Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

OT: Silliest things on Ebay

80 views
Skip to first unread message

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Mar 22, 2023, 5:16:21 PM3/22/23
to
What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?

To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534

pothead

unread,
Mar 22, 2023, 5:20:52 PM3/22/23
to
I once saw someone selling a used potty for seniors......
Yuck...


--
pothead
Tommy Chong For President 2024.
Crazy Joe Biden Is A Demented Imbecile.
Impeach Joe Biden 2022.

Peeler

unread,
Mar 22, 2023, 5:28:45 PM3/22/23
to
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:16:14 -0000, Birdbrain Macaw (aka "Commander Kinsey",
"James Wilkinson", "Steven Wanker","Bruce Farquar", "Fred Johnson, etc.),
the pathological resident idiot and attention whore of all the uk ngs,
blathered again:

<FLUSH the subnormal sociopathic trolling attention whore's latest
attention-baiting sick bullshit unread again

--
damdu...@yahoo.co.uk about Birdbrain Macaw's (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL)
trolling:
"He is a well known attention seeking troll and every reply you
make feeds him.
Starts many threads most of which die quick as on the UK groups anyone
with sense Kill filed him ages ago which is why he now cross posts to
the US groups for a new audience.
This thread was unusual in that it derived and continued without him
to a large extent and his silly questioning is an attempt to get
noticed again."
MID: <be195d5jh0hktj054...@4ax.com>

--
ItsJoanNotJoann addressing Birdbrain Macaw's (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"You're an annoying troll and I'm done with you and your
stupidity."
MID: <e39a6a7f-9677-4e78...@googlegroups.com>

--
AndyW addressing Birdbrain:
"Troll or idiot?...
You have been presented with a viewpoint with information, reasoning,
historical cases, citations and references to back it up and wilfully
ignore all going back to your idea which has no supporting information."
MID: <KaToA.263621$g93.2...@fx10.am4>

--
Phil Lee adressing Birdbrain Macaw:
"You are too stupid to be wasting oxygen."
MID: <uv2u4clurscpat3g2...@4ax.com>

--
Phil Lee describing Birdbrain Macaw:
"I've never seen such misplaced pride in being a fucking moronic motorist."
MID: <j7fb6ct83igfd1g99...@4ax.com>

--
Tony944 addressing Birdbrain Macaw:
"I seen and heard many people but you are on top of list being first class
ass hole jerk. ...You fit under unconditional Idiot and should be put in
mental institution.
MID: <VLCdnYC5HK1Z4S3F...@giganews.com>

--
Pelican to Birdbrain Macaw:
"Ok. I'm persuaded . You are an idiot."
MID: <obru31$nao$3...@dont-email.me>

--
DerbyDad03 addressing Birdbrain Macaw (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"Frigging Idiot. Get the hell out of my thread."
MID: <4d907253-b3b9-40d4...@googlegroups.com>

--
Kerr Mudd-John about Birdbrain Macaw (now "Commander Kinsey LOL):
"It's like arguing with a demented frog."
MID: <op.yy3c0...@dell3100.workgroup>

--
Mr Pounder Esquire about Birdbrain Macaw (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"the piss poor delivery boy with no hot running water, 11 cats and
several parrots living in his hovel."
MID: <odqtgc$iug$1...@dont-email.me>

--
Rob Morley about Birdbrain:
"He's a perennial idiot"
MID: <20170519215057.56a1f1d4@Mars>

--
JoeyDee to Birdbrain
"I apologize for thinking you were a jerk. You're just someone with an IQ
lower than your age, and I accept that as a reason for your comments."
MID: <0001HW.1EE2D20300...@news.eternal-september.org>

--
Sam Plusnet about Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"He's just desperate to be noticed. Any attention will do, no matter how
negative it may be."
MID: <rOmdndd_O7u8iK7E...@brightview.co.uk>

--
thekma...@gmail.com asking Birdbrain:
"What, were you dropped on your head as a child?"
MID: <58ddfad5-d9a5-4031...@googlegroups.com>

--
Christie addressing endlessly driveling Birdbrain Macaw (now "Commander
Kinsey" LOL):
"What are you resurrecting that old post of mine for? It's from last
month some time. You're like a dog who's just dug up an old bone they
hid in the garden until they were ready to have another go at it."
MID: <59d8b0db...@news.eternal-september.org>

--
Mr Pounder's fitting description of Birdbrain Macaw:
"You are a well known fool, a tosser, a pillock, a stupid unemployable
sponging failure who will always live alone and will die alone. You will not
be missed."
MID: <orree6$on2$1...@dont-email.me>

--
Richard to pathetic wanker Hucker:
"You haven't bred?
Only useful thing you've done in your pathetic existence."
MID: <orvctf$l5m$1...@gioia.aioe.org>

--
cl...@snyder.on.ca about Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
""not the sharpest knife in the drawer"'s parents sure made a serious
mistake having him born alive -- A total waste of oxygen, food, space,
and bandwidth."
MID: <s5e9uclqpnabteheh...@4ax.com>

--
Mr Pounder exposing sociopathic Birdbrain:
"You will always be a lonely sociopath living in a shithole with no hot
running water with loads of stinking cats and a few parrots."
MID: <os5m1i$8m1$1...@dont-email.me>

--
francis about Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"He seems to have a reputation as someone of limited intelligence"
MID: <cf06cdd9-8bb8-469c...@googlegroups.com>

--
Peter Moylan about Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"If people like JWS didn't exist, we would have to find some other way to
explain the concept of "invincible ignorance"."
MID: <otofc8$tbg$2...@dont-email.me>

--
Lewis about nym-shifting Birdbrain:
"Typical narcissist troll, thinks his shit is so grand he has the right to
try to force it on everyone
MID: <slrnq16c27....@jaka.local>

Snit

unread,
Mar 22, 2023, 5:32:44 PM3/22/23
to
On Mar 22, 2023 at 2:16:14 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.11771...@ryzen.home>:

> What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?
>
> To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534

How much is shipping? How will they protect it?

And can you trust them give how it is all they seem to be selling?

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

Ed Pawlowski

unread,
Mar 22, 2023, 5:38:26 PM3/22/23
to
On 3/22/2023 5:20 PM, pothead wrote:
> On 2023-03-22, Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?
>>
>> To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
>> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534
>
> I once saw someone selling a used potty for seniors......
> Yuck...
>
>

If properly cleaned and sanitized, not any different than a brand new
one. Ever use a public restroom? That is real yuck.

Peeler

unread,
Mar 22, 2023, 5:51:13 PM3/22/23
to
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:20:45 -0000 (UTC), pothead, another mentally
challenged, troll-feeding, senile ASSHOLE, blathered:


> I once saw someone selling a used potty for seniors......
> Yuck...

You wouldn't need one. You keep the shit all inside your senile head,
troll-feeding senile shithead!

Peeler

unread,
Mar 22, 2023, 5:56:46 PM3/22/23
to
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:32:36 GMT, Shit the git, the trolling and
troll-feeding senile asshole, blathered again:


> How much is shipping? How will they protect it?
>
> And can you trust them give how it is all they seem to be selling?

Ah, Shit the git, Usenet's constantly gurgling toilet, has started running
again! <BG>

--
Glenn Hall in comp.os.linux.advocacy about Shit the git:
"That person is like a constantly running toilet that won't stop. Does he
ever stop talking about UI consistency? No matter what anyone replies, he
adds a few more branches to the spider web as it grows and grows. It's a
waste of time." 31 Oct 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/c8dd8a244fe1eb2c

pothead

unread,
Mar 22, 2023, 6:12:09 PM3/22/23
to
I guess. It just seemed odd to me.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 1, 2023, 1:58:45 PM4/1/23
to
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:32:36 -0000, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 22, 2023 at 2:16:14 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.11771...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?
>>
>> To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
>> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534
>
> How much is shipping? How will they protect it?

A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a packet she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the human race.

> And can you trust them give how it is all they seem to be selling?

Nobody bid on it and he's relisted it! That will have cost him 36p (again).

You don't need to trust them, there is Ebay money back guarantee. That would give them a laugh. You could buy it, click the return damaged item button, and he'd have to pay the return postage!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 1, 2023, 1:59:59 PM4/1/23
to
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:38:18 -0000, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:

> On 3/22/2023 5:20 PM, pothead wrote:
>> On 2023-03-22, Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?
>>>
>>> To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
>>> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534
>>
>> I once saw someone selling a used potty for seniors......
>> Yuck...
>
> If properly cleaned and sanitized,

It might not be. You can buy used dirty underwear....

> not any different than a brand new
> one. Ever use a public restroom? That is real yuck.

Only in France. In the UK they clean them. The ones in motorway service stations have a timer saying when they were last cleaned.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 1, 2023, 2:00:14 PM4/1/23
to
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 22:12:03 -0000, pothead <pot...@snakebite.com> wrote:

> On 2023-03-22, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>> On 3/22/2023 5:20 PM, pothead wrote:
>>> On 2023-03-22, Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>> What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?
>>>>
>>>> To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
>>>> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534
>>>
>>> I once saw someone selling a used potty for seniors......
>>> Yuck...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> If properly cleaned and sanitized, not any different than a brand new
>> one. Ever use a public restroom? That is real yuck.
>
> I guess. It just seemed odd to me.

Ah, the recycled toilet paper joke.

Snit

unread,
Apr 1, 2023, 2:07:32 PM4/1/23
to
On Apr 1, 2023 at 10:58:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.12qhj...@ryzen.home>:

> On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:32:36 -0000, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mar 22, 2023 at 2:16:14 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.11771...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>> What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?
>>>
>>> To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
>>> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534
>>
>> How much is shipping? How will they protect it?
>
> A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a packet
> she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the human race.

They need to ship them with even MORE air!

>> And can you trust them give how it is all they seem to be selling?
>
> Nobody bid on it and he's relisted it! That will have cost him 36p (again).
>
> You don't need to trust them, there is Ebay money back guarantee. That would
> give them a laugh. You could buy it, click the return damaged item button, and
> he'd have to pay the return postage!

I suppose I could. But I won't.

Peeler

unread,
Apr 1, 2023, 3:12:56 PM4/1/23
to
On Sat, 01 Apr 2023 18:07:25 GMT, Shit the git, the trolling and
troll-feeding senile asshole, blathered again:


> They need to ship them with even MORE air!

The thing both of you sickos already got too much of in your sick heads, you
two abnormal airheads!

--
Some facts about the trolling senile shithead:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html

rbowman

unread,
Apr 1, 2023, 10:08:47 PM4/1/23
to
On Sat, 01 Apr 2023 18:58:38 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:

> A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a
> packet she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the
> human race.

She should stick to Pringles. Did the UK ever determine if Pringles can be
called crisps?


Snit

unread,
Apr 1, 2023, 10:26:44 PM4/1/23
to
On Apr 1, 2023 at 7:08:41 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
<k8s6d8...@mid.individual.net>:
Not only can they be, they must be or they would avoid a tax. I think. Would
have to look it up again.

Peeler

unread,
Apr 2, 2023, 4:28:43 AM4/2/23
to
On 2 Apr 2023 02:08:41 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> She should stick to Pringles. Did the UK ever determine if Pringles can be
> called crisps?

Whereas you stick to sucking troll prick, senile Yankee bigmouth.

--
More of the senile gossip's absolutely idiotic senile blather:
"I stopped for breakfast at a diner in Virginia when the state didn't do
DST. I remarked on the time difference and the crusty old waitress said
'We keep God's time in Virginia.'

I also lived in Ft. Wayne for a while."

MID: <t0tjfa$6r5$1...@dont-email.me>

AK

unread,
Apr 2, 2023, 5:08:46 AM4/2/23
to
Silly is not the word I would use to describe that posting.

Maybe the seller is short on cash?

:-)

Andy

Peeler

unread,
Apr 2, 2023, 5:22:51 AM4/2/23
to
On Sun, 2 Apr 2023 02:08:41 -0700 (PDT), AK, another mentally challenged
troll-feeding senile asshole, blathered:


> Silly is not the word I would use to describe that posting.

How about calling it another idiotic bait by the attention-starved and
proven clinically insane troll, troll-feeding senile asshole?

rbowman

unread,
Apr 2, 2023, 2:21:52 PM4/2/23
to
On Sun, 02 Apr 2023 02:26:37 GMT, Snit wrote:

> On Apr 1, 2023 at 7:08:41 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
> <k8s6d8...@mid.individual.net>:
>
>> On Sat, 01 Apr 2023 18:58:38 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>
>>> A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a
>>> packet she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the
>>> human race.
>>
>> She should stick to Pringles. Did the UK ever determine if Pringles can
>> be called crisps?
>
> Not only can they be, they must be or they would avoid a tax. I think.
> Would have to look it up again.

That was the scam. They're less than 50% potato so they can't be crisps
even if it says crisps on the can so we don't have to pay VAT. I think P&P
got away with it for a couple of years before a slumbering politician woke
up. You have to watch those trade agreements.

https://sarah-angleton.com/tag/1872-tariff-act/

Peeler

unread,
Apr 2, 2023, 3:17:00 PM4/2/23
to
On 2 Apr 2023 18:21:45 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> That was the scam. They're less than 50% potato so they can't be crisps
> even if it says crisps on the can so we don't have to pay VAT. I think P&P
> got away with it for a couple of years before a slumbering politician woke
> up. You have to watch those trade agreements.
>
> https://sarah-angleton.com/tag/1872-tariff-act/

Now the resident bigmouth is driveling about crisps!!!! What next? What a
poor fucked up senile ASSHOLE and typical Trumper! LOL

--
More of the pathological senile gossip's sick shit squeezed out of his sick
head:
"Skunk probably tastes like chicken. I've never gotten that comparison,
most famously with Chicken of the Sea. Tuna is a fish and tastes like a
fish. I will admit I've had chicken that tasted like fish. I don't think I
want to know what they were feeding it."
MID: <k44t5l...@mid.individual.net>

Snit

unread,
Apr 2, 2023, 3:35:07 PM4/2/23
to
On Apr 2, 2023 at 11:21:45 AM MST, "rbowman" wrote
<k8tvdo...@mid.individual.net>:
The law goes by what is written... not by what is meant or what makes sense.
People have tons of fun with that, and lawyers get rich.

FromTheRafters

unread,
Apr 3, 2023, 7:16:54 AM4/3/23
to
Snit laid this down on his screen :
> On Apr 2, 2023 at 11:21:45 AM MST, "rbowman" wrote
> <k8tvdo...@mid.individual.net>:
>
>> On Sun, 02 Apr 2023 02:26:37 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 1, 2023 at 7:08:41 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
>>> <k8s6d8...@mid.individual.net>:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 01 Apr 2023 18:58:38 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a
>>>>> packet she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the
>>>>> human race.
>>>>
>>>> She should stick to Pringles. Did the UK ever determine if Pringles can
>>>> be called crisps?
>>>
>>> Not only can they be, they must be or they would avoid a tax. I think.
>>> Would have to look it up again.
>>
>> That was the scam. They're less than 50% potato so they can't be crisps
>> even if it says crisps on the can so we don't have to pay VAT. I think P&P
>> got away with it for a couple of years before a slumbering politician woke
>> up. You have to watch those trade agreements.
>>
>> https://sarah-angleton.com/tag/1872-tariff-act/
>
> The law goes by what is written... not by what is meant or what makes sense.
> People have tons of fun with that, and lawyers get rich.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_and_spirit_of_the_law

Snit

unread,
Apr 3, 2023, 12:14:33 PM4/3/23
to
On Apr 3, 2023 at 4:16:43 AM MST, "FromTheRafters" wrote
<u0eciu$2upa2$1...@dont-email.me>:
Keeps the lawyers rich.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 8, 2023, 1:04:52 PM4/8/23
to
On Sat, 01 Apr 2023 19:07:25 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 1, 2023 at 10:58:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.12qhj...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:32:36 -0000, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mar 22, 2023 at 2:16:14 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.11771...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>> What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?
>>>>
>>>> To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
>>>> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534
>>>
>>> How much is shipping? How will they protect it?
>>
>> A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a packet
>> she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the human race.
>
> They need to ship them with even MORE air!

If you were placed in the back of a lorry, such that there was 99% air and 1% you, you'd still collide with the side when it went round a corner. You need some kind of structure to the air, like bubblewrap. Then she'd sue them because she ate the bubblewrap because there were no instructions forbidding it. I propose a new law. Anyone suing for something stupid gets shot on sight. Like the woman who didn't know coffee was hot, balanced it between her legs, then drove off and wondered why it scorched her vagina. Some people would pay for that.

>>> And can you trust them give how it is all they seem to be selling?
>>
>> Nobody bid on it and he's relisted it! That will have cost him 36p (again).
>>
>> You don't need to trust them, there is Ebay money back guarantee. That would
>> give them a laugh. You could buy it, click the return damaged item button, and
>> he'd have to pay the return postage!
>
> I suppose I could. But I won't.

Eat it, provide written testimony it tasted foul, and send back a crumb, carefully packaged of course.

Snit

unread,
Apr 8, 2023, 1:27:38 PM4/8/23
to
On Apr 8, 2023 at 10:04:45 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.123dp...@ryzen.home>:

> On Sat, 01 Apr 2023 19:07:25 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 1, 2023 at 10:58:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.12qhj...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>> On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:32:36 -0000, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mar 22, 2023 at 2:16:14 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>> <op.11771...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>
>>>>> What's the silliest thing you can find on Ebay?
>>>>>
>>>>> To start you off, a single crisp with one side a different colour.
>>>>> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204279064534
>>>>
>>>> How much is shipping? How will they protect it?
>>>
>>> A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a packet
>>> she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the human race.
>>
>> They need to ship them with even MORE air!
>
> If you were placed in the back of a lorry, such that there was 99% air and 1%
> you, you'd still collide with the side when it went round a corner. You need
> some kind of structure to the air, like bubblewrap. Then she'd sue them
> because she ate the bubblewrap because there were no instructions forbidding
> it.

Edible bubble wrap.

> I propose a new law. Anyone suing for something stupid gets shot on sight.
> Like the woman who didn't know coffee was hot, balanced it between her legs,
> then drove off and wondered why it scorched her vagina. Some people would pay
> for that.

There is more to that story... I would go with shared responsibility.

>
>>>> And can you trust them give how it is all they seem to be selling?
>>>
>>> Nobody bid on it and he's relisted it! That will have cost him 36p (again).
>>>
>>> You don't need to trust them, there is Ebay money back guarantee. That would
>>> give them a laugh. You could buy it, click the return damaged item button, and
>>> he'd have to pay the return postage!
>>
>> I suppose I could. But I won't.
>
> Eat it, provide written testimony it tasted foul, and send back a crumb,
> carefully packaged of course.

On it!

Peeler

unread,
Apr 8, 2023, 2:37:59 PM4/8/23
to
On Sat, 08 Apr 2023 17:27:30 GMT, Shit the git, the trolling and
troll-feeding senile asshole, blathered again:


> Edible bubble wrap.

Ah, Shit the Git, Usenet's notorious toilet, starts gurgling again! <BG>

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 15, 2023, 11:58:05 AM4/15/23
to
On Sun, 02 Apr 2023 03:26:37 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 1, 2023 at 7:08:41 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
> <k8s6d8...@mid.individual.net>:
>
>> On Sat, 01 Apr 2023 18:58:38 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>
>>> A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a
>>> packet she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the
>>> human race.
>>
>> She should stick to Pringles. Did the UK ever determine if Pringles can be
>> called crisps?
>
> Not only can they be, they must be or they would avoid a tax. I think. Would
> have to look it up again.

As is usually the case on the internet, I found conflicting articles. These two say they ARE crisps:

https://www.tasteofhome.com/article/pringles-arent-really-potato-chips/
https://recipes.howstuffworks.com/pringles.htm

These two say they AREN'T chips:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pringles-are-actually-biscuits-and-not-crisps-113530894.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7490346.stm

Since one of them says the decision was reversed later in the courts, I would have said they used to be not crisps and now are crisps.

But.... they don't say crisps on the packet.

Final word - I looked at a shopping receipt. I'm charged 20% VAT on Pringles, so they're crisps.

It all comes down to government theft, they didn't make those crisps, they have no right to my money. FUCKING LEFTY THEIVES!

And why the fuck do Americans screw up every word, you've changed chips to fries then crisps to chips!

Snit

unread,
Apr 15, 2023, 12:06:12 PM4/15/23
to
On Apr 15, 2023 at 8:57:58 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13f9a...@ryzen.home>:

> On Sun, 02 Apr 2023 03:26:37 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 1, 2023 at 7:08:41 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
>> <k8s6d8...@mid.individual.net>:
>>
>>> On Sat, 01 Apr 2023 18:58:38 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>
>>>> A woman once successfully sued Walkers crisps because the crisps in a
>>>> packet she bought were not whole. I fear for the continuation of the
>>>> human race.
>>>
>>> She should stick to Pringles. Did the UK ever determine if Pringles can be
>>> called crisps?
>>
>> Not only can they be, they must be or they would avoid a tax. I think. Would
>> have to look it up again.
>
> As is usually the case on the internet, I found conflicting articles. These
> two say they ARE crisps:
>
> https://www.tasteofhome.com/article/pringles-arent-really-potato-chips/
> https://recipes.howstuffworks.com/pringles.htm
>
> These two say they AREN'T chips:
>
> https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pringles-are-actually-biscuits-and-not-crisps-113530894.html
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7490346.stm
>
> Since one of them says the decision was reversed later in the courts, I would
> have said they used to be not crisps and now are crisps.
>
> But.... they don't say crisps on the packet.
>
> Final word - I looked at a shopping receipt. I'm charged 20% VAT on Pringles,
> so they're crisps.

Legally that seems to be the case.

>
> It all comes down to government theft, they didn't make those crisps, they
> have no right to my money. FUCKING LEFTY THEIVES!

LOL! You say this as you use public services. Oy.

>
> And why the fuck do Americans screw up every word, you've changed chips to
> fries then crisps to chips!


Peeler

unread,
Apr 15, 2023, 12:58:15 PM4/15/23
to
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 16:06:05 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


>> It all comes down to government theft, they didn't make those crisps, they
>> have no right to my money. FUCKING LEFTY THEIVES!
>
> LOL! You say this as you use public services. Oy.

He says this because he's a fucking stupid troll like you, Shit the Git!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 15, 2023, 4:13:16 PM4/15/23
to
No there isn't. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know coffee is hot. She's a fucking moron. MacDonalds provided the hot drink, what she does with it afterwards is her problem.

>>>>> And can you trust them give how it is all they seem to be selling?
>>>>
>>>> Nobody bid on it and he's relisted it! That will have cost him 36p (again).
>>>>
>>>> You don't need to trust them, there is Ebay money back guarantee. That would
>>>> give them a laugh. You could buy it, click the return damaged item button, and
>>>> he'd have to pay the return postage!
>>>
>>> I suppose I could. But I won't.
>>
>> Eat it, provide written testimony it tasted foul, and send back a crumb,
>> carefully packaged of course.
>
> On it!

Typical Jew!

Snit

unread,
Apr 15, 2023, 4:26:14 PM4/15/23
to
On Apr 15, 2023 at 1:13:09 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13gk3...@ryzen.home>:
We disagree. OK.

> It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know coffee is hot.

It was hotter than it was supposed to be, and they had previously been warned.
Multiple times.

> She's a fucking moron. MacDonalds provided the hot drink, what she does with
> it afterwards is her problem.
>
>>>>>> And can you trust them give how it is all they seem to be selling?
>>>>>
>>>>> Nobody bid on it and he's relisted it! That will have cost him 36p (again).
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't need to trust them, there is Ebay money back guarantee. That would
>>>>> give them a laugh. You could buy it, click the return damaged item button, and
>>>>> he'd have to pay the return postage!
>>>>
>>>> I suppose I could. But I won't.
>>>
>>> Eat it, provide written testimony it tasted foul, and send back a crumb,
>>> carefully packaged of course.
>>
>> On it!
>
> Typical Jew!


Peeler

unread,
Apr 15, 2023, 5:17:25 PM4/15/23
to
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 20:26:07 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> We disagree. OK.

You are vying with him for the position as the top troll in these groups,
you filthy constantly gurgling "human" toilet!

--
Glenn Hall in comp.os.linux.advocacy about Shit the Git:

rbowman

unread,
Apr 15, 2023, 11:12:12 PM4/15/23
to
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 16:57:58 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:

> And why the fuck do Americans screw up every word, you've changed chips
> to fries then crisps to chips!

chips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx_JXW4QwxE

fries:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGxAbNXeyEw

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:33:00 AM4/16/23
to
On 16 Apr 2023 03:12:05 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


LMAO! You STILL claiming you are holding down a job, you abnormal useless
senile bigmouth? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA...!!!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:58:06 AM4/16/23
to
Since they're stealing the money from me, obviously I steal it back.

But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:58:53 AM4/16/23
to
Because you're a blamer, Jews are like that. You sue everyone and live off it.

>> It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know coffee is hot.
>
> It was hotter than it was supposed to be, and they had previously been warned.
> Multiple times.

When you make coffee at home, you boil a kettle, it could very easily be almost 100C, especially black coffee. I don't think MacDonalds have broken the laws of physics and made water go above 100C in liquid form.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:59:37 AM4/16/23
to
I prefer real food.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 5:00:06 AM4/16/23
to
Since they're stealing the money from me, obviously I steal it back.

But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.

Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 11:35:10 AM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 1:59:57 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13hkl...@ryzen.home>:
False premise.


> obviously I steal it back.
>
> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.

Does not work.

>
>>> And why the fuck do Americans screw up every word, you've changed chips to
>>> fries then crisps to chips!


Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 11:35:25 AM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 1:58:44 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13hkj...@ryzen.home>:
I do not appreciate the antisemitism.

>
>>> It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know coffee is hot.
>>
>> It was hotter than it was supposed to be, and they had previously been warned.
>> Multiple times.
>
> When you make coffee at home, you boil a kettle, it could very easily be
> almost 100C, especially black coffee. I don't think MacDonalds have broken the
> laws of physics and made water go above 100C in liquid form.


Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 12:53:00 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 15:35:18 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> I do not appreciate the antisemitism.

I do not appreciate your taking every single idiotic bait the Scottish
wanker keeps setting out for all you senile assholes in these ngs!

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 12:53:54 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 15:35:02 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> False premise.

False topic, you trolling piece of senile shit!

--
Glenn Hall in comp.os.linux.advocacy about Shit the git:

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 2:29:59 PM4/16/23
to
It's a statement of fact.

Antisemitism would be "I wish Hitler had won".

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 2:31:20 PM4/16/23
to
Taking without permission is stealing, it's the definition of the word.

>> obviously I steal it back.
>>
>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>
> Does not work.

Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no, but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human race.

And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That would prove your point, we don't want it.

rbowman

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:02:56 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 09:58:44 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:

> When you make coffee at home, you boil a kettle, it could very easily be
> almost 100C, especially black coffee. I don't think MacDonalds have
> broken the laws of physics and made water go above 100C in liquid form.

The contention was MacDonalds held the coffee at 190F, considerably hotter
than other restaurants. I believe that was the case. I always found it
annoying to have to drive for several miles before the stuff was
drinkable.

The woman had verifiable medical expenses from having her crotch scalded.
She asked for $20000 to offset those expenses and MacDonalds offered $800.
At that point she engaged an ambulance chaser who was good at his job.

That's the other side of 'frivilous' lawsuits. Corporations seldom accept
any responsibility figuring they have lawyers on the payroll and might as
well use them.

Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:07:49 PM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 11:31:11 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13ia1...@ryzen.home>:
If it is illegal. Taxes are legal. And moral -- they are needed for a modern
society to function. You are required to give some BACK. It is fair. Does not
mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.

>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>
>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>
>> Does not work.
>
> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,

Does not work for a society.

> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
> race.
>
> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
> would prove your point, we don't want it.

I would not find the big picture. We should get a group that is tasked with
looking at that. Oh. We have it.

Again, does not mean they do it well. They do not. But better than not having
it.

Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:08:31 PM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 11:29:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13iaz...@ryzen.home>:
Your bigoted views are not facts, they are bigoted views. To assume all Jews,
or even Jews in general, do as you say is simply pushing an antisemitic
attack.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:34:36 PM4/16/23
to
It's an observation. And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss? Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:37:17 PM4/16/23
to
Only because the people who run the courts are the ones doing the stealing.

> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
> society to function.

They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would be better off if we weeded them out.

> You are required to give some BACK.

I'm supposed to.

> It is fair. Does not
> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.

It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.

>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>
>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>
>>> Does not work.
>>
>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>
> Does not work for a society.

In your strange mind.

>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>> race.
>>
>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>
> I would not find the big picture.

Rewrite that in English.

> We should get a group that is tasked with
> looking at that. Oh.

Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what stops things getting done.

> We have it.

No, we have a group of thieves we didn't want in power.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:39:09 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:02:48 +0100, rbowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 09:58:44 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>
>> When you make coffee at home, you boil a kettle, it could very easily be
>> almost 100C, especially black coffee. I don't think MacDonalds have
>> broken the laws of physics and made water go above 100C in liquid form.
>
> The contention was MacDonalds held the coffee at 190F, considerably hotter
> than other restaurants. I believe that was the case. I always found it
> annoying to have to drive for several miles before the stuff was
> drinkable.

Annoying perhaps, but not deadly.

> The woman had verifiable medical expenses from having her crotch scalded.

This was her own fault.

> She asked for $20000 to offset those expenses and MacDonalds offered $800.
> At that point she engaged an ambulance chaser who was good at his job.

Ambulance chasers ought to get run over by ambulances.

> That's the other side of 'frivilous' lawsuits. Corporations seldom accept
> any responsibility figuring they have lawyers on the payroll and might as
> well use them.

Anyone like her making up this shit should get jailed.

Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:43:03 PM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 12:37:09 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13id3...@ryzen.home>:

>>>>>
>>>>> Since they're stealing the money from me,
>>>>
>>>> False premise.
>>>
>>> Taking without permission is stealing, it's the definition of the word.
>>
>> If it is illegal. Taxes are legal.
>
> Only because the people who run the courts are the ones doing the stealing.

The ones who run the courts were put there by the people.

Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
THAT I want to see change.

>
>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>> society to function.
>
> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
> be better off if we weeded them out.

The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
person is tied to what they produce?
>
>> You are required to give some BACK.
>
> I'm supposed to.

And if you do not there are consequences. Has to be same rules for everyone.

>
>> It is fair. Does not
>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>
> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.

I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
they do not.

>
>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>
>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>
>>>> Does not work.
>>>
>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>
>> Does not work for a society.
>
> In your strange mind.

You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.
>
>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>> race.
>>>
>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>
>> I would not find the big picture.
>
> Rewrite that in English.

Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.

>
>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>> looking at that. Oh.
>
> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
> stops things getting done.

Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
society.

>
>> We have it.
>
> No, we have a group of thieves we didn't want in power.

I do want a representative government. In the US we cannot have that -- more
from the Republicans but really both major parties suck.

Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:45:22 PM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 12:34:28 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13idz...@ryzen.home>:
You have bigoted feelings. OK. What is a better way to deal with it than
pushing harm onto others?

Your actions here show why the Libertarian mindset cannot work. A
feelings-bases society is not a civil one.

> And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss?
> Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.

Those are your feelings. Bigoted feelings, really.

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:49:06 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 19:08:22 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> Your bigoted views are not facts, they are bigoted views. To assume all Jews,
> or even Jews in general, do as you say is simply pushing an antisemitic
> attack.

Who cares about his "views" ...other than a trolling and troll-feeding
senile asshole like you? <BG>

--
Some facts about the trolling senile shithead:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:50:44 PM4/16/23
to
On 16 Apr 2023 19:02:48 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:



> The contention was MacDonalds held the coffee at 190F, considerably hotter
> than other restaurants. I believe that was the case. I always found it
> annoying to have to drive for several miles before the stuff was
> drinkable.

Keep your stinking senile shit out of these groups, you stinking trolling
bigmouth!

--
More of the resident bigmouth's usual idiotic babble and gossip:
I'm not saying my father and uncle wouldn't have drank Genesee beer
without Miss Genny but it certainly didn't hurt. Stanton's was the
hometown brewery but it closed in '50. There was a Schaefer brewery in
Albany but their product was considered a step up from cat piss.

My preference was Rheingold on tap"

MID: <k9mnmm...@mid.individual.net>

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:51:42 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 19:07:40 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> If it is illegal. Taxes are legal. And moral -- they are needed for a modern

It is more of your off topic senile shit, trolling senile pest!

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 3:52:41 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 19:42:56 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> The ones who run the courts were put there by the people.

Oh, fuck! The "human" toilet has started gurgling again...

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:11:58 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:42:56 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 16, 2023 at 12:37:09 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.13id3...@ryzen.home>:
>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since they're stealing the money from me,
>>>>>
>>>>> False premise.
>>>>
>>>> Taking without permission is stealing, it's the definition of the word.
>>>
>>> If it is illegal. Taxes are legal.
>>
>> Only because the people who run the courts are the ones doing the stealing.
>
> The ones who run the courts were put there by the people.

Wow, you really believe that? Actually we have a choice of idiots or bigger idiots. No sensible person ever goes into politics.

> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
> THAT I want to see change.

The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.

>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>> society to function.
>>
>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>
> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
> person is tied to what they produce?

Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't force others to do so.

>>> You are required to give some BACK.
>>
>> I'm supposed to.
>
> And if you do not there are consequences. Has to be same rules for everyone.

Rules are for the obedience of fools.

>>> It is fair. Does not
>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>
>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>
> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
> they do not.

They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of 30,000.

>>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does not work.
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>>
>>> Does not work for a society.
>>
>> In your strange mind.
>
> You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.

Indeed, they don't do anything to help society. They are a burden.

>>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>>> race.
>>>>
>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>>
>>> I would not find the big picture.
>>
>> Rewrite that in English.
>
> Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.

How can "Would not work for" change to "I would not find"?

>>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>>> looking at that. Oh.
>>
>> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
>> stops things getting done.
>
> Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
> society.

Those with intelligence know simple things without having to study them.

>>> We have it.
>>
>> No, we have a group of thieves we didn't want in power.
>
> I do want a representative government. In the US we cannot have that -- more
> from the Republicans but really both major parties suck.

then vote for a small one. Oh wait, most people are thickos and vote tactically, so they'll never get in. But they would if you just voted who you wanted, nevermind how many others you think will vote that way.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:13:25 PM4/16/23
to
No, as I said, Jews are like that, it's what I've observed. There is no other reason for me to say so.

> Your actions here show why the Libertarian mindset cannot work. A
> feelings-bases society is not a civil one.

You choose to vote democrat because of your feelings.

>> And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss?
>> Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.
>
> Those are your feelings. Bigoted feelings, really.

No, they are reality. I saw Irish electricians cause two fires in one contract. "Irish electrician" is what's called an oxymoron.

rbowman

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:13:36 PM4/16/23
to
Bull balls are real food.

https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-world/us/strange-news/article/Montana-gearing-up-for-annual-bare-all-Testicle-8509029.php

Unfortunately the Testicle Festival was canceled a few years ago after several related traffic fatalities and a couple of stabbings.

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:22:07 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 19:45:15 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> You have bigoted feelings.

Says, of course, the hypocrite who keeps trashing these ngs with his endless
off topic senile shit!

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:24:59 PM4/16/23
to
On 16 Apr 2023 20:13:28 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> Bull balls are real food.

I wonder whether they are big enough to make you shut up, bigmouth!

--
More of the senile gossip's absolutely idiotic senile blather:
"I stopped for breakfast at a diner in Virginia when the state didn't do
DST. I remarked on the time difference and the crusty old waitress said
'We keep God's time in Virginia.'

I also lived in Ft. Wayne for a while."

MID: <t0tjfa$6r5$1...@dont-email.me>

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:37:16 PM4/16/23
to
Real food doesn't make me puke to see it.

Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:38:01 PM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 1:13:16 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13ifs...@ryzen.home>:

>>>> Your bigoted views are not facts, they are bigoted views. To assume all Jews,
>>>> or even Jews in general, do as you say is simply pushing an antisemitic
>>>> attack.
>>>
>>> It's an observation.
>>
>> You have bigoted feelings. OK. What is a better way to deal with it than
>> pushing harm onto others?
>
> No, as I said, Jews are like that, it's what I've observed. There is no other
> reason for me to say so.

People with bigoted tendencies make those type observations. I get that.

>
>> Your actions here show why the Libertarian mindset cannot work. A
>> feelings-bases society is not a civil one.
>
> You choose to vote democrat because of your feelings.

Nope. Because while the Dems absolutely suck, they are better than the
Republicans -- better and promoting evidence based policies, better at
promoting a representative government, better at supporting equal rights.

Better is NOT perfect, nor even particularly good. But better is better.

>
>>> And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss?
>>> Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.
>>
>> Those are your feelings. Bigoted feelings, really.
>
> No, they are reality. I saw Irish electricians cause two fires in one
> contract. "Irish electrician" is what's called an oxymoron.

Your have bigoted feelings on this. I get it.

Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:42:58 PM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 1:11:50 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13ifp...@ryzen.home>:

> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:42:56 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 16, 2023 at 12:37:09 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.13id3...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since they're stealing the money from me,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> False premise.
>>>>>
>>>>> Taking without permission is stealing, it's the definition of the word.
>>>>
>>>> If it is illegal. Taxes are legal.
>>>
>>> Only because the people who run the courts are the ones doing the stealing.
>>
>> The ones who run the courts were put there by the people.
>
> Wow, you really believe that? Actually we have a choice of idiots or bigger
> idiots. No sensible person ever goes into politics.

See the rest of the paragraph. LOL!

>
>> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
>> THAT I want to see change.
>
> The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can
> think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.

The government sucks. The Libertarian alternative of control by corporations,
or war lords, would be worse.

>
>>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>>> society to function.
>>>
>>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>>
>> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
>> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
>> person is tied to what they produce?
>
> Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't
> force others to do so.

I understand that feeling and optimism, though I think in most cases it is
stated as an excuse for the person to not donate... but there is no reason or
evidence to think it would work.

>
>>>> You are required to give some BACK.
>>>
>>> I'm supposed to.
>>
>> And if you do not there are consequences. Has to be same rules for everyone.
>
> Rules are for the obedience of fools.

Stay off the road.

>
>>>> It is fair. Does not
>>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>>
>>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>>
>> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
>> they do not.
>
> They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of
> 30,000.

I terms of percentage of income. But even in raw numbers they often pay less.
Look at Bezos. And Trump.

>
>>>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does not work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>>>
>>>> Does not work for a society.
>>>
>>> In your strange mind.
>>
>> You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.
>
> Indeed, they don't do anything to help society. They are a burden.

You are open your ideas would not work for society, but only for those you
deem worthy. And that excludes the elderly and infirm, the disabled and the
young. No thanks.

>
>>>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>>>> race.
>>>>>
>>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>>>
>>>> I would not find the big picture.
>>>
>>> Rewrite that in English.
>>
>> Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.
>
> How can "Would not work for" change to "I would not find"?

Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.

>
>>>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>>>> looking at that. Oh.
>>>
>>> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
>>> stops things getting done.
>>
>> Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
>> society.
>
> Those with intelligence know simple things without having to study them.

You mock those who do not share your feelings. That shows insecurity with your
ideas.

>
>>>> We have it.
>>>
>>> No, we have a group of thieves we didn't want in power.
>>
>> I do want a representative government. In the US we cannot have that -- more
>> from the Republicans but really both major parties suck.
>
> then vote for a small one. Oh wait, most people are thickos and vote
> tactically, so they'll never get in. But they would if you just voted who you
> wanted, nevermind how many others you think will vote that way.

I have voted for third parties... but our Constitution makes it so they
basically cannot win the presidency, even if they get more votes than the two
big parties. It is stupid.

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:52:16 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:37:54 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> People with bigoted tendencies make those type observations. I get that.

So, for HOW long will your latest idiotic "discussion" go on like that, you
trolling senile pest?

Peeler

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 4:53:19 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:42:51 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> See the rest of the paragraph. LOL!

Hard to tell which of the two of you is the bigger idiot!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 7:39:15 PM4/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 21:42:51 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 16, 2023 at 1:11:50 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.13ifp...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:42:56 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 16, 2023 at 12:37:09 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.13id3...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since they're stealing the money from me,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> False premise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Taking without permission is stealing, it's the definition of the word.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it is illegal. Taxes are legal.
>>>>
>>>> Only because the people who run the courts are the ones doing the stealing.
>>>
>>> The ones who run the courts were put there by the people.
>>
>> Wow, you really believe that? Actually we have a choice of idiots or bigger
>> idiots. No sensible person ever goes into politics.
>
> See the rest of the paragraph. LOL!

In which you refute the people running the courts were put there by the people.

>>> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
>>> THAT I want to see change.
>>
>> The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can
>> think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.
>
> The government sucks. The Libertarian alternative of control by corporations,
> or war lords, would be worse.

No, control by nobody. Why do you want to be controlled? Can you not think for yourself?

>>>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>>>> society to function.
>>>>
>>>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>>>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>>>
>>> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
>>> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
>>> person is tied to what they produce?
>>
>> Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't
>> force others to do so.
>
> I understand that feeling and optimism, though I think in most cases it is
> stated as an excuse for the person to not donate... but there is no reason or
> evidence to think it would work.

There are two possibilities:

1) Plenty of people think like you and donate. This will presumably be the case for 50% of the population who currently votes left wing.

2) Voters of left wing are actually liars and scroungers and want to receive but not send. In which case they won't get.

>>>>> You are required to give some BACK.
>>>>
>>>> I'm supposed to.
>>>
>>> And if you do not there are consequences. Has to be same rules for everyone.
>>
>> Rules are for the obedience of fools.
>
> Stay off the road.

No. Every man for himself. Or get a bigger car.

>>>>> It is fair. Does not
>>>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>>>
>>>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>>>
>>> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
>>> they do not.
>>
>> They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of
>> 30,000.
>
> I terms of percentage of income. But even in raw numbers they often pay less.
> Look at Bezos. And Trump.

If you've worked hard to get where you are, why the fuck should you pay for the minions?

Although I have no idea why people buy from Amazon.

Amazon take 15%
Ebay take 10%
Ebid take 5%

>>>>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does not work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>>>>
>>>>> Does not work for a society.
>>>>
>>>> In your strange mind.
>>>
>>> You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.
>>
>> Indeed, they don't do anything to help society. They are a burden.
>
> You are open your ideas would not work for society, but only for those you
> deem worthy. And that excludes the elderly and infirm, the disabled and the
> young. No thanks.

Society is what's left after the weak have gone. Go ask a herd of buffalo what happens to the weak. They slow them down. So they let the predator get them.

>>>>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>>>>> race.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would not find the big picture.
>>>>
>>>> Rewrite that in English.
>>>
>>> Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.
>>
>> How can "Would not work for" change to "I would not find"?
>
> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.

Your autocarrot is changing the words around? Not just a spellchecker? Don't give that much control to your "computer".

>>>>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>>>>> looking at that. Oh.
>>>>
>>>> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
>>>> stops things getting done.
>>>
>>> Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
>>> society.
>>
>> Those with intelligence know simple things without having to study them.
>
> You mock those who do not share your feelings. That shows insecurity with your
> ideas.

The exact opposite. I am very secure in my feelings being correct, therefore anyone with different feelings is completely wrong. How the fuck did you come to the opposite conclusion?

>>>>> We have it.
>>>>
>>>> No, we have a group of thieves we didn't want in power.
>>>
>>> I do want a representative government. In the US we cannot have that -- more
>>> from the Republicans but really both major parties suck.
>>
>> then vote for a small one. Oh wait, most people are thickos and vote
>> tactically, so they'll never get in. But they would if you just voted who you
>> wanted, nevermind how many others you think will vote that way.
>
> I have voted for third parties... but our Constitution makes it so they
> basically cannot win the presidency, even if they get more votes than the two
> big parties. It is stupid.

You mean like our first past the post? You need to get over 50% in each area to get a person in?

Snit

unread,
Apr 16, 2023, 10:05:18 PM4/16/23
to
On Apr 16, 2023 at 4:39:06 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13ipb...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Only because the people who run the courts are the ones doing the stealing.
>>>>
>>>> The ones who run the courts were put there by the people.
>>>
>>> Wow, you really believe that? Actually we have a choice of idiots or bigger
>>> idiots. No sensible person ever goes into politics.
>>
>> See the rest of the paragraph. LOL!
>
> In which you refute the people running the courts were put there by the people.

I note we do not have a representative government. I wish we did.

>
>>>> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
>>>> THAT I want to see change.
>>>
>>> The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can
>>> think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.
>>
>> The government sucks. The Libertarian alternative of control by corporations,
>> or war lords, would be worse.
>
> No, control by nobody. Why do you want to be controlled? Can you not think for
> yourself?

This with power WILL take control. The role of the government is to have
protections for human rights and the environment. Libertarians suggest getting
rid of those controls but refuse to accept the consequences of not having
those controls (reduction in human rights and the environment).

The idea you will be able to counter that control, even as you note you cannot
now, is absurd.
>
>>>>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>>>>> society to function.
>>>>>
>>>>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>>>>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>>>>
>>>> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
>>>> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
>>>> person is tied to what they produce?
>>>
>>> Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't
>>> force others to do so.
>>
>> I understand that feeling and optimism, though I think in most cases it is
>> stated as an excuse for the person to not donate... but there is no reason or
>> evidence to think it would work.
>
> There are two possibilities:
>
> 1) Plenty of people think like you and donate. This will presumably be the
> case for 50% of the population who currently votes left wing.

How do you figure? And donate to WHAT?

>
> 2) Voters of left wing are actually liars and scroungers and want to receive
> but not send. In which case they won't get.

Again, how do you figure?

You set up a false dichotomy based on a faulty premise.

>
>>>>>> You are required to give some BACK.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm supposed to.
>>>>
>>>> And if you do not there are consequences. Has to be same rules for everyone.
>>>
>>> Rules are for the obedience of fools.
>>
>> Stay off the road.
>
> No. Every man for himself. Or get a bigger car.

So control by those with more money than you and with nothing to limit the
restrictions of your rights or the harm done to you by environmental damage.

No thanks!

>
>>>>>> It is fair. Does not
>>>>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>>>>
>>>> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
>>>> they do not.
>>>
>>> They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of
>>> 30,000.
>>
>> I terms of percentage of income. But even in raw numbers they often pay less.
>> Look at Bezos. And Trump.
>
> If you've worked hard to get where you are, why the fuck should you pay for
> the minions?

They benefitted from a system. They should give some back. Be required to give
some back.

>
> Although I have no idea why people buy from Amazon.
>
> Amazon take 15%
> Ebay take 10%
> Ebid take 5%
>
>>>>>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does not work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does not work for a society.
>>>>>
>>>>> In your strange mind.
>>>>
>>>> You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.
>>>
>>> Indeed, they don't do anything to help society. They are a burden.
>>
>> You are open your ideas would not work for society, but only for those you
>> deem worthy. And that excludes the elderly and infirm, the disabled and the
>> young. No thanks.
>
> Society is what's left after the weak have gone. Go ask a herd of buffalo what
> happens to the weak. They slow them down. So they let the predator get them.

You have little value for human life. I do. OK. But keep in mind others
support you. You want to get but not give.

The Virtue Of Selfishness.... Ayn Rand. It is what Libertarians push.


>
>>>>>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>>>>>> race.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would not find the big picture.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rewrite that in English.
>>>>
>>>> Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.
>>>
>>> How can "Would not work for" change to "I would not find"?
>>
>> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.
>
> Your autocarrot is changing the words around? Not just a spellchecker? Don't
> give that much control to your "computer".

Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.

>
>>>>>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>>>>>> looking at that. Oh.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
>>>>> stops things getting done.
>>>>
>>>> Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
>>>> society.
>>>
>>> Those with intelligence know simple things without having to study them.
>>
>> You mock those who do not share your feelings. That shows insecurity with your
>> ideas.
>
> The exact opposite.

Nope. When others disagree you try to minimize them and their ideas. It shows
you are not confident in your ideas enough to use logic and evidence to back
them. You jump to ad hominem.

> I am very secure in my feelings being correct, therefore anyone with different
> feelings is completely wrong. How the fuck did you come to the opposite
> conclusion?

Your ad hominem goes counter to your claims.

>
>>>>>> We have it.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, we have a group of thieves we didn't want in power.
>>>>
>>>> I do want a representative government. In the US we cannot have that -- more
>>>> from the Republicans but really both major parties suck.
>>>
>>> then vote for a small one. Oh wait, most people are thickos and vote
>>> tactically, so they'll never get in. But they would if you just voted who you
>>> wanted, nevermind how many others you think will vote that way.
>>
>> I have voted for third parties... but our Constitution makes it so they
>> basically cannot win the presidency, even if they get more votes than the two
>> big parties. It is stupid.
>
> You mean like our first past the post? You need to get over 50% in each area
> to get a person in?

For presidency. If you do not then it goes to the House, but instead of the
normal rules of the house which are at least closer to fair representation,
those in less populated states get extra representation.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
May 7, 2023, 2:52:39 PM5/7/23
to
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 21:37:54 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 16, 2023 at 1:13:16 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.13ifs...@ryzen.home>:
>
>>>>> Your bigoted views are not facts, they are bigoted views. To assume all Jews,
>>>>> or even Jews in general, do as you say is simply pushing an antisemitic
>>>>> attack.
>>>>
>>>> It's an observation.
>>>
>>> You have bigoted feelings. OK. What is a better way to deal with it than
>>> pushing harm onto others?
>>
>> No, as I said, Jews are like that, it's what I've observed. There is no other
>> reason for me to say so.
>
> People with bigoted tendencies make those type observations. I get that.

You do talk shite. I just explained to you, I'm acting on evidence, your favourite little passtime.

>>> Your actions here show why the Libertarian mindset cannot work. A
>>> feelings-bases society is not a civil one.
>>
>> You choose to vote democrat because of your feelings.
>
> Nope. Because while the Dems absolutely suck, they are better than the
> Republicans -- better and promoting evidence based policies,

"Evidence based policies" WTF does that buzzword even mean? You talk absolute twaddle. You should be a politician yourself. Listening to anyone left wing in government, they just go on and on and never actually make a point. They just wave their arms about. Right wing just does things.

> better at promoting a representative government, better at supporting equal rights.

I don't want equal rights, because people aren't equal.

> Better is NOT perfect, nor even particularly good. But better is better.

You must have even better smaller parties. We have about ten, in both directions.

>>>> And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss?
>>>> Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.
>>>
>>> Those are your feelings. Bigoted feelings, really.
>>
>> No, they are reality. I saw Irish electricians cause two fires in one
>> contract. "Irish electrician" is what's called an oxymoron.
>
> Your have bigoted feelings on this. I get it.

As with Jews, it's based on evidence, your favourite little topic. Every fucking Irishman I've had the misfortune to meet is an illiterate innumerate no good wanker.

Snit

unread,
May 7, 2023, 3:00:35 PM5/7/23
to
On May 7, 2023 at 11:45:50 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.14k7q...@ryzen.home>:

> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 21:37:54 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 16, 2023 at 1:13:16 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.13ifs...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>>>>> Your bigoted views are not facts, they are bigoted views. To assume all Jews,
>>>>>> or even Jews in general, do as you say is simply pushing an antisemitic
>>>>>> attack.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's an observation.
>>>>
>>>> You have bigoted feelings. OK. What is a better way to deal with it than
>>>> pushing harm onto others?
>>>
>>> No, as I said, Jews are like that, it's what I've observed. There is no other
>>> reason for me to say so.
>>
>> People with bigoted tendencies make those type observations. I get that.
>
> You do talk shite. I just explained to you, I'm acting on evidence, your
> favourite little passtime.

You are making bigoted claims based on your biases. You want a free pass. Not
granting it.


>
>>>> Your actions here show why the Libertarian mindset cannot work. A
>>>> feelings-bases society is not a civil one.
>>>
>>> You choose to vote democrat because of your feelings.
>>
>> Nope. Because while the Dems absolutely suck, they are better than the
>> Republicans -- better and promoting evidence based policies,
>
> "Evidence based policies" WTF does that buzzword even mean?

Policies based on evidence. Studies. Things which can be shown to work. Things
like reduction of teen pregnancy and abortion. We have evidence as to what
works. Same with gun laws to some extent. Not that the Democrats do it
perfectly -- FAR FROM -- but they do it better than the Republicans.

> You talk absolute twaddle.

You think evidence is "twaddle". Sure.

> You should be a politician yourself. Listening to anyone left wing in
> government, they just go on and on and never actually make a point. They just
> wave their arms about. Right wing just does things.

They right wing tends to stick together more. They are more authoritarian so
that makes sense.

>
>> better at promoting a representative government, better at supporting equal
>> rights.
>
> I don't want equal rights, because people aren't equal.

I do want equal rights... which is not the same as equal outcomes.

>
>> Better is NOT perfect, nor even particularly good. But better is better.
>
> You must have even better smaller parties. We have about ten, in both
> directions.

Our system is set up to shut them out. It is insane.

>
>>>>> And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss?
>>>>> Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.
>>>>
>>>> Those are your feelings. Bigoted feelings, really.
>>>
>>> No, they are reality. I saw Irish electricians cause two fires in one
>>> contract. "Irish electrician" is what's called an oxymoron.
>>
>> Your have bigoted feelings on this. I get it.
>
> As with Jews, it's based on evidence, your favourite little topic. Every
> fucking Irishman I've had the misfortune to meet is an illiterate innumerate
> no good wanker.

Your claim of evidence is utter bullshit you will never support. I do not
accept your FEELINGS. I do not accept your bigotry. You want a free pass to
say bigoted things. You might get it -- likely will from conservatives -- but
not from me. Not going to attack you or be cruel to you in any way, but will
not pretend your bigoted, feelings-based nonsense is an evidence based,
rational view.

Peeler

unread,
May 7, 2023, 3:44:25 PM5/7/23
to
On Sun, 07 May 2023 19:00:28 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> You are making bigoted claims based on your biases. You want a free pass. Not
> granting it.

He's trolling, just like you, you disgusting trolling and troll-feeding
senile asshole!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
May 14, 2023, 4:52:14 PM5/14/23
to
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 03:05:11 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 16, 2023 at 4:39:06 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.13ipb...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only because the people who run the courts are the ones doing the stealing.
>>>>>
>>>>> The ones who run the courts were put there by the people.
>>>>
>>>> Wow, you really believe that? Actually we have a choice of idiots or bigger
>>>> idiots. No sensible person ever goes into politics.
>>>
>>> See the rest of the paragraph. LOL!
>>
>> In which you refute the people running the courts were put there by the people.
>
> I note we do not have a representative government. I wish we did.
>
>>>>> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
>>>>> THAT I want to see change.
>>>>
>>>> The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can
>>>> think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.
>>>
>>> The government sucks. The Libertarian alternative of control by corporations,
>>> or war lords, would be worse.
>>
>> No, control by nobody. Why do you want to be controlled? Can you not think for
>> yourself?
>
> This with power WILL take control.

But that's what we have with the government. If there was no government, and some rich folk tried to take control, others of us could fight back. But you can't fight the government, they're a monopoly with arms.

> The role of the government is to have protections for human rights and the environment.

Neither of those things should ever be protected.

> Libertarians suggest getting
> rid of those controls but refuse to accept the consequences of not having
> those controls (reduction in human rights and the environment).

Which would be cheaper, easier, and fun.

>>>>>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>>>>>> society to function.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>>>>>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>>>>>
>>>>> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
>>>>> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
>>>>> person is tied to what they produce?
>>>>
>>>> Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't
>>>> force others to do so.
>>>
>>> I understand that feeling and optimism, though I think in most cases it is
>>> stated as an excuse for the person to not donate... but there is no reason or
>>> evidence to think it would work.
>>
>> There are two possibilities:
>>
>> 1) Plenty of people think like you and donate. This will presumably be the
>> case for 50% of the population who currently votes left wing.
>
> How do you figure? And donate to WHAT?

Because those who vote left wing think donating is good, so why would they stop?

And donate to charity. For example in the UK,the life boats are not government funded, but they still run. The RSPCA (animal protection) is also a charity, it still runs.

>> 2) Voters of left wing are actually liars and scroungers and want to receive
>> but not send. In which case they won't get.
>
> Again, how do you figure?

They vote left wing to get benefits. If I'm wrong, the above would work.

> You set up a false dichotomy based on a faulty premise.

Stop using big words to sound clever.

>>>>>>> It is fair. Does not
>>>>>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
>>>>> they do not.
>>>>
>>>> They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of
>>>> 30,000.
>>>
>>> I terms of percentage of income. But even in raw numbers they often pay less.
>>> Look at Bezos. And Trump.
>>
>> If you've worked hard to get where you are, why the fuck should you pay for
>> the minions?
>
> They benefitted from a system. They should give some back. Be required to give
> some back.

No, rich folk never received benefits.

>> Although I have no idea why people buy from Amazon.
>>
>> Amazon take 15%
>> Ebay take 10%
>> Ebid take 5%
>>
>>>>>>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does not work.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does not work for a society.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In your strange mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, they don't do anything to help society. They are a burden.
>>>
>>> You are open your ideas would not work for society, but only for those you
>>> deem worthy. And that excludes the elderly and infirm, the disabled and the
>>> young. No thanks.
>>
>> Society is what's left after the weak have gone. Go ask a herd of buffalo what
>> happens to the weak. They slow them down. So they let the predator get them.
>
> You have little value for human life. I do. OK. But keep in mind others
> support you. You want to get but not give.

I do not believe I should get. But if they're willing to throw away money I'll take it.

> The Virtue Of Selfishness.... Ayn Rand. It is what Libertarians push.

No, they believe in every man for themselves.

>>>>>>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>>>>>>> race.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>>>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>>>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would not find the big picture.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rewrite that in English.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.
>>>>
>>>> How can "Would not work for" change to "I would not find"?
>>>
>>> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.
>>
>> Your autocarrot is changing the words around? Not just a spellchecker? Don't
>> give that much control to your "computer".
>
> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.

What?

>>>>>>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>>>>>>> looking at that. Oh.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
>>>>>> stops things getting done.
>>>>>
>>>>> Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
>>>>> society.
>>>>
>>>> Those with intelligence know simple things without having to study them.
>>>
>>> You mock those who do not share your feelings. That shows insecurity with your
>>> ideas.
>>
>> The exact opposite.
>
> Nope. When others disagree you try to minimize them and their ideas. It shows
> you are not confident in your ideas enough to use logic and evidence to back them.

Why would I waste effort dismissing the obviously stupid?

> You jump to ad hominem.

I'm not even going to bother looking that up.

>> I am very secure in my feelings being correct, therefore anyone with different
>> feelings is completely wrong. How the fuck did you come to the opposite
>> conclusion?
>
> Your ad hominem goes counter to your claims.

I'm still not going to look that up.

>>>>>>> We have it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, we have a group of thieves we didn't want in power.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do want a representative government. In the US we cannot have that -- more
>>>>> from the Republicans but really both major parties suck.
>>>>
>>>> then vote for a small one. Oh wait, most people are thickos and vote
>>>> tactically, so they'll never get in. But they would if you just voted who you
>>>> wanted, nevermind how many others you think will vote that way.
>>>
>>> I have voted for third parties... but our Constitution makes it so they
>>> basically cannot win the presidency, even if they get more votes than the two
>>> big parties. It is stupid.
>>
>> You mean like our first past the post? You need to get over 50% in each area
>> to get a person in?
>
> For presidency. If you do not then it goes to the House, but instead of the
> normal rules of the house which are at least closer to fair representation,
> those in less populated states get extra representation.

It's a big complicated mess. Even so called proportional representation just makes it more complicated. They should simply have one vote for one voter. Whoever gets the most votes is in power, or has that proportion of power.

Party A gets 40 million votes.
Party B gets 30 million votes.
Party C gets 20 million votes.

The only sensible ways are either:

Party A gets in power absolutely.

Or all parties get to vote on everything, with a ratio of 4:3:2.

Snit

unread,
May 14, 2023, 5:10:08 PM5/14/23
to
On May 14, 2023 at 1:50:27 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.14yb6...@ryzen.home>:

>>
>>>>>> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
>>>>>> THAT I want to see change.
>>>>>
>>>>> The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can
>>>>> think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.
>>>>
>>>> The government sucks. The Libertarian alternative of control by corporations,
>>>> or war lords, would be worse.
>>>
>>> No, control by nobody. Why do you want to be controlled? Can you not think for
>>> yourself?
>>
>> This with power WILL take control.
>
> But that's what we have with the government. If there was no government, and
> some rich folk tried to take control, others of us could fight back. But you
> can't fight the government, they're a monopoly with arms.

The rich will always be better armed. And in the US we have too many guns.
There is a strong correlation between more guns and higher suicide and
homicide rates.

>> The role of the government is to have protections for human rights and the
>> environment.
>
> Neither of those things should ever be protected.

For any society to work they must be.

>> Libertarians suggest getting
>> rid of those controls but refuse to accept the consequences of not having
>> those controls (reduction in human rights and the environment).
>
> Which would be cheaper, easier, and fun.

Increased abuse in a situation with less clean water and air and food is not
my idea of "fun". And being a slave is not "cheaper".

>
>>>>>>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>>>>>>> society to function.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>>>>>>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
>>>>>> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
>>>>>> person is tied to what they produce?
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't
>>>>> force others to do so.
>>>>
>>>> I understand that feeling and optimism, though I think in most cases it is
>>>> stated as an excuse for the person to not donate... but there is no reason or
>>>> evidence to think it would work.
>>>
>>> There are two possibilities:
>>>
>>> 1) Plenty of people think like you and donate. This will presumably be the
>>> case for 50% of the population who currently votes left wing.
>>
>> How do you figure? And donate to WHAT?
>
> Because those who vote left wing think donating is good, so why would they
> stop?

Who said we would? Or that others do not donate? But in a Liberation hellscape
who would have the money to donate?

And SOME donating is not the same as systemic protections. False equivalency
on your part.

> And donate to charity. For example in the UK,the life boats are not government
> funded, but they still run. The RSPCA (animal protection) is also a charity,
> it still runs.

Sure. Some can work. But to rely on it for all is absurd.

>
>>> 2) Voters of left wing are actually liars and scroungers and want to receive
>>> but not send. In which case they won't get.
>>
>> Again, how do you figure?
>
> They vote left wing to get benefits. If I'm wrong, the above would work.

Being liberal is more about helping those OTHER than yourself, and those not
like you.
>
>> You set up a false dichotomy based on a faulty premise.
>
> Stop using big words to sound clever.

You have bad thoughts and come to back conclusions.

>
>>>>>>>> It is fair. Does not
>>>>>>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
>>>>>> they do not.
>>>>>
>>>>> They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of
>>>>> 30,000.
>>>>
>>>> I terms of percentage of income. But even in raw numbers they often pay less.
>>>> Look at Bezos. And Trump.
>>>
>>> If you've worked hard to get where you are, why the fuck should you pay for
>>> the minions?
>>
>> They benefitted from a system. They should give some back. Be required to give
>> some back.
>
> No, rich folk never received benefits.

They ALWAYS do. Heck, I am rich enough to get benefits the truly poor do not
get.

>
>>> Although I have no idea why people buy from Amazon.
>>>
>>> Amazon take 15%
>>> Ebay take 10%
>>> Ebid take 5%
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Does not work.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does not work for a society.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In your strange mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed, they don't do anything to help society. They are a burden.
>>>>
>>>> You are open your ideas would not work for society, but only for those you
>>>> deem worthy. And that excludes the elderly and infirm, the disabled and the
>>>> young. No thanks.
>>>
>>> Society is what's left after the weak have gone. Go ask a herd of buffalo what
>>> happens to the weak. They slow them down. So they let the predator get them.
>>
>> You have little value for human life. I do. OK. But keep in mind others
>> support you. You want to get but not give.
>
> I do not believe I should get. But if they're willing to throw away money I'll
> take it.

You live as you do off the generosity of others.

>
>> The Virtue Of Selfishness.... Ayn Rand. It is what Libertarians push.
>
> No, they believe in every man for themselves.

Ayn Rand.

>
>>>>>>>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>>>>>>>> race.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>>>>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>>>>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would not find the big picture.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rewrite that in English.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.
>>>>>
>>>>> How can "Would not work for" change to "I would not find"?
>>>>
>>>> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.
>>>
>>> Your autocarrot is changing the words around? Not just a spellchecker? Don't
>>> give that much control to your "computer".
>>
>> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.
>
> What?

Not sure where you are confused.

>
>>>>>>>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>>>>>>>> looking at that. Oh.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
>>>>>>> stops things getting done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
>>>>>> society.
>>>>>
>>>>> Those with intelligence know simple things without having to study them.
>>>>
>>>> You mock those who do not share your feelings. That shows insecurity with your
>>>> ideas.
>>>
>>> The exact opposite.
>>
>> Nope. When others disagree you try to minimize them and their ideas. It shows
>> you are not confident in your ideas enough to use logic and evidence to back
>> them.
>
> Why would I waste effort dismissing the obviously stupid?

You prove my point.

>
>> You jump to ad hominem.
>
> I'm not even going to bother looking that up.

You focus on the person over the argument.

>
>>> I am very secure in my feelings being correct, therefore anyone with different
>>> feelings is completely wrong. How the fuck did you come to the opposite
>>> conclusion?
>>
>> Your ad hominem goes counter to your claims.
>
> I'm still not going to look that up.

Look up.

>
>>>>>>>> We have it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, we have a group of thieves we didn't want in power.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do want a representative government. In the US we cannot have that -- more
>>>>>> from the Republicans but really both major parties suck.
>>>>>
>>>>> then vote for a small one. Oh wait, most people are thickos and vote
>>>>> tactically, so they'll never get in. But they would if you just voted who you
>>>>> wanted, nevermind how many others you think will vote that way.
>>>>
>>>> I have voted for third parties... but our Constitution makes it so they
>>>> basically cannot win the presidency, even if they get more votes than the two
>>>> big parties. It is stupid.
>>>
>>> You mean like our first past the post? You need to get over 50% in each area
>>> to get a person in?
>>
>> For presidency. If you do not then it goes to the House, but instead of the
>> normal rules of the house which are at least closer to fair representation,
>> those in less populated states get extra representation.
>
> It's a big complicated mess. Even so called proportional representation just
> makes it more complicated. They should simply have one vote for one voter.
> Whoever gets the most votes is in power, or has that proportion of power.

I wish it was like that in the US. Sure.

>
> Party A gets 40 million votes.
> Party B gets 30 million votes.
> Party C gets 20 million votes.
>
> The only sensible ways are either:
>
> Party A gets in power absolutely.
>
> Or all parties get to vote on everything, with a ratio of 4:3:2.

I would go with the latter, though of course that is less efficient.

Peeler

unread,
May 14, 2023, 5:10:24 PM5/14/23
to
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 02:05:11 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> I note we do not have a representative government. I wish we did.

I note that your sick senile head is as full of shit as any other troll's,
Shit the Git!

Peeler

unread,
May 14, 2023, 5:29:56 PM5/14/23
to
On Sun, 14 May 2023 21:10:01 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> The rich will always be better armed.

WTF has your latest trollshit got to do with the three newsgroups you are
crossposting it to, you subnormal senile shithead?

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Jun 9, 2023, 1:25:41 AM6/9/23
to
On Sun, 07 May 2023 20:00:28 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 7, 2023 at 11:45:50 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.14k7q...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 21:37:54 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 16, 2023 at 1:13:16 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.13ifs...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>>>>> Your bigoted views are not facts, they are bigoted views. To assume all Jews,
>>>>>>> or even Jews in general, do as you say is simply pushing an antisemitic
>>>>>>> attack.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's an observation.
>>>>>
>>>>> You have bigoted feelings. OK. What is a better way to deal with it than
>>>>> pushing harm onto others?
>>>>
>>>> No, as I said, Jews are like that, it's what I've observed. There is no other
>>>> reason for me to say so.
>>>
>>> People with bigoted tendencies make those type observations. I get that.
>>
>> You do talk shite. I just explained to you, I'm acting on evidence, your
>> favourite little passtime.
>
> You are making bigoted claims based on your biases. You want a free pass. Not
> granting it.

I'm making observations and stating facts. Why do you call that bigotry? Jews are the weakest link and they get upset when the big boys bully them.

>>>>> Your actions here show why the Libertarian mindset cannot work. A
>>>>> feelings-bases society is not a civil one.
>>>>
>>>> You choose to vote democrat because of your feelings.
>>>
>>> Nope. Because while the Dems absolutely suck, they are better than the
>>> Republicans -- better and promoting evidence based policies,
>>
>> "Evidence based policies" WTF does that buzzword even mean?
>
> Policies based on evidence. Studies. Things which can be shown to work. Things
> like reduction of teen pregnancy and abortion. We have evidence as to what
> works. Same with gun laws to some extent. Not that the Democrats do it
> perfectly -- FAR FROM -- but they do it better than the Republicans.

Best to just get on with things rather than "study" them.

>> You talk absolute twaddle.
>
> You think evidence is "twaddle". Sure.

You do, with respect to Jews being mean theives.

>> You should be a politician yourself. Listening to anyone left wing in
>> government, they just go on and on and never actually make a point. They just
>> wave their arms about. Right wing just does things.
>
> They right wing tends to stick together more. They are more authoritarian so
> that makes sense.

No, left wing is authoritarian. They want to control everything. Right wing wants to let people do things themselves, let companies rule the country instead of the government.

>>> better at promoting a representative government, better at supporting equal
>>> rights.
>>
>> I don't want equal rights, because people aren't equal.
>
> I do want equal rights... which is not the same as equal outcomes.

Why isn't it?

>>> Better is NOT perfect, nor even particularly good. But better is better.
>>
>> You must have even better smaller parties. We have about ten, in both
>> directions.
>
> Our system is set up to shut them out. It is insane.

It's mainly the stupid tactical voters shutting them out.

>>>>>> And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss?
>>>>>> Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.
>>>>>
>>>>> Those are your feelings. Bigoted feelings, really.
>>>>
>>>> No, they are reality. I saw Irish electricians cause two fires in one
>>>> contract. "Irish electrician" is what's called an oxymoron.
>>>
>>> Your have bigoted feelings on this. I get it.
>>
>> As with Jews, it's based on evidence, your favourite little topic. Every
>> fucking Irishman I've had the misfortune to meet is an illiterate innumerate
>> no good wanker.
>
> Your claim of evidence is utter bullshit you will never support. I do not
> accept your FEELINGS. I do not accept your bigotry. You want a free pass to
> say bigoted things. You might get it -- likely will from conservatives -- but
> not from me. Not going to attack you or be cruel to you in any way, but will
> not pretend your bigoted, feelings-based nonsense is an evidence based,
> rational view.

Do you or do you not admit Irish are thick?

Snit

unread,
Jun 9, 2023, 1:38:21 AM6/9/23
to
On Jun 8, 2023 at 10:25:34 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.159ao...@ryzen.home>:

>>>
>>> You do talk shite. I just explained to you, I'm acting on evidence, your
>>> favourite little passtime.
>>
>> You are making bigoted claims based on your biases. You want a free pass. Not
>> granting it.
>
> I'm making observations and stating facts. Why do you call that bigotry?

You offer a false premise. You are stating your views and what you see as
facts, and those things are filtered though bigotry.

> Jews are the weakest link and they get upset when the big boys bully them.

This is an example of that.

>>> "Evidence based policies" WTF does that buzzword even mean?
>>
>> Policies based on evidence. Studies. Things which can be shown to work. Things
>> like reduction of teen pregnancy and abortion. We have evidence as to what
>> works. Same with gun laws to some extent. Not that the Democrats do it
>> perfectly -- FAR FROM -- but they do it better than the Republicans.
>
> Best to just get on with things rather than "study" them.

I like facts. Evidence.

>
>>> You talk absolute twaddle.
>>
>> You think evidence is "twaddle". Sure.
>
> You do, with respect to Jews being mean theives.

You make a bigoted claim here.

>
>>> You should be a politician yourself. Listening to anyone left wing in
>>> government, they just go on and on and never actually make a point. They just
>>> wave their arms about. Right wing just does things.
>>
>> They right wing tends to stick together more. They are more authoritarian so
>> that makes sense.
>
> No, left wing is authoritarian.

Incorrect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Political_Compass#/media/File:Political_Compass_purple_LibRight.svg

It generally is split like this. Left and right on the, well, left and right.
Top is authoritarian and bottom is libertarian.

> They want to control everything.

Nope.

> Right wing wants to let people do things themselves, let companies rule the
> country instead of the government.

This is clearly untrue.

>
>>>> better at promoting a representative government, better at supporting equal
>>>> rights.
>>>
>>> I don't want equal rights, because people aren't equal.
>>
>> I do want equal rights... which is not the same as equal outcomes.
>
> Why isn't it?

There is no mechanism to make one lead to the other.
>
>>>> Better is NOT perfect, nor even particularly good. But better is better.
>>>
>>> You must have even better smaller parties. We have about ten, in both
>>> directions.
>>
>> Our system is set up to shut them out. It is insane.
>
> It's mainly the stupid tactical voters shutting them out.

More than that.

>
>>>>>>> And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss?
>>>>>>> Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those are your feelings. Bigoted feelings, really.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, they are reality. I saw Irish electricians cause two fires in one
>>>>> contract. "Irish electrician" is what's called an oxymoron.
>>>>
>>>> Your have bigoted feelings on this. I get it.
>>>
>>> As with Jews, it's based on evidence, your favourite little topic. Every
>>> fucking Irishman I've had the misfortune to meet is an illiterate innumerate
>>> no good wanker.
>>
>> Your claim of evidence is utter bullshit you will never support. I do not
>> accept your FEELINGS. I do not accept your bigotry. You want a free pass to
>> say bigoted things. You might get it -- likely will from conservatives -- but
>> not from me. Not going to attack you or be cruel to you in any way, but will
>> not pretend your bigoted, feelings-based nonsense is an evidence based,
>> rational view.
>
> Do you or do you not admit Irish are thick?

I do not agree with bigoted claims.

Peeler

unread,
Jun 9, 2023, 3:52:59 AM6/9/23
to
On Fri, 09 Jun 2023 05:38:14 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> You offer a false premise.

The trolling wanker offer you his cock to suck! LOL And you senile trolling
shithead EAGERLY do him the favour, every single time!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Jun 12, 2023, 6:53:42 AM6/12/23
to
On Sun, 14 May 2023 22:10:01 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 14, 2023 at 1:50:27 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.14yb6...@ryzen.home>:
>
>>>
>>>>>>> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
>>>>>>> THAT I want to see change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can
>>>>>> think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.
>>>>>
>>>>> The government sucks. The Libertarian alternative of control by corporations,
>>>>> or war lords, would be worse.
>>>>
>>>> No, control by nobody. Why do you want to be controlled? Can you not think for
>>>> yourself?
>>>
>>> This with power WILL take control.
>>
>> But that's what we have with the government. If there was no government, and
>> some rich folk tried to take control, others of us could fight back. But you
>> can't fight the government, they're a monopoly with arms.
>
> The rich will always be better armed. And in the US we have too many guns.

I'd rather rich folk after me than the government. Rich folk will only defend themselves and their property. The government wants to control everyone.

> There is a strong correlation between more guns and higher suicide and
> homicide rates.

Best keep the numbers down, we don't want Americans taking over the world.

>>> The role of the government is to have protections for human rights and the
>>> environment.
>>
>> Neither of those things should ever be protected.
>
> For any society to work they must be.

For any girly society.

>>> Libertarians suggest getting
>>> rid of those controls but refuse to accept the consequences of not having
>>> those controls (reduction in human rights and the environment).
>>
>> Which would be cheaper, easier, and fun.
>
> Increased abuse in a situation with less clean water and air and food is not
> my idea of "fun". And being a slave is not "cheaper".

It's cheaper for the person you work for.

>>>>>>>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>>>>>>>> society to function.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>>>>>>>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
>>>>>>> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
>>>>>>> person is tied to what they produce?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't
>>>>>> force others to do so.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that feeling and optimism, though I think in most cases it is
>>>>> stated as an excuse for the person to not donate... but there is no reason or
>>>>> evidence to think it would work.
>>>>
>>>> There are two possibilities:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Plenty of people think like you and donate. This will presumably be the
>>>> case for 50% of the population who currently votes left wing.
>>>
>>> How do you figure? And donate to WHAT?
>>
>> Because those who vote left wing think donating is good, so why would they
>> stop?
>
> Who said we would? Or that others do not donate? But in a Liberation hellscape
> who would have the money to donate?

What makes you think you would suddenly be worse off?

In fact you'd be better off, lower taxes. Much lower taxes. In the UK a THIRD of your earnings go to the government.

> And SOME donating is not the same as systemic protections. False equivalency
> on your part.

I never said it would only be some.

>> And donate to charity. For example in the UK,the life boats are not government
>> funded, but they still run. The RSPCA (animal protection) is also a charity,
>> it still runs.
>
> Sure. Some can work. But to rely on it for all is absurd.

If those two work, so can the rest.

>>>> 2) Voters of left wing are actually liars and scroungers and want to receive
>>>> but not send. In which case they won't get.
>>>
>>> Again, how do you figure?
>>
>> They vote left wing to get benefits. If I'm wrong, the above would work.
>
> Being liberal is more about helping those OTHER than yourself, and those not
> like you.

For what purpose?

>>> You set up a false dichotomy based on a faulty premise.
>>
>> Stop using big words to sound clever.
>
> You have bad thoughts and come to back conclusions.

Rewrite in English.

>>>>>>>>> It is fair. Does not
>>>>>>>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
>>>>>>> they do not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of
>>>>>> 30,000.
>>>>>
>>>>> I terms of percentage of income. But even in raw numbers they often pay less.
>>>>> Look at Bezos. And Trump.
>>>>
>>>> If you've worked hard to get where you are, why the fuck should you pay for
>>>> the minions?
>>>
>>> They benefitted from a system. They should give some back. Be required to give
>>> some back.
>>
>> No, rich folk never received benefits.
>
> They ALWAYS do. Heck, I am rich enough to get benefits the truly poor do not
> get.

Bullshit. What benefit is removed when you get poorer?

Snit

unread,
Jun 12, 2023, 11:39:17 AM6/12/23
to
On Jun 12, 2023 at 3:53:34 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.16e9v...@ryzen.home>:

> On Sun, 14 May 2023 22:10:01 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 14, 2023 at 1:50:27 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.14yb6...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
>>>>>>>> THAT I want to see change.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can
>>>>>>> think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The government sucks. The Libertarian alternative of control by corporations,
>>>>>> or war lords, would be worse.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, control by nobody. Why do you want to be controlled? Can you not think for
>>>>> yourself?
>>>>
>>>> This with power WILL take control.
>>>
>>> But that's what we have with the government. If there was no government, and
>>> some rich folk tried to take control, others of us could fight back. But you
>>> can't fight the government, they're a monopoly with arms.
>>
>> The rich will always be better armed. And in the US we have too many guns.
>
> I'd rather rich folk after me than the government. Rich folk will only defend
> themselves and their property.

Where did you get this idea?

> The government wants to control everyone.
>
>> There is a strong correlation between more guns and higher suicide and
>> homicide rates.
>
> Best keep the numbers down, we don't want Americans taking over the world.
>
>>>> The role of the government is to have protections for human rights and the
>>>> environment.
>>>
>>> Neither of those things should ever be protected.
>>
>> For any society to work they must be.
>
> For any girly society.

Misogynistic attitude noted.

>
>>>> Libertarians suggest getting
>>>> rid of those controls but refuse to accept the consequences of not having
>>>> those controls (reduction in human rights and the environment).
>>>
>>> Which would be cheaper, easier, and fun.
>>
>> Increased abuse in a situation with less clean water and air and food is not
>> my idea of "fun". And being a slave is not "cheaper".
>
> It's cheaper for the person you work for.

But not you, the slave.

>
>>>>>>>>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>>>>>>>>> society to function.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>>>>>>>>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
>>>>>>>> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
>>>>>>>> person is tied to what they produce?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't
>>>>>>> force others to do so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I understand that feeling and optimism, though I think in most cases it is
>>>>>> stated as an excuse for the person to not donate... but there is no reason or
>>>>>> evidence to think it would work.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are two possibilities:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Plenty of people think like you and donate. This will presumably be the
>>>>> case for 50% of the population who currently votes left wing.
>>>>
>>>> How do you figure? And donate to WHAT?
>>>
>>> Because those who vote left wing think donating is good, so why would they
>>> stop?
>>
>> Who said we would? Or that others do not donate? But in a Liberation hellscape
>> who would have the money to donate?
>
> What makes you think you would suddenly be worse off?

When you get rid of all protections you end up being worse off.

>
> In fact you'd be better off, lower taxes. Much lower taxes. In the UK a THIRD
> of your earnings go to the government.

Slaves do not get earnings.

>
>> And SOME donating is not the same as systemic protections. False equivalency
>> on your part.
>
> I never said it would only be some.

All donating? What?

>
>>> And donate to charity. For example in the UK,the life boats are not government
>>> funded, but they still run. The RSPCA (animal protection) is also a charity,
>>> it still runs.
>>
>> Sure. Some can work. But to rely on it for all is absurd.
>
> If those two work, so can the rest.

How do you figure?

>
>>>>> 2) Voters of left wing are actually liars and scroungers and want to receive
>>>>> but not send. In which case they won't get.
>>>>
>>>> Again, how do you figure?
>>>
>>> They vote left wing to get benefits. If I'm wrong, the above would work.
>>
>> Being liberal is more about helping those OTHER than yourself, and those not
>> like you.
>
> For what purpose?

Based on empathy and being a decent human being.

>
>>>> You set up a false dichotomy based on a faulty premise.
>>>
>>> Stop using big words to sound clever.
>>
>> You have bad thoughts and come to back conclusions.
>
> Rewrite in English.

You have bad thoughts and come to bad conclusions.

>
>>>>>>>>>> It is fair. Does not
>>>>>>>>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
>>>>>>>> they do not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of
>>>>>>> 30,000.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I terms of percentage of income. But even in raw numbers they often pay less.
>>>>>> Look at Bezos. And Trump.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you've worked hard to get where you are, why the fuck should you pay for
>>>>> the minions?
>>>>
>>>> They benefitted from a system. They should give some back. Be required to give
>>>> some back.
>>>
>>> No, rich folk never received benefits.
>>
>> They ALWAYS do. Heck, I am rich enough to get benefits the truly poor do not
>> get.
>
> Bullshit. What benefit is removed when you get poorer?

The rich get more in housing benefits. Why?

Peeler

unread,
Jun 12, 2023, 12:16:20 PM6/12/23
to
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 15:39:10 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


>
> Where did you get this idea?

So totally unable to resist the unwashed wanker's cock, Shit the Git? <BG>

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Jul 14, 2023, 4:32:30 PM7/14/23
to
On Fri, 09 Jun 2023 06:38:14 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 8, 2023 at 10:25:34 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.159ao...@ryzen.home>:
>
>>>>
>>>> You do talk shite. I just explained to you, I'm acting on evidence, your
>>>> favourite little passtime.
>>>
>>> You are making bigoted claims based on your biases. You want a free pass. Not
>>> granting it.
>>
>> I'm making observations and stating facts. Why do you call that bigotry?
>
> You offer a false premise. You are stating your views and what you see as
> facts, and those things are filtered though bigotry.
>
>> Jews are the weakest link and they get upset when the big boys bully them.
>
> This is an example of that.

It is an observed truth. Just because they got beaten in the war, they won't stop going on about it.

>>>> "Evidence based policies" WTF does that buzzword even mean?
>>>
>>> Policies based on evidence. Studies. Things which can be shown to work. Things
>>> like reduction of teen pregnancy and abortion. We have evidence as to what
>>> works. Same with gun laws to some extent. Not that the Democrats do it
>>> perfectly -- FAR FROM -- but they do it better than the Republicans.
>>
>> Best to just get on with things rather than "study" them.
>
> I like facts. Evidence.

Why study politics? It's just people being stupid. Study something worthwhile like science.

>>>> You talk absolute twaddle.
>>>
>>> You think evidence is "twaddle". Sure.
>>
>> You do, with respect to Jews being mean theives.
>
> You make a bigoted claim here.

It's an observation of reality. They sue people to make money by claiming to be poor little picked on folk.

>>>> You should be a politician yourself. Listening to anyone left wing in
>>>> government, they just go on and on and never actually make a point. They just
>>>> wave their arms about. Right wing just does things.
>>>
>>> They right wing tends to stick together more. They are more authoritarian so
>>> that makes sense.
>>
>> No, left wing is authoritarian.
>
> Incorrect.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Political_Compass#/media/File:Political_Compass_purple_LibRight.svg
>
> It generally is split like this. Left and right on the, well, left and right.
> Top is authoritarian and bottom is libertarian.

That's utter bullshit. Left (in your country that's democrats) are all for controlling everything and providing for the people. Right (in your country that's republicans) are all for free will.

>>>>> better at promoting a representative government, better at supporting equal
>>>>> rights.
>>>>
>>>> I don't want equal rights, because people aren't equal.
>>>
>>> I do want equal rights... which is not the same as equal outcomes.
>>
>> Why isn't it?
>
> There is no mechanism to make one lead to the other.

I don't see the difference between the two. Point out your subtlety.

>>>>>>>> And what makes you think your race is so special we can't take the piss?
>>>>>>>> Irish and Americans are thick, Jews are mean, that's just the way they are.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Those are your feelings. Bigoted feelings, really.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, they are reality. I saw Irish electricians cause two fires in one
>>>>>> contract. "Irish electrician" is what's called an oxymoron.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your have bigoted feelings on this. I get it.
>>>>
>>>> As with Jews, it's based on evidence, your favourite little topic. Every
>>>> fucking Irishman I've had the misfortune to meet is an illiterate innumerate
>>>> no good wanker.
>>>
>>> Your claim of evidence is utter bullshit you will never support. I do not
>>> accept your FEELINGS. I do not accept your bigotry. You want a free pass to
>>> say bigoted things. You might get it -- likely will from conservatives -- but
>>> not from me. Not going to attack you or be cruel to you in any way, but will
>>> not pretend your bigoted, feelings-based nonsense is an evidence based,
>>> rational view.
>>
>> Do you or do you not admit Irish are thick?
>
> I do not agree with bigoted claims.

It is observed. I have known many Irish.

Snit

unread,
Jul 14, 2023, 6:15:05 PM7/14/23
to
On Jul 14, 2023 at 1:32:21 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.1729z7fumvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Fri, 09 Jun 2023 06:38:14 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 8, 2023 at 10:25:34 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.159ao...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You do talk shite. I just explained to you, I'm acting on evidence, your
>>>>> favourite little passtime.
>>>>
>>>> You are making bigoted claims based on your biases. You want a free pass. Not
>>>> granting it.
>>>
>>> I'm making observations and stating facts. Why do you call that bigotry?
>>
>> You offer a false premise. You are stating your views and what you see as
>> facts, and those things are filtered though bigotry.
>>
>>> Jews are the weakest link and they get upset when the big boys bully them.
>>
>> This is an example of that.
>
> It is an observed truth. Just because they got beaten in the war, they won't
> stop going on about it.

Your intuition... which is not reliable or accurate or based on any evidence.
It is based on your bigoted lens.
As seen though a bigoted lens.

Peeler

unread,
Jul 15, 2023, 4:06:28 AM7/15/23
to
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 22:14:57 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> Your intuition...

HIS trolling... YOUR troll-feeding, you endlessly gurgling human toilet!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Jul 15, 2023, 2:48:43 PM7/15/23
to
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 23:14:57 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jul 14, 2023 at 1:32:21 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.1729z7fumvhs6z@ryzen>:
>
>> On Fri, 09 Jun 2023 06:38:14 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 8, 2023 at 10:25:34 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.159ao...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You do talk shite. I just explained to you, I'm acting on evidence, your
>>>>>> favourite little passtime.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are making bigoted claims based on your biases. You want a free pass. Not
>>>>> granting it.
>>>>
>>>> I'm making observations and stating facts. Why do you call that bigotry?
>>>
>>> You offer a false premise. You are stating your views and what you see as
>>> facts, and those things are filtered though bigotry.
>>>
>>>> Jews are the weakest link and they get upset when the big boys bully them.
>>>
>>> This is an example of that.
>>
>> It is an observed truth. Just because they got beaten in the war, they won't
>> stop going on about it.
>
> Your intuition... which is not reliable or accurate or based on any evidence.
> It is based on your bigoted lens.

It is a fact they lost the war. It is a fact they don't stop moaning about it. no lens used.
100% of Irish I've known were stupid.

Snit

unread,
Jul 15, 2023, 11:38:47 PM7/15/23
to
On Jul 15, 2023 at 11:48:34 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.174zu8cmmvhs6z@ryzen>:
As seen through your bigoted lens. Sure.

Peeler

unread,
Jul 16, 2023, 4:20:30 AM7/16/23
to
On Sun, 16 Jul 2023 03:38:39 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


>> 100% of Irish I've known were stupid.
>
> As seen through your bigoted lens. Sure.

That idiot, retard and proven clinically insane attention whore gets you to
take his absolutely idiotic baits, time and again. But why not, you are a
troll in your own right!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Jul 16, 2023, 8:31:02 PM7/16/23
to
You're cut and pasting like those 2 digit IQ Indians.

And not making any sense either. Stupid is not subjective. It is entirely measurable. For goodness sake they fought against themselves in a war.

Snit

unread,
Jul 18, 2023, 10:25:29 AM7/18/23
to
On Jul 16, 2023 at 5:30:52 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.177adqramvhs6z@ryzen>:
There is really nothing to add: you claim groups are X, but your only evidence
is your subjective intuition. Even if there are trends in a group it does not
apply to all. You generalizations are there to put others down to feel better
about yourself. That is largely what bigotry is.

Peeler

unread,
Jul 18, 2023, 10:32:23 AM7/18/23
to
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 14:25:20 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> There is really nothing to add:

Then STFU, you endlessly troll-feeding senile asshole!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Jul 18, 2023, 6:23:48 PM7/18/23
to
On Sun, 14 May 2023 22:10:01 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 14, 2023 at 1:50:27 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.14yb6...@ryzen.home>:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Does not work.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does not work for a society.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In your strange mind.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed, they don't do anything to help society. They are a burden.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are open your ideas would not work for society, but only for those you
>>>>> deem worthy. And that excludes the elderly and infirm, the disabled and the
>>>>> young. No thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Society is what's left after the weak have gone. Go ask a herd of buffalo what
>>>> happens to the weak. They slow them down. So they let the predator get them.
>>>
>>> You have little value for human life. I do. OK. But keep in mind others
>>> support you. You want to get but not give.
>>
>> I do not believe I should get. But if they're willing to throw away money I'll
>> take it.
>
> You live as you do off the generosity of others.

The stupidity of others. To make up for the money stolen from me in taxes to pay for others.

>>> The Virtue Of Selfishness.... Ayn Rand. It is what Libertarians push.
>>
>> No, they believe in every man for themselves.
>
> Ayn Rand.

Find the part in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand which makes your point, I can't see it.

>>>>>>>>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>>>>>>>>> race.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>>>>>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>>>>>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I would not find the big picture.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rewrite that in English.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How can "Would not work for" change to "I would not find"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.
>>>>
>>>> Your autocarrot is changing the words around? Not just a spellchecker? Don't
>>>> give that much control to your "computer".
>>>
>>> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.
>>
>> What?
>
> Not sure where you are confused.

You have yet to provide a sensible response to my:
>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.

>>>>>>>>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>>>>>>>>> looking at that. Oh.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
>>>>>>>> stops things getting done.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
>>>>>>> society.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those with intelligence know simple things without having to study them.
>>>>>
>>>>> You mock those who do not share your feelings. That shows insecurity with your
>>>>> ideas.
>>>>
>>>> The exact opposite.
>>>
>>> Nope. When others disagree you try to minimize them and their ideas. It shows
>>> you are not confident in your ideas enough to use logic and evidence to back
>>> them.
>>
>> Why would I waste effort dismissing the obviously stupid?
>
> You prove my point.

You're not even speaking English anymore. You sound like a politician.

>>> You jump to ad hominem.
>>
>> I'm not even going to bother looking that up.
>
> You focus on the person over the argument.

That is a very vague statement, does it have anything to do with our discussion?

>>>> I am very secure in my feelings being correct, therefore anyone with different
>>>> feelings is completely wrong. How the fuck did you come to the opposite
>>>> conclusion?
>>>
>>> Your ad hominem goes counter to your claims.
>>
>> I'm still not going to look that up.
>
> Look up.

No, communicate in normal everyday English.
I agree, the latter makes more sense. B and C could be similar parties with regards to some policies.

Snit

unread,
Jul 18, 2023, 6:53:28 PM7/18/23
to
On Jul 18, 2023 at 3:23:34 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.18attkzwmvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Sun, 14 May 2023 22:10:01 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 14, 2023 at 1:50:27 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.14yb6...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously I steal it back.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But the only fair way is to pay for the services IF and when you use them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Does not work.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't work for the weak or lazy, no,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Does not work for a society.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In your strange mind.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You already excluded those you see as weak or lazy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Indeed, they don't do anything to help society. They are a burden.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are open your ideas would not work for society, but only for those you
>>>>>> deem worthy. And that excludes the elderly and infirm, the disabled and the
>>>>>> young. No thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Society is what's left after the weak have gone. Go ask a herd of buffalo what
>>>>> happens to the weak. They slow them down. So they let the predator get them.
>>>>
>>>> You have little value for human life. I do. OK. But keep in mind others
>>>> support you. You want to get but not give.
>>>
>>> I do not believe I should get. But if they're willing to throw away money I'll
>>> take it.
>>
>> You live as you do off the generosity of others.
>
> The stupidity of others. To make up for the money stolen from me in taxes to
> pay for others.

That is a very pessimistic and unrealistic way of looking at things. I opt to
be thankful for the assistance of others when I get it, and appreciate that I
live FAR better than I would if I lived on a deserted island. It is simply a
fact we all do.

Does not mean I approve of how taxes are collected or spent. Lots of room for
improvement... but I do not like playing victim as you describe.

>
>>>> The Virtue Of Selfishness.... Ayn Rand. It is what Libertarians push.
>>>
>>> No, they believe in every man for themselves.
>>
>> Ayn Rand.
>
> Find the part in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand which makes your
> point, I can't see it.

"Commentators [have commented on how she] failed to recognize its importance
in human life."

To me that matters.

>
>>>>>>>>>>> but it works for the fit healthy ones, the ones we want to continue the human
>>>>>>>>>>> race.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>>>>>>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>>>>>>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I would not find the big picture.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rewrite that in English.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would not work for the big picture. Damned autocarrot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How can "Would not work for" change to "I would not find"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your autocarrot is changing the words around? Not just a spellchecker? Don't
>>>>> give that much control to your "computer".
>>>>
>>>> Do not recall the exact wording. Went with the idea.
>>>
>>> What?
>>
>> Not sure where you are confused.
>
> You have yet to provide a sensible response to my:
>>>> And of course your own family is free to help, and so are charities. You'd
>>>> donate to the needy wouldn't you? Are you saying hardly anyone would? That
>>>> would prove your point, we don't want it.

The answer is simple: this assumes any one person is going to know the needs
that can be seen only on a broad scale, and that people in general will put
themselves at a competitive disadvantage. Doing so means they will, on
average, do less well and you will have those least willing to help doing the
best financially. This leads to human suffering and at the extreme to slavery.
I do not back that in any way.

We all benefit... we can all be required to give some back assuming we are in
a position to do so. There is nothing immoral about that.

>
>>>>>>>>>> We should get a group that is tasked with
>>>>>>>>>> looking at that. Oh.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh here we go, everything needs a study group and a committee. That's what
>>>>>>>>> stops things getting done.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Evidence and organization is not all bad. Your feelings are not a way to run a
>>>>>>>> society.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Those with intelligence know simple things without having to study them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mock those who do not share your feelings. That shows insecurity with your
>>>>>> ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> The exact opposite.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. When others disagree you try to minimize them and their ideas. It shows
>>>> you are not confident in your ideas enough to use logic and evidence to back
>>>> them.
>>>
>>> Why would I waste effort dismissing the obviously stupid?
>>
>> You prove my point.
>
> You're not even speaking English anymore. You sound like a politician.

You simply want to hand wave things away based on your emotion / intuition.
You are not secure enough with your ideas to actually test them, or look to
the evidence to see if they are supported.

>
>>>> You jump to ad hominem.
>>>
>>> I'm not even going to bother looking that up.
>>
>> You focus on the person over the argument.
>
> That is a very vague statement, does it have anything to do with our
> discussion?
>
>>>>> I am very secure in my feelings being correct, therefore anyone with different
>>>>> feelings is completely wrong. How the fuck did you come to the opposite
>>>>> conclusion?
>>>>
>>>> Your ad hominem goes counter to your claims.
>>>
>>> I'm still not going to look that up.
>>
>> Look up.
>
> No, communicate in normal everyday English.

The term "ad hominem" is common.
Right. No more worrying about splitting the vote.

Peeler

unread,
Jul 19, 2023, 4:10:49 AM7/19/23
to
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 22:53:20 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> That is a very pessimistic and unrealistic way of looking at things.

That is nothing but absolutely idiotic TROLLING on his part and absolutely
idiotic TROLLING and TROLL-FEEDING on your part, Shit the Git! Both of you
are "famous" for it!

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Jul 21, 2023, 7:38:45 PM7/21/23
to
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 16:39:10 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 12, 2023 at 3:53:34 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.16e9v...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Sun, 14 May 2023 22:10:01 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On May 14, 2023 at 1:50:27 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.14yb6...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does not mean we have a representative government. The US is an oligarchy.
>>>>>>>>> THAT I want to see change.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The best change would be to delete the government in it's entirety. We can
>>>>>>>> think for ourselves, we don't need controlled like pet dogs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The government sucks. The Libertarian alternative of control by corporations,
>>>>>>> or war lords, would be worse.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, control by nobody. Why do you want to be controlled? Can you not think for
>>>>>> yourself?
>>>>>
>>>>> This with power WILL take control.
>>>>
>>>> But that's what we have with the government. If there was no government, and
>>>> some rich folk tried to take control, others of us could fight back. But you
>>>> can't fight the government, they're a monopoly with arms.
>>>
>>> The rich will always be better armed. And in the US we have too many guns.
>>
>> I'd rather rich folk after me than the government. Rich folk will only defend
>> themselves and their property.
>
> Where did you get this idea?

There is no advantage in a rich person who doesn't know you going after you for anything.

>> The government wants to control everyone.
>>
>>> There is a strong correlation between more guns and higher suicide and
>>> homicide rates.
>>
>> Best keep the numbers down, we don't want Americans taking over the world.
>>
>>>>> The role of the government is to have protections for human rights and the
>>>>> environment.
>>>>
>>>> Neither of those things should ever be protected.
>>>
>>> For any society to work they must be.
>>
>> For any girly society.
>
> Misogynistic attitude noted.

What on earth makes you think that about me? It's a statement of fact girls are more afraid fo things than boys, hence calling someone girly is saying they're more afraid than they should be.

And did you know that word was invented in 1620 from a play?

>>>>> Libertarians suggest getting
>>>>> rid of those controls but refuse to accept the consequences of not having
>>>>> those controls (reduction in human rights and the environment).
>>>>
>>>> Which would be cheaper, easier, and fun.
>>>
>>> Increased abuse in a situation with less clean water and air and food is not
>>> my idea of "fun". And being a slave is not "cheaper".
>>
>> It's cheaper for the person you work for.
>
> But not you, the slave.

Slaves are often well looked after. You get board and lodging for a start. You probably also get free sex.

>>>>>>>>>>> And moral -- they are needed for a modern
>>>>>>>>>>> society to function.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They are not. They are required for the lesser people to live. Society would
>>>>>>>>>> be better off if we weeded them out.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The "lesser people". I do not even know what you mean. You mean people who are
>>>>>>>>> handicapped? Kids? The elderly? People who cannot produce more? The value of a
>>>>>>>>> person is tied to what they produce?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course. Your charitable nature is fine with your own money, just don't
>>>>>>>> force others to do so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I understand that feeling and optimism, though I think in most cases it is
>>>>>>> stated as an excuse for the person to not donate... but there is no reason or
>>>>>>> evidence to think it would work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are two possibilities:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Plenty of people think like you and donate. This will presumably be the
>>>>>> case for 50% of the population who currently votes left wing.
>>>>>
>>>>> How do you figure? And donate to WHAT?
>>>>
>>>> Because those who vote left wing think donating is good, so why would they
>>>> stop?
>>>
>>> Who said we would? Or that others do not donate? But in a Liberation hellscape
>>> who would have the money to donate?
>>
>> What makes you think you would suddenly be worse off?
>
> When you get rid of all protections you end up being worse off.

But.... surely everyone who thinks like you, the left wing, who make up about half the electorate, would continue donating anyway, charitably. And you'd be able to choose the worthwhile ones. So no, nobody would be worse off who shouldn't be.

>> In fact you'd be better off, lower taxes. Much lower taxes. In the UK a THIRD
>> of your earnings go to the government.
>
> Slaves do not get earnings.

But they're the lower classes we don't care about. If they'd made something of themselves they'd be the ones owning a slave.

>>>> And donate to charity. For example in the UK,the life boats are not government
>>>> funded, but they still run. The RSPCA (animal protection) is also a charity,
>>>> it still runs.
>>>
>>> Sure. Some can work. But to rely on it for all is absurd.
>>
>> If those two work, so can the rest.
>
> How do you figure?

There's no reason the others would be different.

>>>>>> 2) Voters of left wing are actually liars and scroungers and want to receive
>>>>>> but not send. In which case they won't get.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, how do you figure?
>>>>
>>>> They vote left wing to get benefits. If I'm wrong, the above would work.
>>>
>>> Being liberal is more about helping those OTHER than yourself, and those not
>>> like you.
>>
>> For what purpose?
>
> Based on empathy and being a decent human being.

Statistics show most left wing voters are poor, therefore on the receiving end.

>>>>> You set up a false dichotomy based on a faulty premise.
>>>>
>>>> Stop using big words to sound clever.
>>>
>>> You have bad thoughts and come to back conclusions.
>>
>> Rewrite in English.
>
> You have bad thoughts and come to bad conclusions.

Be more specific.

>>>>>>>>>>> It is fair. Does not
>>>>>>>>>>> mean all taxing is fair or spending is done well.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's monumentally fucked up, even the poorest people pay VAT.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I do think the rich should pay more (in terms of percent of income). In the US
>>>>>>>>> they do not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They already do, that's how percentages work. x% of 50,000 is more than x% of
>>>>>>>> 30,000.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I terms of percentage of income. But even in raw numbers they often pay less.
>>>>>>> Look at Bezos. And Trump.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you've worked hard to get where you are, why the fuck should you pay for
>>>>>> the minions?
>>>>>
>>>>> They benefitted from a system. They should give some back. Be required to give
>>>>> some back.
>>>>
>>>> No, rich folk never received benefits.
>>>
>>> They ALWAYS do. Heck, I am rich enough to get benefits the truly poor do not
>>> get.
>>
>> Bullshit. What benefit is removed when you get poorer?
>
> The rich get more in housing benefits. Why?

They do not. All benefits in the UK are based on what money you earn or possess. You receive nothing if you are well off.

Snit

unread,
Jul 24, 2023, 3:01:34 AM7/24/23
to
On Jul 21, 2023 at 4:38:34 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.18ghakxdmvhs6z@ryzen>:

>>>>>> They benefitted from a system. They should give some back. Be required to give
>>>>>> some back.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, rich folk never received benefits.
>>>>
>>>> They ALWAYS do. Heck, I am rich enough to get benefits the truly poor do not
>>>> get.
>>>
>>> Bullshit. What benefit is removed when you get poorer?
>>
>> The rich get more in housing benefits. Why?
>
> They do not. All benefits in the UK are based on what money you earn or
> possess. You receive nothing if you are well off.

In the US, home owners get government support for their mortgage interest.

Peeler

unread,
Jul 24, 2023, 3:50:19 AM7/24/23
to
On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 07:01:25 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> In the US, home owners get government support for their mortgage interest.

Will your shit never stop in these groups, you incontinent senile shithead?

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Jul 24, 2023, 11:09:35 PM7/24/23
to
On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 08:01:25 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jul 21, 2023 at 4:38:34 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.18ghakxdmvhs6z@ryzen>:
>
>>>>>>> They benefitted from a system. They should give some back. Be required to give
>>>>>>> some back.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, rich folk never received benefits.
>>>>>
>>>>> They ALWAYS do. Heck, I am rich enough to get benefits the truly poor do not
>>>>> get.
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit. What benefit is removed when you get poorer?
>>>
>>> The rich get more in housing benefits. Why?
>>
>> They do not. All benefits in the UK are based on what money you earn or
>> possess. You receive nothing if you are well off.
>
> In the US, home owners get government support for their mortgage interest.

As we do here if we are unemployed for a long time. Rent or mortgage interest, seems fair. If you become unemployed for three years, and you have a larger mortgage, why should you have to move house?

Snit

unread,
Jul 25, 2023, 12:51:02 AM7/25/23
to
On Jul 24, 2023 at 8:09:26 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.18ma10hfmvhs6z@ryzen>:
No, here it is even if you have a great job and more money than you know what
to do with you get housing assistance in that way... meanwhile I know a woman
with MS who is in a wheelchair and diapers and has a failing mind who just got
evicted because there was no assistance for her.

Peeler

unread,
Jul 25, 2023, 4:00:09 AM7/25/23
to
On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 04:50:55 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:


> No, here it is even if you have a great job and more money than you know what
> to do with you get housing assistance in that way... meanwhile I know a woman
> with MS who is in a wheelchair and diapers and has a failing mind who just got
> evicted because there was no assistance for her.

Meanwhile everyone here knows about you two endlessly driveling trolling
shitheads and the shit you keep spouting here.

Commander Kinsey

unread,
Aug 6, 2023, 10:55:11 PM8/6/23
to
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 15:25:20 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jul 16, 2023 at 5:30:52 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.177adqramvhs6z@ryzen>:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Jul 2023 04:38:39 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 15, 2023 at 11:48:34 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.174zu8cmmvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 23:14:57 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 14, 2023 at 1:32:21 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>>> <op.1729z7fumvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It is observed. I have known many Irish.
>>>>>
>>>>> As seen though a bigoted lens.
>>>>
>>>> 100% of Irish I've known were stupid.
>>>
>>> As seen through your bigoted lens. Sure.
>>
>> You're cut and pasting like those 2 digit IQ Indians.
>>
>> And not making any sense either. Stupid is not subjective. It is entirely
>> measurable. For goodness sake they fought against themselves in a war.
>
> There is really nothing to add: you claim groups are X, but your only evidence
> is your subjective intuition. Even if there are trends in a group it does not
> apply to all. You generalizations are there to put others down to feel better
> about yourself. That is largely what bigotry is.

There is nothing subjective in observing Irish stupidity.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages