stupid they can't even keep it within the bounds that
>> they set themselves.
>
> kind of illegal abortionist you're left with when you shut down the
> legal ones. He's what you get when people like you get their way.
>
I think you spilled some on ya' Ed. You shouldn't try to carry that
much at a time! But, you do the boys proud!
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 9:17:07 PM5/18/13
to
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 9:58:17 PM5/18/13
to
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 9:59:31 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 4:50 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:39:31 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
> wrote:
>
>> "Gunner Asch" wrote in message
>> news:2irep892gi2i6f5td...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>
>>> You mean there is quality control now?
>>>
>>> About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>>> aborting babies........
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>
>> RogerN
>>
>
> Ed is senile and doesn't think clearly anymore, sadly.
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:39:31 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
> wrote:
>
>> "Gunner Asch" wrote in message
>> news:2irep892gi2i6f5td...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>
>>> You mean there is quality control now?
>>>
>>> About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>>> aborting babies........
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>
>> RogerN
>>
>
>
>
> --
A lifetime of narrow indoctrination.
Tom Gardner
May 18, 2013, 10:02:40 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 5:21 PM, RogerN wrote:
> "Gunner Asch" wrote in message
> news:vbqfp85kka791g0dg...@4ax.com...
>
>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:39:31 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
>> wrote:
>>
> <snip>
>>>
>>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were
>>> outlawed.
>>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>>
>>> RogerN
>>>
>>
>> Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>>
>>
>> --
>
> This is a joke article from the Onion but it's so true of the typical left
> winger here.
>
> http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-supporter-has-perfectly-improbable-explanati,32462/?ref=auto
>
> RogerN
>
>
That's EXACTLY what the left is doing!
> "Gunner Asch" wrote in message
> news:vbqfp85kka791g0dg...@4ax.com...
>
>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:39:31 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
>> wrote:
>>
> <snip>
>>>
>>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were
>>> outlawed.
>>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>>
>>> RogerN
>>>
>>
>> Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>>
>>
>> --
>
> This is a joke article from the Onion but it's so true of the typical left
> winger here.
>
> http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-supporter-has-perfectly-improbable-explanati,32462/?ref=auto
>
> RogerN
>
>
Zepp
May 18, 2013, 10:00:51 PM5/18/13
to
Fascists' worst enemy!
Zepp
May 18, 2013, 10:32:43 PM5/18/13
to
Gunner Asch
May 18, 2013, 11:00:45 PM5/18/13
to
(The Left) from America. With so many Leftwingers mixed together in
mass graves....we could tear down most slums and ghettos..and let the
sunlight in.
--
Gunner Asch
May 18, 2013, 11:01:59 PM5/18/13
to
Same in fact.
David R. Birch
May 18, 2013, 11:02:04 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 3:07 PM, Zepp wrote:
>>>> I watched her enough to form an opinion, now I ignore her like I
>>>> do Limbaugh.
>>>
>>> Well there are plenty enough out there who do *not* ignore her.
>>
>> Sigh... Yes, there are always those like you among the uncritical
>> masses.
>>
>> David
>
> If you have a valid reason why we should ignore Rachel Maddow, by all
> means, let us know.
If you can listen to her and take what she says seriously, go for it.
>>>> I watched her enough to form an opinion, now I ignore her like I
>>>> do Limbaugh.
>>>
>>> Well there are plenty enough out there who do *not* ignore her.
>>
>> Sigh... Yes, there are always those like you among the uncritical
>> masses.
>>
>> David
>
> If you have a valid reason why we should ignore Rachel Maddow, by all
> means, let us know.
All I hear from her is left wing rant, just like all I hear from
Limbaugh is right wing rant.
I don't take either clown seriously.
David
David R. Birch
May 18, 2013, 11:06:14 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 3:49 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:22:13 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>
>>> You mean there is quality control now?
>>
>> Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
>> one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>>
> Odd that the doctor in question was running a clinic isnt it?
From what I've read, it was more like the pre-Roe v. Wade back alley.
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:22:13 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>
>>> You mean there is quality control now?
>>
>> Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
>> one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>>
> Odd that the doctor in question was running a clinic isnt it?
>
>>>
>>> About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>>> aborting babies........
>>
>> Yes, unlike the usual pro-life drivel, this was a case where a doctor
>> actually was killing viable babies after far too late term abortions.
>>
>> David
>
> There are 2 more cases coming to the forefront in the next couple
> weeks. Very similar cases.
>
>
> Gosnell Case Launches Congressional Probe Into Abortion in America
> Matt Vespa
> May 13, 2013 - 10:30 am
>
>
> the grand jury report, and the case�s sparse coverage in the news has
> set up a rather powerful narrative concerning media bias and
> censorship. Even the left has admitted that the media covered up
> Gosnell to protect abortion. Yet, conservatives shamed the mainstream
> media to cover the case. It now has national attention, with a
> congressional probe into abortion in America. Yes, feminists,
> pro-aborts, and liberals aren�t going to be happy, and this could
> censorship. Even the left has admitted that the media covered up
> Gosnell to protect abortion. Yet, conservatives shamed the mainstream
> media to cover the case. It now has national attention, with a
> congressional probe into abortion in America. Yes, feminists,
> bring up the ever irritating �war on women� narrative from 2012.
> Nevertheless, Steven Ertelt at Life News reported on May 9 that:
>
> A House committee has launched a nationwide investigation in
> response to the trial of Kermit Gosnell, the abortion practitioner
> charged with multiple counts of murder for gruesome abortions and
> infanticides.
>
> The move follows letters from another committee to public health
> officials in all 50 states asking them what they are doing to prevent
> �House of Horrors� abortion clinics like the one Kermit Gosnell ran in
>
> A House committee has launched a nationwide investigation in
> response to the trial of Kermit Gosnell, the abortion practitioner
> charged with multiple counts of murder for gruesome abortions and
> infanticides.
>
> The move follows letters from another committee to public health
> officials in all 50 states asking them what they are doing to prevent
> Pennsylvania.
>
> Because the Gosnell Grand Jury report identified a �regulatory
> collapse� that allowed Gosnell to go undetected for decades, the House
> Judiciary Committee sent a letter to all 50 state attorneys general
> asking questions about efforts to protect the civil rights of newborns
> and their mothers.
>
> [...]
>
> Responding to that, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob
> Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee
> Chairman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) have sent a letter to all 50 state
> attorneys general seeking to find out if state and local governments
> are being stymied in their efforts to protect the civil rights of
> newborns and their mothers and if the federal government might be able
> to partner with states to prevent newborn homicides.
>
> The letter asks the state attorneys general to respond to several
> questions and to provide copies of any official written procedures or
> guidance that relate to the gathering of information on, or the
> prosecution of, newborn homicides by June 1, 2013.
>
> This comes after Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut
> blocked Sen. Mike Lee�s resolution to have hearing on Gosnell and
> asking questions about efforts to protect the civil rights of newborns
> and their mothers.
>
> [...]
>
> Responding to that, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob
> Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee
> Chairman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) have sent a letter to all 50 state
> attorneys general seeking to find out if state and local governments
> are being stymied in their efforts to protect the civil rights of
> newborns and their mothers and if the federal government might be able
> to partner with states to prevent newborn homicides.
>
> The letter asks the state attorneys general to respond to several
> questions and to provide copies of any official written procedures or
> guidance that relate to the gathering of information on, or the
> prosecution of, newborn homicides by June 1, 2013.
>
> This comes after Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut
> abortion. As a result, the House wants to know what the states are
> doing to prevent more Gosnells from operating freely, and committing
> infanticide. Do you hear that? It�s the sound of angry feminists and
> doing to prevent more Gosnells from operating freely, and committing
> pro-aborts on the horizon.
I'm all for providing safer health care for women. That was your point,
wasn't it?
David
David R. Birch
May 18, 2013, 11:10:11 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 3:50 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>
>> RogerN
>>
>
> Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
You were the guy who couldn't afford $25 for an 1891 carbine rear sight
>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>
>> RogerN
>>
>
> Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
leaf, yet wanted to buy a $1000 FN49 from me.
Sadly, how long has been it since you thought clearly?
David
David R. Birch
May 18, 2013, 11:14:43 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/18/2013 8:58 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:
>> I think you'd better look into the history of abortion, and find out
>> what it was like before it was legal. There were lots of Gosnells. Now
>> they're rare enough that they make national news.
>>
>> We don't need those backroom abortions. And we don't need superstition
>> about undifferented lumps of tissue being called "babies," dictating
>> our laws.
>>
>
> So tell us, does that lump of tissue have a soul?
Do you? Do any of us? Answer the questions without referring to
>> I think you'd better look into the history of abortion, and find out
>> what it was like before it was legal. There were lots of Gosnells. Now
>> they're rare enough that they make national news.
>>
>> We don't need those backroom abortions. And we don't need superstition
>> about undifferented lumps of tissue being called "babies," dictating
>> our laws.
>>
>
> So tell us, does that lump of tissue have a soul?
religious authority or your own personal belief, I want an objective
answer, not something based on superstitious fear.
David
RogerN
May 18, 2013, 11:58:32 PM5/18/13
to
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news:vbqfp85kka791g0dg...@4ax.com...
<snip>
>>
>>Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were
>>outlawed.
>>It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>
>>RogerN
>>
>
>Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>
>
>--
I see Hillary is indeed qualified for the Democrats nominee for President,
>>Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were
>>outlawed.
>>It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>
>>RogerN
>>
>
>Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>
>
>--
she has a lot of experience in being involved in scandals!
http://www.infowars.com/flashback-hillary-clinton-fired-from-watergate-investigation-for-lying-unethical-behavior/
http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/05/hillary-clinton-watergate-our-first-taste-of-her-delicious-corruption-2-2519382.html
http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/52621
Seems to be a good liberal you have to be an immoral unethical lying piece
of shit, that's what they like, birds of a feather.
RogerN
Gunner Asch
May 19, 2013, 12:20:07 AM5/19/13
to
On Sat, 18 May 2013 22:06:14 -0500, "David R. Birch"
to perform legal abortions.
>> the grand jury report, and the case�s sparse coverage in the news has
>> bring up the ever irritating �war on women� narrative from 2012.
>> Pennsylvania.
>>
>> Because the Gosnell Grand Jury report identified a �regulatory
>> collapse� that allowed Gosnell to go undetected for decades, the House
wasnt it?
Say..seen this?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/irs-face-lawsuit-over-theft-60-million-patient-health-records
IRS faces class action lawsuit over theft of 60 million medical
records
California HIPAA-covered entity sues big time
SAN DIEGO | March 15, 2013
This story has been updated.
The Internal Revenue Service could now be facing a class action
lawsuit over allegations that it improperly accessed and stole the
health records of some 10 million Americans, including medical records
of all California state judges.
According to a report by Courthousenews.com, an unnamed HIPAA-covered
entity in California is suing the IRS, alleging that some 60 million
medical records from 10 million patients were stolen by 15 IRS agents.
The personal health information seized on March 11, 2011, included
psychological counseling, gynecological counseling, sexual/drug
treatment and other medical treatment data.
"This is an action involving the corruption and abuse of power by
several Internal Revenue Service agents," wrote Robert E. Barnes,
attorney representing the John Doe Company, in the official complaint.
"No search warrant authorized the seizure of these records; no
subpoena authorized the seizure of these records; none of the
10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil
investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to
the IRS search. IT personnel at the scene, a HIPPA facility warning on
the building and the IT portion of the searched premises, and the
company executives each warned the IRS agents of these privileged
records," the complaint continued.
According to the complaint, the IRS agents obtained a search warrant
for financial data pertaining to a former employee of the John Doe
Company, however, "it did not authorize any seizure of any healthcare
or medical record of any persons, least of all third parties
completely unrelated to the matter," the complaint read.
The IRS did not respond to multiple inquiries regarding the case.
�If the allegations are true, the IRS is in trouble,� wrote Jim Pyles,
Washington-based healthcare privacy lawyer, in a statement to
Healthcare IT News. �By both constitutional law and HIPAA, then I
think we have a problem.�
Pyles added that the Fourth Amendment was drafted in response to the
General Warrants issued by the King of England under which his
officers could search for any evidence of crime without showing
probable cause. �The drafters expressly sought to curb that practice
in the 4th Amendment which guarantees the �right of the people to be
secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures,�� he explained. If the allegations
are true, �they way overstepped the limits of the search warrant.�
Just recently, IRS officials have been under fire over routinely
searching through Americans� emails, an action the American Civil
Liberties Union bills as a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The
agency�s justification of this process may foreshadow the fate of the
California lawsuit. According to New York Daily News, back in 2009 the
IRS wrote, �The Fourth Amendment does not protect communications held
in electronic storage, such as email messages stored on a server,
because Internet users do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy
in such communication.�
The class action lawsuit against the IRS seeks $25,000 in compensatory
damages "per violation per individual" in addition to punitive damages
for constitutional violations. Thus, compensatory damages could start
at a minimum of $250 billion.
<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>On 5/18/2013 3:49 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:22:13 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>
>>>> You mean there is quality control now?
>>>
>>> Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
>>> one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>>>
>> Odd that the doctor in question was running a clinic isnt it?
>
> From what I've read, it was more like the pre-Roe v. Wade back alley.
In practice perhaps..but it was a legal medical establishment provided
>On 5/18/2013 3:49 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:22:13 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>
>>>> You mean there is quality control now?
>>>
>>> Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
>>> one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>>>
>> Odd that the doctor in question was running a clinic isnt it?
>
> From what I've read, it was more like the pre-Roe v. Wade back alley.
to perform legal abortions.
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>>>> aborting babies........
>>>
>>> Yes, unlike the usual pro-life drivel, this was a case where a doctor
>>> actually was killing viable babies after far too late term abortions.
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> There are 2 more cases coming to the forefront in the next couple
>> weeks. Very similar cases.
>>
>>
>> Gosnell Case Launches Congressional Probe Into Abortion in America
>> Matt Vespa
>> May 13, 2013 - 10:30 am
>>
>>
>> Philly Abortionist Kermit Gosnell�s atrocities are well-documented in
>>
>>>>
>>>> About that guy that just got convicted of multiple murders while
>>>> aborting babies........
>>>
>>> Yes, unlike the usual pro-life drivel, this was a case where a doctor
>>> actually was killing viable babies after far too late term abortions.
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> There are 2 more cases coming to the forefront in the next couple
>> weeks. Very similar cases.
>>
>>
>> Gosnell Case Launches Congressional Probe Into Abortion in America
>> Matt Vespa
>> May 13, 2013 - 10:30 am
>>
>>
>> the grand jury report, and the case�s sparse coverage in the news has
>> set up a rather powerful narrative concerning media bias and
>> censorship. Even the left has admitted that the media covered up
>> Gosnell to protect abortion. Yet, conservatives shamed the mainstream
>> media to cover the case. It now has national attention, with a
>> congressional probe into abortion in America. Yes, feminists,
>> pro-aborts, and liberals aren�t going to be happy, and this could
>> censorship. Even the left has admitted that the media covered up
>> Gosnell to protect abortion. Yet, conservatives shamed the mainstream
>> media to cover the case. It now has national attention, with a
>> congressional probe into abortion in America. Yes, feminists,
>> bring up the ever irritating �war on women� narrative from 2012.
>> Nevertheless, Steven Ertelt at Life News reported on May 9 that:
>>
>> A House committee has launched a nationwide investigation in
>> response to the trial of Kermit Gosnell, the abortion practitioner
>> charged with multiple counts of murder for gruesome abortions and
>> infanticides.
>>
>> The move follows letters from another committee to public health
>> officials in all 50 states asking them what they are doing to prevent
>> �House of Horrors� abortion clinics like the one Kermit Gosnell ran in
>>
>> A House committee has launched a nationwide investigation in
>> response to the trial of Kermit Gosnell, the abortion practitioner
>> charged with multiple counts of murder for gruesome abortions and
>> infanticides.
>>
>> The move follows letters from another committee to public health
>> officials in all 50 states asking them what they are doing to prevent
>> Pennsylvania.
>>
>> Because the Gosnell Grand Jury report identified a �regulatory
>> collapse� that allowed Gosnell to go undetected for decades, the House
>> Judiciary Committee sent a letter to all 50 state attorneys general
>> asking questions about efforts to protect the civil rights of newborns
>> and their mothers.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Responding to that, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob
>> Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee
>> Chairman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) have sent a letter to all 50 state
>> attorneys general seeking to find out if state and local governments
>> are being stymied in their efforts to protect the civil rights of
>> newborns and their mothers and if the federal government might be able
>> to partner with states to prevent newborn homicides.
>>
>> The letter asks the state attorneys general to respond to several
>> questions and to provide copies of any official written procedures or
>> guidance that relate to the gathering of information on, or the
>> prosecution of, newborn homicides by June 1, 2013.
>>
>> This comes after Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut
>> blocked Sen. Mike Lee�s resolution to have hearing on Gosnell and
>> asking questions about efforts to protect the civil rights of newborns
>> and their mothers.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Responding to that, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob
>> Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee
>> Chairman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) have sent a letter to all 50 state
>> attorneys general seeking to find out if state and local governments
>> are being stymied in their efforts to protect the civil rights of
>> newborns and their mothers and if the federal government might be able
>> to partner with states to prevent newborn homicides.
>>
>> The letter asks the state attorneys general to respond to several
>> questions and to provide copies of any official written procedures or
>> guidance that relate to the gathering of information on, or the
>> prosecution of, newborn homicides by June 1, 2013.
>>
>> This comes after Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut
>> abortion. As a result, the House wants to know what the states are
>> doing to prevent more Gosnells from operating freely, and committing
>> infanticide. Do you hear that? It�s the sound of angry feminists and
>> doing to prevent more Gosnells from operating freely, and committing
>> pro-aborts on the horizon.
>
>I'm all for providing safer health care for women. That was your point,
>wasn't it?
>
>David
Yet your "safe legal abortion clinic" was really a murder factory
>
>I'm all for providing safer health care for women. That was your point,
>wasn't it?
>
>David
wasnt it?
Say..seen this?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/irs-face-lawsuit-over-theft-60-million-patient-health-records
IRS faces class action lawsuit over theft of 60 million medical
records
California HIPAA-covered entity sues big time
SAN DIEGO | March 15, 2013
This story has been updated.
The Internal Revenue Service could now be facing a class action
lawsuit over allegations that it improperly accessed and stole the
health records of some 10 million Americans, including medical records
of all California state judges.
According to a report by Courthousenews.com, an unnamed HIPAA-covered
entity in California is suing the IRS, alleging that some 60 million
medical records from 10 million patients were stolen by 15 IRS agents.
The personal health information seized on March 11, 2011, included
psychological counseling, gynecological counseling, sexual/drug
treatment and other medical treatment data.
"This is an action involving the corruption and abuse of power by
several Internal Revenue Service agents," wrote Robert E. Barnes,
attorney representing the John Doe Company, in the official complaint.
"No search warrant authorized the seizure of these records; no
subpoena authorized the seizure of these records; none of the
10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil
investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to
the IRS search. IT personnel at the scene, a HIPPA facility warning on
the building and the IT portion of the searched premises, and the
company executives each warned the IRS agents of these privileged
records," the complaint continued.
According to the complaint, the IRS agents obtained a search warrant
for financial data pertaining to a former employee of the John Doe
Company, however, "it did not authorize any seizure of any healthcare
or medical record of any persons, least of all third parties
completely unrelated to the matter," the complaint read.
The IRS did not respond to multiple inquiries regarding the case.
�If the allegations are true, the IRS is in trouble,� wrote Jim Pyles,
Washington-based healthcare privacy lawyer, in a statement to
Healthcare IT News. �By both constitutional law and HIPAA, then I
think we have a problem.�
Pyles added that the Fourth Amendment was drafted in response to the
General Warrants issued by the King of England under which his
officers could search for any evidence of crime without showing
probable cause. �The drafters expressly sought to curb that practice
in the 4th Amendment which guarantees the �right of the people to be
secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures,�� he explained. If the allegations
are true, �they way overstepped the limits of the search warrant.�
Just recently, IRS officials have been under fire over routinely
searching through Americans� emails, an action the American Civil
Liberties Union bills as a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The
agency�s justification of this process may foreshadow the fate of the
California lawsuit. According to New York Daily News, back in 2009 the
IRS wrote, �The Fourth Amendment does not protect communications held
in electronic storage, such as email messages stored on a server,
because Internet users do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy
in such communication.�
The class action lawsuit against the IRS seeks $25,000 in compensatory
damages "per violation per individual" in addition to punitive damages
for constitutional violations. Thus, compensatory damages could start
at a minimum of $250 billion.
Gunner Asch
May 19, 2013, 12:23:06 AM5/19/13
to
On Sat, 18 May 2013 22:10:11 -0500, "David R. Birch"
<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>On 5/18/2013 3:50 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
>>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>>
>>> RogerN
>>>
>>
>> Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>
>You were the guy who couldn't afford $25 for an 1891 carbine rear sight
>leaf, yet wanted to buy a $1000 FN49 from me.
Wanted to buy? Not at a grand. Not fucking bloody likely. In fact..I
<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>On 5/18/2013 3:50 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
>>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>>
>>> RogerN
>>>
>>
>> Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>
>You were the guy who couldn't afford $25 for an 1891 carbine rear sight
>leaf, yet wanted to buy a $1000 FN49 from me.
swapped for another one 2 weeks ago in 7x57.
>
>Sadly, how long has been it since you thought clearly?
>
>David
So how long has it been that you told the truth? Years?
Wanted to buy? For a grand? LOL
Gunner
David R. Birch
May 19, 2013, 3:33:26 AM5/19/13
to
On 5/18/2013 11:20 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 22:06:14 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/18/2013 3:49 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:22:13 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>>>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>>>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>>>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean there is quality control now?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
>>>> one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>>>>
>>> Odd that the doctor in question was running a clinic isnt it?
>>
>> From what I've read, it was more like the pre-Roe v. Wade back alley.
>
> In practice perhaps..but it was a legal medical establishment provided
> to perform legal abortions.
And is no longer, because of its VERY atypical practices. So someone who
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 22:06:14 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/18/2013 3:49 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:22:13 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/18/2013 7:05 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:23:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>>>>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, banning abortion would be just as effective as Prohibition, which
>>>>>> stopped people from drinking, and the War on Drugs, which is still
>>>>>> keeping people from getting high. Banning anything results in the
>>>>>> product still being available, but without quality control.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean there is quality control now?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I see a difference between a procedure done in a medical clinic and
>>>> one done in an alley. Quality control leads to survival of the woman.
>>>>
>>> Odd that the doctor in question was running a clinic isnt it?
>>
>> From what I've read, it was more like the pre-Roe v. Wade back alley.
>
> In practice perhaps..but it was a legal medical establishment provided
> to perform legal abortions.
was actually doing what pro-lifers claim was shut down when he was
discovered.
So?
>>
>> I'm all for providing safer health care for women. That was your point,
>> wasn't it?
>>
>> David
>
> Yet your "safe legal abortion clinic" was really a murder factory
> wasnt it?
The quotation marks you use would only be appropriate if I had used the
phrase you put in quotes.
Seems you want to go on record as opposing safer health care for women.
>
> Say..seen this?
Yes.
David
David R. Birch
May 19, 2013, 3:45:59 AM5/19/13
to
On 5/18/2013 11:23 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 22:10:11 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/18/2013 3:50 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>
>>>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
>>>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>>>
>>>> RogerN
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>>
>> You were the guy who couldn't afford $25 for an 1891 carbine rear sight
>> leaf, yet wanted to buy a $1000 FN49 from me.
>
> Wanted to buy? Not at a grand. Not fucking bloody likely. In fact..I
> swapped for another one 2 weeks ago in 7x57.
So have you bought that $25 carbine sight leaf yet?
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 22:10:11 -0500, "David R. Birch"
> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/18/2013 3:50 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>
>>>> Ed says this Gosnell thing is what would happen if abortions were outlawed.
>>>> It's been legal around 40 years and it's happening now! I think the left
>>>> nuts want an abortion clinic in every home!
>>>>
>>>> RogerN
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ed is senile and doesnt think clearly anymore, sadly.
>>
>> You were the guy who couldn't afford $25 for an 1891 carbine rear sight
>> leaf, yet wanted to buy a $1000 FN49 from me.
>
> Wanted to buy? Not at a grand. Not fucking bloody likely. In fact..I
> swapped for another one 2 weeks ago in 7x57.
You expressed an interest in a 30'06 FN49. I never quoted a price, but
any I have is worth at least that much. I have a Colombian contract
available, total contract was 1000 rifles, of which there are about 20
in the US. Also, 2 Venezuelans in 7x57, NRA VG+. Consecutive serial #s.
>> Sadly, how long has been it since you thought clearly?
>>
>> David
>
> .05 Nanoseconds ago, based on my best estimate.
>
> So how long has it been that you told the truth? Years?
.05 Nanoseconds ago, based on my best estimate.
>
> Wanted to buy? For a grand? LOL
>
> Gunner
As you wish. I don't have any FN49 rifles bad enough for you to be able
> So how long has it been that you told the truth? Years?
.05 Nanoseconds ago, based on my best estimate.
>
> Wanted to buy? For a grand? LOL
>
> Gunner
to afford.
David
Gunner Asch
May 19, 2013, 4:06:55 AM5/19/13
to
On Sun, 19 May 2013 02:33:26 -0500, "David R. Birch"
And you think it was unique and there are no others like it?
<G>
Watch the news in the next few weeks....
>So?
>
>
>>>
>>> I'm all for providing safer health care for women. That was your point,
>>> wasn't it?
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> Yet your "safe legal abortion clinic" was really a murder factory
>> wasnt it?
>
>In the sense that it was like the pre-Roe v. Wade back alley abortions, yes.
>
>The quotation marks you use would only be appropriate if I had used the
>phrase you put in quotes.
Actually...I simply quoted what you intended to say, but avoided it.
>
>
>>
>> Say..seen this?
>
>Yes.
>
>David
<G>
Watch the news in the next few weeks....
>So?
>
>
>>>
>>> I'm all for providing safer health care for women. That was your point,
>>> wasn't it?
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> Yet your "safe legal abortion clinic" was really a murder factory
>> wasnt it?
>
>In the sense that it was like the pre-Roe v. Wade back alley abortions, yes.
>
>The quotation marks you use would only be appropriate if I had used the
>phrase you put in quotes.
>
>Seems you want to go on record as opposing safer health care for women.
Seems you want to go on record as approving of baby murders.
>Seems you want to go on record as opposing safer health care for women.
>
>
>>
>> Say..seen this?
>
>Yes.
>
>David
GOP_Decline_and_Fall
May 19, 2013, 4:29:39 AM5/19/13
to
> Sensing
>tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
>during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
>Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make".
Bullshit.
>tensions in Libya, they ask to keep their security, but are denied, then
>during the Benghazi attack, they need help and again are denied. They lied,
>Americans died, and Hitlary asks "What difference does it make".
Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security,
U.S. officials say
CAIRO � In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in
Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher
Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the
senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns
that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government
officials told McClatchy.
Why Stevens, who died of smoke inhalation in the first of two attacks
that took place late Sept. 11 and early Sept. 12, 2012, would turn
down the offers remains unclear. The deteriorating security situation
in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials
held Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S.
diplomatic compound in Benghazi.
Read more here:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#.UZTNYu2fM98#storylink=cpy
Steve
May 19, 2013, 6:24:36 AM5/19/13
to
scrape up, even those who like Zepp, can't afford the products that
sponsor her.
Tom Gardner
May 19, 2013, 6:45:33 AM5/19/13
to
The left sure has fucked things up!
Tom Gardner
May 19, 2013, 6:47:27 AM5/19/13
to
Need some links?
Tom Gardner
May 19, 2013, 6:49:05 AM5/19/13
to
Tom Gardner
May 19, 2013, 6:50:33 AM5/19/13
to
Tom Gardner
May 19, 2013, 6:52:29 AM5/19/13
to
conception. Where have you been?
Steve
May 19, 2013, 6:57:33 AM5/19/13
to
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages