Re: #How Palin's Email Got Hacked
Kurt Nicklas
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:52:10 -0400, "Brian Carey"
>
> <car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >Interesting email to Michelle Malkin follows. It explains how Palin's email
> >was hacked. As you can see, the hacker was clearly looking to derail her
> >candidacy. But instead he got nothing.
>
> I see Malkin is plagiarizing again. Her description of /b/ is
> virtually word for word from a NY Times piece on hackers that I posted
> here less than two months ago.
Post a link to it or be accused of lying once again, "Zepp".
Speaking of lying, when are you going to back up your contention
that Tucker Carlson interviewed me after the Kanga suicide?
I'm still waiting.......
>
>
> >I have little doubt that the individual responsible for this will be getting
> >a visit from the FBI shortly. But this is interesting reading for netizens.
>
> >---
> >I missed the original incident, but monitored the discussion and repostings
> >afterward to see what I could learn about what had happened and who was
> >responsible.
>
> >There are several misconceptions and errors in most accounts of this story,
> >including your post. Most significantly, the perpetrator(s) were not members
> >of an infamous group of hackers. I don't blame you for misunderstanding
> >this, because in all the media coverage regarding the war with Scientology
> >the media has completely failed to explain what Anonymous is.
>
> >Anonymous is not exactly a group. It is people using the umbrella of a web
> >discussion board for cover to be as offensive, funny, strange, or whatever
> >as they want.
>
> >Here's the short version: there is a site called 4chan.org. It is an image
> >posting site based on a popular Japanese site. The site contains multiple
> >boards, each of which is dedicated to a particular subject. The most
> >notorious of these boards is called /b/. /b/ is the board dedicated to
> >random images. /b/tards, as its denizens are called, are interested only in
> >their own amusement. Their sense of humor runs the gamut from sick to cruel
> >to merely strange. Lolcats, as made famous by
> >http://www.icanhascheezburger.com, originated on /b/. A lot of memes start
> >there. There is a lot of racist humor - pictures of excited and happy black
> >people in proximity to fried chicken abound. There is a lot of pornography.
> >Sometimes it's child pornography, although posting that is moderator grounds
> >for banning - no, it's not a pedophile ring; /b/tards post it because they
> >think doing so is funny.
>
> >4chan does not log participants. Most people don't use or have usernames,
> >and post instead as "Anonymous." And every so often, a number of /b/'s
> >anonymous denizens decide to make somebody's life hell. Sometimes it's a
> >random person who offends /b/'s sense of propriety. Sometimes it's a forum
> >dedicated to a serious topic. Sometimes it's Scientology. And Tuesday, it
> >was Sarah Palin. Or it would have been.
>
> >Sarah Palin's email account was hacked by one person. Not a group.
>
> >This person read her emails, then posted the username and password on /b/.
> >This happened at about 4 in the morning on Tuesday. The idea was that the
> >sea of Anonymous /b/tards would download the emails, upload porn, and cause
> >all manner of mischief. Anonymous is not a group of hackers. Anonymous is
> >more like gremlins. They are hyperactive adolescents in search of amusement
> >and joy, which they often get by upsetting people and making messes. That's
> >what was happening here. Anonymous did not hack the account. A hacker tried
> >to throw Sarah Palin to Anonymous. Not all of Anonymous was having it. One
> >person threw a crowbar in the works. Other /b/tards were displeased to miss
> >a chance at the lulz. The moderators stepped in. The thread was deleted.
>
> >Later, other individuals created threads reposting screencaps of emails and
> >the inbox, and put together a collection of these files. All mentions of
> >these were purged by the moderators. So then some bright /b/tards decided to
> >email what little stuff they had to the media.
>
> >That's pretty much it.
>
> >This afternoon, in a thread that was later deleted, an individual claiming
> >to be the original poster gave his account of what happened. I've attached
> >screencaps. Here's the text. The original poster used the name "rubico." The
> >linked email address for the poster was rubic...@yahoo.com.
>
> >This is what rubico said:
>
> >===
>
> >rubico 09/17/08(Wed)12:57:22 No.85782652
>
> >Hello, /b/ as many of you might already know, last night sarah palin's yahoo
> >was "hacked" and caps were posted on /b/, i am the lurker who did it, and i
> >would like to tell the story.
>
> >In the past couple days news had come to light about palin using a yahoo
> >mail account, it was in news stories and such, a thread was started full of
> >newfags trying to do something that would not get this off the ground, for
> >the next 2 hours the acct was locked from password recovery presumably from
> >all this bullshit spamming.
>
> >after the password recovery was reenabled, it took seriously 45 mins on
> >wikipedia and google to find the info, Birthday? 15 seconds on wikipedia,
> >zip code? well she had always been from wasilla, and it only has 2 zip codes
> >(thanks online postal service!)
>
> >the second was somewhat harder, the question was "where did you meet your
> >spouse?" did some research, and apparently she had eloped with mister palin
> >after college, if youll look on some of the screenshits that I took and
> >other fellow anon have so graciously put on photobucket you will see the
> >google search for "palin eloped" or some such in one of the tabs.
>
> >I found out later though more research that they met at high school, so I
> >did variations of that, high, high school, eventually hit on "Wasilla high"
> >I promptly changed the password to popcorn and took a cold shower.
>
> >>> rubico 09/17/08(Wed)12:58:04 No.85782727
>
> >this is all verifiable if some anal /b/tard wants to think Im a troll, and
> >there isn't any hard proof to the contrary, but anyone who had followed the
> >thread from the beginning to the 404 will know I probably am not, the
> >picture I posted this topic with is the same one as the original thread.
>
> >I read though the emails. ALL OF THEM. before I posted, and what I concluded
> >was anticlimactic, there was nothing there, nothing incriminating, nothing
> >that would derail her campaign as I had hoped, all I saw was personal stuff,
> >some clerical stuff from when she was governor.. And pictures of her family
>
> >I then started a topic on /b/, peeps asked for pics or gtfo and I obliged,
> >then it started to get big
>
> >Earlier it was just some prank to me, I really wanted to get something
> >incriminating which I was sure there would be, just like all of you anon out
> >there that you think there was some missed opportunity of glory, well there
> >WAS NOTHING, I read everything, every little blackberry confirmation. all
> >the pictures, and there was nothing, and it finally set in, THIS internet
> >was serious business, yes I was behind a proxy, only one, if this shit ever
> >got to the FBI I was fucked, I panicked, i still wanted the stuff out there
> >but I didn't know how to rapidshit all that stuff, so I posted the pass on
> >/b/, and then promptly deleted everything, and unplugged my internet and
> >just sat there in a comatose state
>
> >Then the white knight fucker came along, and did it in for everyone, I
> >trusted /b/ with that email password, I had gotten done what I could do
> >well, then passed the torch , all to be let down by the douchebaggery, good
> >job /b/, this is why we cant have nice things
>
> >===
>
> >The "white knight fucker" was the /b/tard who thought that going through
> >Sarah Palin's email wasn't cool. He logged in, changed the password, and
> >sent an email to a friend of Palin's warning her and letting her know the
> >new password. Unfortunately, he then posted a screenshot of this email to
> >let the other /b/tards know their fun was over. He failed to blank the
> >password, and they all tried to log in and change the password - which
> >tripped the automated Yahoo! freeze. Since then, the account has been
> >deleted. "Rapidshit" refers to rapidshare.com - i.e., rubico wanted to
> >download the emails, put them into one file, and put that file up on
> >rapidshare for /b/tards and the world at large to download. But he panicked,
> >or didn't know how to download the emails, and so pawned that task off on
> >Anonymous, which he didn't realize wasn't monolithic and in his favor.
>
> >As Paul Harvey would say, "And now you know.. the rest of the story."
>
> >---
>
> --
>
> What do you call a Republican with a conscience?
>
> An ex-Republican.
>
> http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8827(From Yang, AthD (h.c)
>
> "Prosperity and peace are in the balance," -- Putsch, not admitting that he's against both
>
> Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
>
> Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
> Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
> For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
> For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
> Zepps_News-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
> Zepps_essays-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Kurt Nicklas
> "4741 Dead" <zepp22114...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
>
> news:07l4d410p37e78jmq...@4ax.com...
>
> > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:52:10 -0400, "Brian Carey"
> > <car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >>Interesting email to Michelle Malkin follows. It explains how Palin's
> >>was hacked. As you can see, the hacker was clearly looking to derail her
> >>candidacy. But instead he got nothing.
>
> > I see Malkin is plagiarizing again. Her description of /b/ is
> > virtually word for word from a NY Times piece on hackers that I posted
> > here less than two months ago.
>
He's probably lying. He likes to pose as being techno-savy and this is
just a part of that particular mania.
4741 Dead
Link's already posted, Knickers. BTW it doesn't take any
"techno-savy" [sic] to recognize a copy job when I see one.
So why aren't you reposting remarks about this hack of Palin's private
email from the Weasel group, a private newslist where you lurk?
Kurt Nicklas
On Sep 18, 12:09 pm, 4741 Dead <ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:06:25 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
>
>
>
>
>
> <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >On Sep 18, 10:04 am, "Brian Carey" <car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> "4741 Dead" <zepp22114...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:07l4d410p37e78jmq...@4ax.com...
>
> >> > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:52:10 -0400, "Brian Carey"
> >> > <car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> >>Interesting email to Michelle Malkin follows. It explains how Palin's
> >> >>was hacked. As you can see, the hacker was clearly looking to derail her
> >> >>candidacy. But instead he got nothing.
>
> >> > I see Malkin is plagiarizing again. Her description of /b/ is
> >> > virtually word for word from a NY Times piece on hackers that I posted
> >> > here less than two months ago.
>
> >> Really? Post a link.
>
> >He's probably lying. He likes to pose as being techno-savy and this is
> >just a part of that particular mania.
>
> Link's already posted, Knickers.
So? There's nothing there that's repeated in the Malkin piece.
But let's look at your lie in a little more detail, shall we?
Here is your accusation from above:
"Her description of /b/ is
virtually word for word from a NY Times piece on hackers that I posted
here less than two months ago."
Here are the descriptions of /b/ from the two articles:
Malkin:
"Here's the short version: there is a site called 4chan.org. It is an
image
posting site based on a popular Japanese site. The site contains
multiple
boards, each of which is dedicated to a particular subject. The most
notorious of these boards is called /b/. /b/ is the board dedicated
to
random images. /b/tards, as its denizens are called, are interested
only in
their own amusement. Their sense of humor runs the gamut from sick to
cruel
to merely strange. Lolcats, as made famous by
http://www.icanhascheezburger.com, originated on /b/. A lot of memes
start
there. There is a lot of racist humor - pictures of excited and happy
black
people in proximity to fried chicken abound. There is a lot of
pornography.
Sometimes it's child pornography, although posting that is moderator
grounds
for banning - no, it's not a pedophile ring; /b/tards post it because
they
think doing so is funny."
NYT:
/b/ is the designated “random” board of 4chan.org, a group of message
boards that draws more than 200 million page views a month. A post
consists of an image and a few lines of text. Almost everyone posts as
“anonymous.” In effect, this makes /b/ a panopticon in reverse —
nobody can see anybody, and everybody can claim to speak from the
center. The anonymous denizens of 4chan’s other boards — devoted to
travel, fitness and several genres of pornography — refer to the /b/-
dwellers as “/b/tards.”
As we all can see, there's been no copying so, once again, you're
simply lying.
But if your dance will be to insist that these are not the portions of
the articles you had in mind, you may post the portions you believe
were "virtually word for word" between the two articles.
Post the plagerized portions right here---->>>
> BTW it doesn't take any
> "techno-savy" [sic]
"Oooh. A spelling flame. How intellectual of you!"
------------- "Zepp" Jamieson 10/15/2005
> to recognize a copy job when I see one.
And speaking of your lies, when are you going to own up to the lie you
told
about my "interview" with Tucker Carlson after the Kangas suicide,
hmmm?
> So why aren't you reposting remarks about this hack of Palin's private
> email from the Weasel group, a private newslist where you lurk?
Oh, lookee! Now "Zepp" is accusing me of hacking his "newslist".
Honestly,
he's getting to sound more and more like Gary Rosell with each passing
election cycle!
Kurt Nicklas
> "4741 Dead" <zepp22114...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:04:23 -0400, "Brian Carey"
> > <car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >>"4741 Dead" <zepp22114...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
> >>news:07l4d410p37e78jmq...@4ax.com...
> >>> On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:52:10 -0400, "Brian Carey"
> >>> <car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>Interesting email to Michelle Malkin follows. It explains how Palin's
> >>>>was hacked. As you can see, the hacker was clearly looking to derail
> >>>>her
> >>>>candidacy. But instead he got nothing.
>
> >>> I see Malkin is plagiarizing again. Her description of /b/ is
> >>> virtually word for word from a NY Times piece on hackers that I posted
> >>> here less than two months ago.
>
> >>Really? Post a link.
>
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/magazine/03trolls-t.html?_r=1&pagew...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Unfortunately, it doesn't look *anything* like Michell Malkin's piece except
> that it mentions /b/ and 4chan.org.
>
> So explain to me how that is plagiarizing?
If he replies it'll be in full straw flinging mode.
He's made a fool of himself once again and he'll high tail it just
like all the other times.
------------------------------------------------------
Kurt : >Tell us again about those 400 electoral votes that Algore's
going to
>get.
>How are you going to spin this, Bryan? Have you begun to think about
>that yet?
>I'll bet you have............
"I predict you won't be asking me about that after Tuesday."
-------------------------- "Zepp" Jamieson 11/5/2000
4741 Dead
Oh, you can deny it all you want, Bri. I see you got Knickers to back
you up. That really adds to your credibility.
Ha ha ha.
>
>------------------------------------------------------
>Kurt : >Tell us again about those 400 electoral votes that Algore's
>going to
>>get.
>>How are you going to spin this, Bryan? Have you begun to think about
>>that yet?
>>I'll bet you have............
>
>"I predict you won't be asking me about that after Tuesday."
>-------------------------- "Zepp" Jamieson 11/5/2000
--
What do you call a Republican with a conscience?
An ex-Republican.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8827 (From Yang, AthD (h.c)
"Prosperity and peace are in the balance," -- Putsch, not admitting that he's against both
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
Zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
Kurt Nicklas
<shrug>
I presented you with the excerpts you alleged were involved in this
"copying word for word" and you're unable to point it out.
When you scamper away from a very simple challenge to your judgement,
just *whose credibility suffers, "Zepp", yours or mine?
> Ha ha ha.
Indeed.
>
>
> >------------------------------------------------------
> >Kurt : >Tell us again about those 400 electoral votes that Algore's
> >going to
> >>get.
> >>How are you going to spin this, Bryan? Have you begun to think about
> >>that yet?
> >>I'll bet you have............
>
> >"I predict you won't be asking me about that after Tuesday."
> >-------------------------- "Zepp" Jamieson 11/5/2000
>
> --
>
> What do you call a Republican with a conscience?
>
> An ex-Republican.
>
> http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8827(From Yang, AthD (h.c)
>
> "Prosperity and peace are in the balance," -- Putsch, not admitting that he's against both
>
> Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
>
> Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
> Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
> For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
> For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
> Zepps_News-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
Kurt Nicklas
The non-voting, non-citizen has run away yet again.
Knew he would......
4741 Dead
Yours.
Oh, and how long do you plan to wave your arms frantically in hopes
that nobody will notice that the Palin hack reveals that she
improperly used private accounts for official business?
I seem to remember you howling for YEARS because Gore may have used a
phone the same way.
David Johnston
wrote:
>
>Oh, and how long do you plan to wave your arms frantically in hopes
>that nobody will notice that the Palin hack reveals that she
>improperly used private accounts for official business?
Does anyone really care?
4741 Dead
wrote:
In a year she'll be the answer on a Trivial Pursuit card.
zo...@yahoo.com
The articles don't look very similar at all. Oh, sorry, you were busy
changing the subject?
Steve
wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 18:26:49 GMT, David Johnston <da...@block.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:03:00 -0700, 4741 Dead <ze...@finestplanet.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Oh, and how long do you plan to wave your arms frantically in hopes
>>>that nobody will notice that the Palin hack reveals that she
>>>improperly used private accounts for official business?
>>
>>Does anyone really care?
>
>In a year she'll be the answer on a Trivial Pursuit card.
previous Zepp predictions....
"I'm beginning to wonder if my forecast of 400 electoral votes for
Gore isn't being a bit conservative."
--Zepp Jamieson 2000-08-23
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=7lk7qsghrt59opk4d7khi5of6ukkhcirk6%404ax.com
"Arnie is limping along on name recognition, but it's become
clear that his campaign is an utter fiasco, and his role in
this election is that of being the biggest clown."
--Zepp Jamieson 2003-09-08
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=bukqlv0922p8s501bdb0ct4i419hmvacdr%404ax.com
"Looks like I'm no longer the only one predicting an electoral vote
blowout for Kerry."
--Zepp Jamieson Oct 20 2004
"In any event, the worst total I see for Kerry at this time is
288 Electoral votes, a comfortable margin. He could conceivably get
as many as 346."
--Zepp Jamieson 8 Oct 2004
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/5bedfa7f2909d2e9?dmode=source&hl=en
Brian Carey
"4741 Dead" <ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:hmm7d4pe0u26soktm...@4ax.com...
>><shrug>
>>
>>I presented you with the excerpts you alleged were involved in this
>>"copying word for word" and you're unable to point it out.
>>
>>When you scamper away from a very simple challenge to your judgement,
>>just *whose credibility suffers, "Zepp", yours or mine?
>
> Yours.
Zepp - do you have evidence that Malkin plagiarized the piece from the New
York Slimes?
If so, please present it.
Brian Carey
Speaking of plagiarism.... looks like you've been doing that to Ann Coulter.
;)
"Then in 2004, Democratic presidential candidate and future Trivial Pursuit
answer Howard Dean told an interviewer that his favorite part of the New
Testament was the Book of Job. The reporter should have asked him if that
was his favorite book in all three testaments."
Kurt Nicklas
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:15:11 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
>
>
>
>
>
LOL Nice to see you've dropped the pretense that Michelle Malkin
plagiarized your NYT article, "Zepp", but you can't admit it to either
Brian C. or me.
Keep dancing!
> Oh, and how long do you plan to wave your arms frantically in hopes
> that nobody will notice that the Palin hack reveals that she
> improperly used private accounts for official business?
If you'd like to talk about Palin using yahoo for official business we
can do that. First, however, you'll need to admit that Malkin didn't,
in fact, copy from your NYT article.
Can you be an adult for once and admit you were wrong?
> I seem to remember you howling for YEARS because Gore may have used a
> phone the same way.
Did you "seem to remember" that the same way you "remembered" Tucker
Carlson
interviewing me after the Kangas suicide? This the way you try to
"influence" your "target audience"?
Kurt Nicklas
LOL
Don't distract him with relevant questions while he's working so hard
to change the subject.
4741 Dead
Hate to tell you this, but "future Trivail Pursuit answer" has been in
the lexicon a lot longer than 2004. I think I first heard it about
1990 or so.
It gets applied to just about anyone who is near the end of their
fifteen minutes of fame -- a description that dates back to the 60s,
and Andy Warhol.
>
4741 Dead
Back to your favorite stunt of claiming capitulation where there is
none?
That's always been one of the reasons you're a laughingstock around
here.
>
>> Oh, and how long do you plan to wave your arms frantically in hopes
>> that nobody will notice that the Palin hack reveals that she
>> improperly used private accounts for official business?
>
>If you'd like to talk about Palin using yahoo for official business we
>can do that. First, however, you'll need to admit that Malkin didn't,
>in fact, copy from your NYT article.
Ah. Run away as fast as your little legs can scamper, Knickers!
4741 Dead
Already have, Brian. Run along.
I realize you are afraid to discuss Palin at all.
>
Steve
wrote:
>That's always been one of the reasons you're a laughingstock around
>here.
Irony anyone?
Pride is the recognition of the fact that you are your own
highest value and, like all of man’s values, it has to be
earned.
_Ayn Rand "ATLAS SHRUGGED"
Brian Carey
>>>>Does anyone really care?
>>>
>>> In a year she'll be the answer on a Trivial Pursuit card.
>>
>>Speaking of plagiarism.... looks like you've been doing that to Ann
>>Coulter.
>>;)
>>
>>"Then in 2004, Democratic presidential candidate and future Trivial
>>Pursuit
>>answer Howard Dean told an interviewer that his favorite part of the New
>>Testament was the Book of Job. The reporter should have asked him if that
>>was his favorite book in all three testaments."
>>
>>http://www.anncoulter.com/
>
> Hate to tell you this, but "future Trivail Pursuit answer" has been in
> the lexicon a lot longer than 2004.
Yeah. Just a coincidence you used it the same week as Ann Coulter.... ;)
Brian Carey
>>>>When you scamper away from a very simple challenge to your judgement,
>>>>just *whose credibility suffers, "Zepp", yours or mine?
>>>
>>> Yours.
>>
>>Zepp - do you have evidence that Malkin plagiarized the piece from the New
>>York Slimes?
>>
>>If so, please present it.
>
> Already have, Brian.
Not in this thread you haven't.
Please demonstrate how Malkin plagiarized The New York Slimes.
And, as always, good luck.
4741 Dead
...who I don't read, since I have a three-digit IQ.
>
4741 Dead
Amazing how fast you and Knickers deleted Malkin's original words and
my link.
Sure beats having to explain how your vice presidential candidate
knowingly violated the sunshine laws and subsequently destroyed
evidence.
Your politics are as morally bankrupt as your religion. You really
need some new hobbies.
>
--
What do you call a Republican with a conscience?
An ex-Republican.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8827 (From Yang, AthD (h.c)
"Prosperity and peace are in the balance," -- Putsch, not admitting that he's against both
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
Zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
Jeffrey Scott Linder
Brian Carey
"4741 Dead" <zepp22...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:ilr8d494nf0lb3cu7...@4ax.com...
>>>>If so, please present it.
>>>
>>> Already have, Brian.
>>
>>Not in this thread you haven't.
>>
>>Please demonstrate how Malkin plagiarized The New York Slimes.
>>
>>And, as always, good luck.
>
> Amazing how fast you and Knickers deleted Malkin's original words and
> my link.
That's because it didn't demonstrate any example of plagiarism. Please try
again.
Brian Carey
>>> Hate to tell you this, but "future Trivail Pursuit answer" has been in
>>> the lexicon a lot longer than 2004.
>>
>>Yeah. Just a coincidence you used it the same week as Ann Coulter.... ;)
>
> ...who I don't read, since I have a three-digit IQ.
Sure... right.... LOL!
4741 Dead
Deny all you want, Bri.
Oh, and dance around Palin's criminalit some more. It's fun to watch.
>
--
Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.
-- John McCain, in the Sept/Oct 2008 issue of Contingencies, the magazine of the American Academy of Actuaries.
Steve
<zepp22...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 07:22:37 -0400, "Brian Carey"
><car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"4741 Dead" <zepp22...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
>>news:ilr8d494nf0lb3cu7...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>>>If so, please present it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Already have, Brian.
>>>>
>>>>Not in this thread you haven't.
>>>>
>>>>Please demonstrate how Malkin plagiarized The New York Slimes.
>>>>
>>>>And, as always, good luck.
>>>
>>> Amazing how fast you and Knickers deleted Malkin's original words and
>>> my link.
>>
>>That's because it didn't demonstrate any example of plagiarism. Please try
>>again.
>>
>>And, as always, good luck.
>
>Deny all you want, Bri.
>
>Oh, and dance around Palin's criminalit some more. It's fun to watch.
What's a "criminalit?"
Every leftist believes that he alone is the chosen one, that
the world revolves around his needs and wants, that it is the
obligation of everyone else to cater to his needs, to take
care of him, to give him whatever he wants, and ignore all
his transgressions, much as an infant is cradled in the
arms at the bosom of his ever-protective, ever-nurturing mother.
4741 Dead
America didn't. It's still in the White House.
>
>
>JSL
>
--
Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.
-- John McCain, in the Sept/Oct 2008 issue of Contingencies, the magazine of the American Academy of Actuaries.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
Zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
Phlip
>>> Yeah. Just a coincidence you used it the same week as Ann Coulter.... ;)
>> ...who I don't read, since I have a three-digit IQ.
> Sure... right.... LOL!
That whooshing sound was the joke going over your head.
A "three-digit IQ" includes the average, at 110.
--
Phlip
Kurt Nicklas
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:29:25 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
>
Irony, anyone?
>
> >> Oh, and how long do you plan to wave your arms frantically in hopes
> >> that nobody will notice that the Palin hack reveals that she
> >> improperly used private accounts for official business?
>
> >If you'd like to talk about Palin using yahoo for official business we
> >can do that. First, however, you'll need to admit that Malkin didn't,
> >in fact, copy from your NYT article.
>
> Ah. Run away as fast as your little legs can scamper, Knickers!
Actually, it's you whose trying to shape-shift out of the corner
you've worked yourself into, Poundcake.
You claimed the Michelle Malkin piece included a section copied "word
for word" from a NYT article you had posted. When we challenged you to
point out the plagiarized section you realized you'd been wrong and,
rather than admit your mistake, you began trying to change the
subject.
What do you think your "target audience" thinks of such behavior,
"Zepp"?
-----------------------------
"Looks like I'm no longer the only one predicting an electoral vote
blowout for Kerry."
--'Zepp' Jamieson Oct 20 2004
Brian Carey
"Kurt Nicklas" <nick...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:8d499475-8350-4171...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> Ah. Run away as fast as your little legs can scamper, Knickers!
>
> Actually, it's you whose trying to shape-shift out of the corner
> you've worked yourself into, Poundcake.
>
> You claimed the Michelle Malkin piece included a section copied "word
> for word" from a NYT article you had posted. When we challenged you to
> point out the plagiarized section you realized you'd been wrong and,
> rather than admit your mistake, you began trying to change the
> subject.
Zepp's moved on to trying to squirm out of another corner he's backed
himself into. He recently said that mortgage-backed securities are not
assets. In attempting to defend that idiotic statement, he's made it
abundantly clear that he doesn't even know what a mortgage-backed security
is.
Kurt Nicklas
> "Kurt Nicklas" <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
The boy's a barrel of laughs for us oldtimers!
4767 Dead
If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
solvent any more?
Got an answer to that one, Knickers? Maybe you and Bri can pray to
Jesus to make them worth something.
Brian Carey
"4767 Dead" <ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:u86id4tcq6iqbf6ng...@4ax.com...
>>> Zepp's moved on to trying to squirm out of another corner he's backed
>>> himself into. He recently said that mortgage-backed securities are not
>>> assets. In attempting to defend that idiotic statement, he's made it
>>> abundantly clear that he doesn't even know what a mortgage-backed
>>> security
>>> is.
>>
>>The boy's a barrel of laughs for us oldtimers!
>
> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
> solvent any more?
LOL! They ARE holding them, you dolt!
Why don't you take my advice and ask your mom if you're unsure of anything?
Kurt Lochner
>
>"hurt, nutless" <nick...@bellsouth.net> writhed in denials:
> >
> >On Sep 23, 8:41 am, "bran curry" <car...@mindspring.com> whined:
> >
> >>"hurt, nutless" <nick...@bellsouth.net> was sniveling:
- -- --
> >> >> Ah. Run away as fast as your little legs can scamper, Knickers!
> >> >
> >> >Actually, it's you whose trying to shape-shift out of the corner
> >> >you've worked yourself into, Poundcake.
> >> >
> >> >You claimed the Michelle Malkin piece included a section copied "word
> >> >for word" from a NYT article you had posted. When we challenged you to
> >> >point out the plagiarized section you realized you'd been wrong and,
> >> >rather than admit your mistake, you began trying to change the
> >> >subject.
> >>
> >>Zepp's moved on to trying to squirm out of another corner he's backed
> >>himself into. He recently said that mortgage-backed securities are not
> >>assets. In attempting to defend that idiotic statement, he's made it
> >>abundantly clear that he doesn't even know what a mortgage-backed security
> >>is.
> >
> >The boy's a barrel of laughs for us oldtimers!
>
> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
> solvent any more?
>
> Got an answer to that one, Knickers? Maybe you and Bri can pray to
> Jesus to make them worth something.
Faith based financing, eh?
--You can take that to the bank..
4767 Dead
Bri's just an idiot, but for Knickers, it's rough. He used to be the
moral and intellectual arbitar of Usenet, back in the good old days of
Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton. Now, he's just a sanctimonious joke.
4767 Dead
<car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>"4767 Dead" <ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
>news:u86id4tcq6iqbf6ng...@4ax.com...
>
>>>> Zepp's moved on to trying to squirm out of another corner he's backed
>>>> himself into. He recently said that mortgage-backed securities are not
>>>> assets. In attempting to defend that idiotic statement, he's made it
>>>> abundantly clear that he doesn't even know what a mortgage-backed
>>>> security
>>>> is.
>>>
>>>The boy's a barrel of laughs for us oldtimers!
>>
>> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
>> solvent any more?
>
>LOL! They ARE holding them, you dolt!
And are they solvent, Bri?
>
>Why don't you take my advice and ask your mom if you're unsure of anything?
You're the one telling us that mortgage debt saved the banks.
Much the way the Indians saved Custer, I imagine.
>
Steve
wrote:
That's from Zeppy Jamieson who thinks that holding a mortgage doesn't
qualify as an asset. But then, the pathetic, hand-to-mouth, usenet
lefties have never had any assets, so how can we expect them to
understand?
Steve
wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:18:36 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
it's safe to assume that Jamieson has no idea what the term "cash
flow" means....
Brian Carey
>>>>The boy's a barrel of laughs for us oldtimers!
>>>
>>> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
>>> solvent any more?
>>
>>LOL! They ARE holding them, you dolt!
>
> And are they solvent, Bri?
LOL! There's quite a few of them, Zepp. Some are, some aren't.
But I'll take this as an implicit admission that you had no idea what you
were talking about when you asked why the banks weren't holding them any
more.
So let's sum what you've been wrong about so far:
1. You didn't know that mortgage backed securities were assets.
2. You thought that people who own mortgage backed securities were the ones
paying the debt, instead of receiving the payments.
3. You thought that banks weren't holding the mortgages any more.
Anything else that you don't know about regarding this subject? If your mom
won't help you, I probably can.
Oh, and we're still waiting for evidence that Michelle Malking plagiarized
that New York Slimes article.
Kurt Harrington
>
> Kurt Lochner was chucling about how:
> >
> > 4767 Dead wrote:
> >>
> >>"hurt, nutless" <nick...@bellsouth.net> writhed in denials:
> >> >
> >> >On Sep 23, 8:41 am, "bran curry" <car...@mindspring.com> whined:
> >> >
> >> >>"hurt, nutless" <nick...@bellsouth.net> was sniveling:
I see that the wingers have abandoned the e-mail 'hack' issue,
probably because they know that she's more of a liability than
as the previously thought-of 'asset' to their fascist agit-prop-dom..
Hell, they won't even let the press near her now..
WTF is that all about?
> >> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
> >> solvent any more?
> >>
> >> Got an answer to that one, Knickers? Maybe you and Bri can pray to
> >> Jesus to make them worth something.
> >
> > Faith based financing, eh?
> >
> > --You can take that to the bank..
>
> Bri's just an idiot, but for Knickers, it's rough. He used to be the
> moral and intellectual arbitar of Usenet, back in the good old days of
> Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton. Now, he's just a sanctimonious joke.
And doesn't even 'get' the punch-line..
--Think of it as evolution in action..
Kurt Nicklas
Meanwhile you've dropped the contention that Michelle Malkin
plagiarized the NYT, I guess. I'll bet even your "target audience"
was laughing at you about that one.
I know *I was.
Hahaha.
----------------------------
"No plane hit the Pentagon. I don’t know what did,[...]"
-- 8/21/07 Bryan Jamieson
"Paranoid crackpot conspiracy theorists. What would Usenet be without
them?"
-- 1/17/08 Bryan Jamieson
Kurt Nicklas
> 4767 Dead wrote:
>
> > Kurt Lochner was chucling about how:
>
> > > 4767 Dead wrote:
>
>
> - -- -- --
>
> I see that the wingers have abandoned the e-mail 'hack' issue,
> probably because they know that she's more of a liability than
> as the previously thought-of 'asset' to their fascist agit-prop-dom..
>
> Hell, they won't even let the press near her now..
>
> WTF is that all about?
>
> > >> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
> > >> solvent any more?
>
> > >> Got an answer to that one, Knickers? Maybe you and Bri can pray to
> > >> Jesus to make them worth something.
>
> > > Faith based financing, eh?
>
> > > --You can take that to the bank..
>
> > Bri's just an idiot, but for Knickers, it's rough. He used to be the
> > moral and intellectual arbitar of Usenet, back in the good old days of
> > Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton. Now, he's just a sanctimonious joke.
>
> And doesn't even 'get' the punch-line..
>
> --Think of it as evolution in action..
Locknutz, does Iris know you used your cox account to send this post?
4767 Dead
<kharr...@cox.net> wrote:
>4767 Dead wrote:
>>
>> Kurt Lochner was chucling about how:
>> >
>> > 4767 Dead wrote:
>> >>
>> >>"hurt, nutless" <nick...@bellsouth.net> writhed in denials:
>> >> >
>> >> >On Sep 23, 8:41 am, "bran curry" <car...@mindspring.com> whined:
>> >> >
>> >> >>"hurt, nutless" <nick...@bellsouth.net> was sniveling:
>- -- -- --
>
>I see that the wingers have abandoned the e-mail 'hack' issue,
>probably because they know that she's more of a liability than
>as the previously thought-of 'asset' to their fascist agit-prop-dom..
>
>Hell, they won't even let the press near her now..
>
>WTF is that all about?
It's not easy being a Republican when everything you stand for is an
utter fraud. Their only hope now is to lay low and hope voters forget
about her.
>
>> >> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
>> >> solvent any more?
>> >>
>> >> Got an answer to that one, Knickers? Maybe you and Bri can pray to
>> >> Jesus to make them worth something.
>> >
>> > Faith based financing, eh?
>> >
>> > --You can take that to the bank..
>>
>> Bri's just an idiot, but for Knickers, it's rough. He used to be the
>> moral and intellectual arbitar of Usenet, back in the good old days of
>> Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton. Now, he's just a sanctimonious joke.
>
>And doesn't even 'get' the punch-line..
>
>--Think of it as evolution in action..
Now, you're going to upset Brian, who thinks "The Flintstones" is a
documentary...
4767 Dead
>On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:48:36 -0400, Steve
><steven...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>
>>That's from Zeppy Jamieson who thinks that holding a mortgage doesn't
>>qualify as an asset. But then, the pathetic, hand-to-mouth, usenet
>>lefties have never had any assets, so how can we expect them to
>>understand?
>
>Coming from a mouth to rightwing asshole nutcase like
>you, that's funny
I see he's already trying to change it around, from holding fund based
on mortgage notes to actually having a mortgage.
Pretty sad. But then, it's kinda hard to argue that something is an
asset when it just nearly wiped out the largest economy in the history
of the world.
Even for a dumb, nutball right winger, that's a tough one.
4767 Dead
Oh, look, the desperate little right wing coward has resumed his
stalking...
4767 Dead
And boy, didn't you rush to drop the links to both Malkin and the NY
Times.
I doubt anyone really cares about her. She's a right wing hack. She's
a paid liar, and a whore. So what's a little plagiarism?
Steve
wrote:
>
>It's not easy being a Republican when everything you stand for is an
>utter fraud. Their only hope now is to lay low and hope voters forget
>about her.
<ROTFLMAO> Irony anyone?
Zepp is talking about Sarah Palin...
Kurt Lochner
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:47:23 -0500, Kurt Lochner-Harrington replied:
> >
> > 4767 Dead wrote:
> >>
> >> Kurt Lochner was chuclling about how:
> >> >
> >> > 4767 Dead wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>"hurt, nutless" <nick...@bellsouth.net> writhed in denials:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >On Sep 23, 8:41 am, "bran curry" <car...@mindspring.com> whined:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>"hurt, nutless" <nick...@bellsouth.net> was sniveling:
- -- -- --
> >
> > I see that the wingers have abandoned the e-mail 'hack' issue,
> > probably because they know that she's more of a liability than
> > as the previously thought-of 'asset' to their fascist agit-prop-dom..
> >
> > Hell, they won't even let the press near her now..
> >
> > WTF is that all about?
>
> It's not easy being a Republican when everything you stand for is an
> utter fraud. Their only hope now is to lay low and hope voters forget
> about her.
her acolyte, McCain serving her hand and foot, answering to her with..
"Yes, your Transparency?.."
> >> >> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
> >> >> solvent any more?
> >> >>
> >> >> Got an answer to that one, Knickers? Maybe you and Bri can pray to
> >> >> Jesus to make them worth something.
> >> >
> >> > Faith based financing, eh?
> >> >
> >> > --You can take that to the bank..
> >>
> >> Bri's just an idiot, but for Knickers, it's rough. He used to be the
> >> moral and intellectual arbitar of Usenet, back in the good old days of
> >> Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton. Now, he's just a sanctimonious joke.
> >
> > And doesn't even 'get' the punch-line..
> >
> > --Think of it as evolution in action..
>
> Now, you're going to upset Brian, who thinks "The Flintstones"
> is a documentary...
Ya know, that'd be hilarious..
--If it wasn't so pointedly true..
Kurt Lochner
>
> On Sep 23, 3:47 pm, Kurt Lochner-Harrington replied to:
> >
> > 4767 Dead wrote:
> > >
> > > Kurt Lochner was chuckling about how:
> > > >
> > > > 4767 Dead was eviscerating:- -- -- --
> > > Bri's just an idiot, but for Knickers, it's rough. He used to be the
> > > moral and intellectual arbitar of Usenet, back in the good old days of
> > > Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton. Now, he's just a sanctimonious joke.
> >
> > And doesn't even 'get' the punch-line..
> >
> > --Think of it as evolution in action..
>
>Locknutz, does Iris know you used your cox account
Hey nutless, does Embarq know that you're stealing their services?
--Or did that junior IT job come open on the Help Desk?
Steve
wrote:
>
>Pretty sad. But then, it's kinda hard to argue that something is an
>asset when it just nearly wiped out the largest economy in the history
>of the world.
Pretty sad.. Actually, it's pretty sad for Zeppy to argue that
holding a mortgage isn't an asset...
Steve
wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:07:32 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
<ROTFLMAO> Zepp has no idea what the term "stalking" MEANS...
...and he really has no idea what owning a mortgage is all about, as
shown below...
"So how come we just had an economic meltdown caused by idiots
trying to pretend mortgage notes were assets?"
--David (Zepp) Jamieson Sep 22, 12:54 pm
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/msg/095dc573344e163f?hl=en
Zepp has demonstrated lots of financial ignorance... See below
"And why are dividends on 401Ks considered capital gains? (They are,
when it comes time to cash the 401K in, but Steve wouldn't know
that)."
David (Zepp) Jamieson Tue, 29 Jul 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/25d56714cbea3db9?hl=en
"If Nevermore tries paying cap gains with a 1040, he'll be in jail
soon enough. Funny. I though a big rich guy like him could afford a
tax accountant. It's obvious he isn't smart enough to do his own
taxes."
--Zepp Jamieson, Dec 3, 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/30fdaff423e2029b?hl=en&
Steve
wrote:
>On Sep 23, 11:48 am, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 09:59:44 -0700, 4767 Dead <ze...@finestplanet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 11:52:20 -0500, Kurt Lochner
>> ><kurt_loch...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>4767 Dead wrote:
>>
>> >>>"hurt, nutless" <nickl...@bellsouth.net> writhed in denials:
>>
>> >>> >On Sep 23, 8:41 am, "bran curry" <car...@mindspring.com> whined:
>>
>> >>> >>"hurt, nutless" <nickl...@bellsouth.net> was sniveling:
>Ok, now i know you've never had two dimes to rub together in your
>life.
You don't know shit dummy, and your bluster below proves it.
>A mortgage is not automatically an asset, you fucktard.
A mortgage is a promise to pay that's secured with real estate..
>The reason the
>secondary market, featuring Fannie and Freddie, was created is so as
>to make a mortgage an asset of sorts. If the mortgage was simply a
>loan to buy a house, it would be just like a car loan. Now, please
>tell me you don't think a car loan is an asset.
<LOL> It is to whoever holds the loan, you half-witted moron.
>A mortgage is a debt, and a debt, by definition, is a liability. It
>only becomes an asset if someone can sell the interest in it.
<ROTFLMAO> Too ignorant to respond to... both above and below..
>This is why the right wing fucked up the economy. How fucked up do you
>have to be to see lending someone $200,000 for a house is an asset, in
>and of itself. Hey, fucktard; wanna lend me a million? Might as well;
>it would just add to your assets.
4767 Dead
wrote:
>On Sep 23, 3:41 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:42:30 -0700, 4767 Dead <ze...@finestplanet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Pretty sad. But then, it's kinda hard to argue that something is an
>> >asset when it just nearly wiped out the largest economy in the history
>> >of the world.
>>
>> Pretty sad.. Actually, it's pretty sad for Zeppy to argue that
>> holding a mortgage isn't an asset...
>>
>
>Please explain to us all how something you don't own is your asset?
>The homeowner owns the house, and they have your money; what is the
>bank's asset, exactly, and why do they hold onto an interest in the
>house for security, if the loan itself is an asset?
And of course, he's frantically trying to pretend that I'm not talking
about the instruments forged from the bad mortgage debts.
In the meantime, maybe he can spellbind us with talkes of how all
those mortgage assets saved Lehman Brothers and AIG.
--
Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition,
as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of
innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.
-- John McCain, in the Sept/Oct 2008 issue of Contingencies, the magazine of the
American Academy of Actuaries.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
Zepps_News...@yahoogroups.com
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
Zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
4767 Dead
wrote:
>On Sep 23, 3:54�pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:24:39 -0700 (PDT), rightwingerss...@muslim.com
>Right, fucktard. The HOUSE is the asset. The interest is an asset. The
>loan itself is a fucking liability.
>
>Do you even know what a fucking asset is?
Haven't you heard? That's why Lehman Brothers and AIG went tits up.
They had too many ASSETS!
It's high finance, like secretly incorporating or paying income taxes
at cap gain rates. You wouldn't understand.
>>
>> >The reason the
>> >secondary market, featuring Fannie and Freddie, was created is so as
>> >to make a mortgage an asset of sorts. If the mortgage was simply a
>> >loan to buy a house, it would be just like a car loan. Now, please
>> >tell me you don't think a car loan is an asset.
>>
>> <LOL> �It is to whoever holds the loan, you half-witted moron.
>
>The definition of an asset, you fucking brain dead sop, is anything of
>value that can be converted into cash. That would be the fucking
>house, and the fucking car, not the fucking loan to buy the house or
>the car.
>>
>> >A mortgage is a debt, and a debt, by definition, is a liability. It
>> >only becomes an asset if someone can sell the interest in it.
>>
>> <ROTFLMAO> � Too ignorant to respond to... �both above and below..\
>
>Oh, really? Then answer this question, fucktard;
>
>If a mortgage is an asset, then please explain why the investment
>banks are at a loss at the moment as to how to value their "asset."
>
>You fucking clod. Do you even know why the investment banks are fucked
>right now? It's because they have all of these loans, and the loans
>are largely unsecured. There are two questions for you to explain in
>that one. First of all, why do you have to secure an asset? And if the
>loan itself is a fucking asset, then why the security in the first
>place? Why the fuck does the bank even bother to foreclose, since the
>loan itself is apparently an asset? Who needs that silly house,
>anyway?
>>
>> >This is why the right wing fucked up the economy. How fucked up do you
>> >have to be to see lending someone $200,000 for a house is an asset, in
>> >and of itself. Hey, fucktard; wanna lend me a million? Might as well;
>> >it would just add to your assets.
>>
>> Every leftist believes that he alone is the chosen one, that
>> the world revolves around his needs and wants, that it is the
>> obligation of everyone else to cater to his needs, to take
>> care of him, to give him whatever he wants, and ignore all
>> his transgressions, much as an infant is cradled in the
>> arms at the bosom of his ever-protective, ever-nurturing mother.
Kurt Lochner
>
> rightwin...@muslim.com was laughing at the intentional ignorance of:
> >
> >"semen canyon" <semen...@yahooooooo.com> lisped:
> >>
> >> 4767 Dead wrote:
- -- -
> >> > Pretty sad. But then, it's kinda hard to argue that something is an
> >> > asset when it just nearly wiped out the largest economy in the history
> >> > of the world.
> >>
> >>Pretty sad.. Actually, it's pretty sad for Zeppy to argue that
> >>holding a mortgage isn't an asset...
> >
> > Please explain to us all how something you don't own is your asset?
> > The homeowner owns the house, and they have your money; what is the
> > bank's asset, exactly, and why do they hold onto an interest in the
> > house for security, if the loan itself is an asset?
>
> And of course, he's frantically trying to pretend that I'm not talking
> about the instruments forged from the bad mortgage debts.
>
> In the meantime, maybe he can spellbind us with talkes of how all
> those mortgage assets saved Lehman Brothers and AIG.
Nah, I'd want to hear about those damned magnetic capacitors again..
--And those 1,000 points of magnetic charge..
Brian Carey
<rightwin...@muslim.com> wrote in message
news:733c7537-5026-471a...@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 23, 3:54 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
> >> That's from Zeppy Jamieson who thinks that holding a mortgage doesn't
> >> qualify as an asset. But then, the pathetic, hand-to-mouth, usenet
> >> lefties have never had any assets, so how can we expect them to
> >> understand?
>
> >Ok, now i know you've never had two dimes to rub together in your
> >life.
>
> You don't know shit dummy, and your bluster below proves it.
>
> >A mortgage is not automatically an asset, you fucktard.
Duh! What do you think "holding a mortgage" means, you idiot?
It means YOU ARE THE MORTGAGEE. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO RECEIVES THE PAYMENTS.
That is an ASSET, Clouseau.
If you guys don't know what you're talking about, do yourselves a favor and
JUST SHUT UP.
LOL!
Brian Carey
<rightwin...@muslim.com> wrote in message
news:94df3ec3-f52a-4c0b...@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 23, 11:48 am, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>> That's from Zeppy Jamieson who thinks that holding a mortgage doesn't
>> qualify as an asset. But then, the pathetic, hand-to-mouth, usenet
>> lefties have never had any assets, so how can we expect them to
>> understand?
>>
>If holding a fucking mortgage qualifies as an asset, you pathetic
>fucktard, then why are they so quick to sell them to Fannie Mae and
>Freddie Mac.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....
Yes, Clouseau, a steady stream of cash flows, or an accounts receivable, is
an ASSET.
You and Zepp are WAY TOO STUPID to be having this debate.
And they sell them so they can raise capital to originate additional loans
(i.e., assets).
>How fucking stupid do you have to be to think that lending someone
>$200,000, so that they can buy something, constitutes an asset?
Duh! Because it's a receivable, Clouseau. Receivables are ASSETS.
>The
>interest is an asset; the portion of the principle that has been paid
>back is an asset. The outstanding balance is a liability.
No you idiot. Money that someone owes you IS NOT A LIABILITY.
And the interest is NOT an asset. It is INCOME. It appears on the balance
sheet once it becomes "retained earnings" after the company's financial
period ends.
>You don't
>need security on an asset, you fucktard; the home is the asset, not
>the fucking loan.
The home is collateral, dipstick. If the mortgagor defaults on the loan,
then the bank gives up on one asset (the loan) and exchanges it for another
asset (the house) via foreclosure.
I wonder if Democrats are happy that their evangelists on Usenet are so
absolutely STUPID when it comes to this subject?
LOL!
Macadamia Nut
>On Sep 23, 3:54�pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:24:39 -0700 (PDT), rightwingerss...@muslim.com
>Right, fucktard. The HOUSE is the asset. The interest is an asset. The
>loan itself is a fucking liability.
>
>Do you even know what a fucking asset is?
>>
>> >The reason the
>> >secondary market, featuring Fannie and Freddie, was created is so as
>> >to make a mortgage an asset of sorts. If the mortgage was simply a
>> >loan to buy a house, it would be just like a car loan. Now, please
>> >tell me you don't think a car loan is an asset.
>>
>> <LOL> �It is to whoever holds the loan, you half-witted moron.
>
>The definition of an asset, you fucking brain dead sop, is anything of
>value that can be converted into cash. That would be the fucking
>house, and the fucking car, not the fucking loan to buy the house or
>the car.
>>
>> >A mortgage is a debt, and a debt, by definition, is a liability. It
>> >only becomes an asset if someone can sell the interest in it.
>>
>> <ROTFLMAO> � Too ignorant to respond to... �both above and below..\
>
>Oh, really? Then answer this question, fucktard;
>
>If a mortgage is an asset, then please explain why the investment
>banks are at a loss at the moment as to how to value their "asset."
>
>You fucking clod. Do you even know why the investment banks are fucked
>right now? It's because they have all of these loans, and the loans
>are largely unsecured. There are two questions for you to explain in
>that one. First of all, why do you have to secure an asset? And if the
>loan itself is a fucking asset, then why the security in the first
>place? Why the fuck does the bank even bother to foreclose, since the
>loan itself is apparently an asset? Who needs that silly house,
>anyway?
Is it so hard for you to understand that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
bought mortgages from banks. They then repackaged the loans and used
them as collateral for bonds called mortgage-backed securities; they
guaranteed buyers of those securities against default. That gave the
illusion they had more capital than they actually had. It was a scam
that dwarfs Enron. There's no investigation into it because Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac were run by Democrats in high places such as Franklin
Raines and Jim Johnson, Obama's economic advisors.
< McCain/Palin '08 >
Steve
wrote:
>On Sep 23, 3:41�pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:42:30 -0700, 4767 Dead <ze...@finestplanet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Pretty sad. �But then, it's kinda hard to argue that something is an
>> >asset when it just nearly wiped out the largest economy in the history
>> >of the world.
>>
>> Pretty sad.. �Actually, it's pretty sad for Zeppy to argue that
>> holding a mortgage isn't an asset...
>>
>
>Please explain to us all how something you don't own is your asset?
A mortgage is a promise to pay, Dummy, and it's secured by the
property itself... if the borrower doesn't pay, the mortgage holder
owns the property.
Obviously, you have no clue how this works...
>The homeowner owns the house,
Actually, he doesn't... not with a lien.
>and they have your money; what is the
>bank's asset, exactly, and why do they hold onto an interest in the
>house for security, if the loan itself is an asset?
<chuckle>
Steve
<zepp22...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:39:21 -0700 (PDT), rightwin...@muslim.com
>wrote:
>
>>On Sep 23, 3:41�pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:42:30 -0700, 4767 Dead <ze...@finestplanet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >Pretty sad. �But then, it's kinda hard to argue that something is an
>>> >asset when it just nearly wiped out the largest economy in the history
>>> >of the world.
>>>
>>> Pretty sad.. �Actually, it's pretty sad for Zeppy to argue that
>>> holding a mortgage isn't an asset...
>>>
>>
>>Please explain to us all how something you don't own is your asset?
>>The homeowner owns the house, and they have your money; what is the
>>bank's asset, exactly, and why do they hold onto an interest in the
>>house for security, if the loan itself is an asset?
>
>And of course, he's frantically trying to pretend that I'm not talking
>about the instruments forged from the bad mortgage debts.
<LOL> Makes no difference.. a mortgage is a mortgage...
..And, of course, Zepp is trying frantically to divert the subject
from his stupid statement... below
"So how come we just had an economic meltdown caused by idiots
trying to pretend mortgage notes were assets?"
--David (Zepp) Jamieson Sep 22, 12:54 pm
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/msg/095dc573344e163f?hl=en
>In the meantime, maybe he can spellbind us with talkes of how all
>those mortgage assets saved Lehman Brothers and AIG.
Zepp has no clue what "cashflow" means...
Steve
wrote:
>On Sep 23, 3:41�pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:42:30 -0700, 4767 Dead <ze...@finestplanet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Pretty sad. �But then, it's kinda hard to argue that something is an
>> >asset when it just nearly wiped out the largest economy in the history
>> >of the world.
>>
>> Pretty sad.. �Actually, it's pretty sad for Zeppy to argue that
>> holding a mortgage isn't an asset...
>>
>Even sadder is the notion that lending someone $200,000, so that THEY
>can buy a house is considered an "asset" by someone. The $200,000 is
>an asset. The home is an asset. The bank who wrote the mortgage
>possesses neither. What they possess is the money that is paid back
>and the interest.
what they posses is a contract that says someone will pay them
$200,000 or you own the house... that's an asset on any balance
sheet.
>And now you know, fucktard, just why Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were
>created. They were created as a secondary market, where banks could
>sell the mortgage paper, and thus avoid risk, and have plenty of money
>to loan to other people.
Steve
wrote:
>On Sep 23, 11:48�am, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>If holding a fucking mortgage qualifies as an asset, you pathetic
>fucktard, then why are they so quick to sell them to Fannie Mae and
>Freddie Mac.
You never heard of selling an asset? people do it all the time? You
probably never heard of that since it's doubtful you ever had any real
assets...
>How fucking stupid do you have to be to think that lending someone
>$200,000, so that they can buy something, constitutes an asset?
<laugh, laugh, laugh> You'd have to be a moron to think otherwise..
The
>interest is an asset; the portion of the principle that has been paid
>back is an asset. The outstanding balance is a liability.
The contract that is the mortgage is an asset to the holder, just as
it is a liability to the borrower..
>You don't
>need security on an asset, you fucktard; the home is the asset, not
>the fucking loan.
The security is part of the loan. The entire loan is an asset.. and
is listed under "assets" on a person's or company's balance sheet.
<LOL> You really are a moron, you know..
Steve
<LOL> Zepp is desperately trying to spin away his last stupid
claim... see below...
"So how come we just had an economic meltdown caused by idiots
trying to pretend mortgage notes were assets?"
--David (Zepp) Jamieson Sep 22, 12:54 pm
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/msg/095dc573344e163f?hl=en
Steve
The Usenet lefty loons aren't good at dealing with financial things..
Most of them are hand-to-mouth losers and have never had any real
assets. Most of them never will. I doubt that any of them ever even
had a car that was worth more than they owed on it...
Steve
wrote:
>On Sep 23, 3:54 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:24:39 -0700 (PDT), rightwingerss...@muslim.com
>Right, fucktard. The HOUSE is the asset. The interest is an asset. The
>loan itself is a fucking liability.
>
>Do you even know what a fucking asset is?
>>
>> >The reason the
>> >secondary market, featuring Fannie and Freddie, was created is so as
>> >to make a mortgage an asset of sorts. If the mortgage was simply a
>> >loan to buy a house, it would be just like a car loan. Now, please
>> >tell me you don't think a car loan is an asset.
>>
>> <LOL> It is to whoever holds the loan, you half-witted moron.
>
>The definition of an asset, you fucking brain dead sop, is anything of
>value that can be converted into cash. That would be the fucking
>house, and the fucking car, not the fucking loan to buy the house or
>the car.
You really think that a contract that says someone must pay you money
isn't an asset? really?
>> >A mortgage is a debt, and a debt, by definition, is a liability. It
>> >only becomes an asset if someone can sell the interest in it.
>>
>> <ROTFLMAO> Too ignorant to respond to... both above and below..\
>
>Oh, really? Then answer this question, fucktard;
>
>If a mortgage is an asset, then please explain why the investment
>banks are at a loss at the moment as to how to value their "asset."
That's not the problem at all dummy, it's pretty much a cash flow
problem. That's the case whenever a person or company is asset-heavy.
>You fucking clod. Do you even know why the investment banks are fucked
>right now? It's because they have all of these loans, and the loans
>are largely unsecured.
<LOL> Bullshit!
> There are two questions for you to explain in
>that one. First of all, why do you have to secure an asset? And if the
>loan itself is a fucking asset, then why the security in the first
>place? Why the fuck does the bank even bother to foreclose, since the
>loan itself is apparently an asset? Who needs that silly house,
>anyway?
The secured property is part of the loan, you moron.
Dr. Barry Worthington
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:18:36 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
>
>
>
>
>
> <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >On Sep 23, 8:41 am, "Brian Carey" <car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> "Kurt Nicklas" <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:8d499475-8350-4171...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >> Ah. Run away as fast as your little legs can scamper, Knickers!
>
> >> > Actually, it's you whose trying to shape-shift out of the corner
> >> > you've worked yourself into, Poundcake.
>
> >> > You claimed the Michelle Malkin piece included a section copied "word
> >> > for word" from a NYT article you had posted. When we challenged you to
> >> > point out the plagiarized section you realized you'd been wrong and,
> >> > rather than admit your mistake, you began trying to change the
> >> > subject.
>
> >> Zepp's moved on to trying to squirm out of another corner he's backed
> >> himself into. He recently said that mortgage-backed securities are not
> >> assets. In attempting to defend that idiotic statement, he's made it
> >> abundantly clear that he doesn't even know what a mortgage-backed security
> >> is.
>
> >The boy's a barrel of laughs for us oldtimers!
>
> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
> solvent any more?
In normal circumstances, loans are considered assets, certainly for
accountancy purposes. But a loan ought to satisfy the following
criteria.....
You ought to know who owes it and what the terms are.
You ought to have made it to someone whose circumstances enable them
to be more than likely to pay it back.
In the case of a large loan, it ought to be accompanied by some
collatoral on the part of the borrower.
Ideally, the ability of the borrower to repay ought to be covered by a
reputable insurance policy.
Of course, your banks long departed from these criteria.....which is
why they are in a mess....
Why anyone in their right minds would continue to value loans that
depart so far from sensible precautions as assets is a complete
mystery.
Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> Got an answer to that one, Knickers? Maybe you and Bri can pray to
> Jesus to make them worth something.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
e1313
Yet oddly, the Blue States provide most of the money for the US economy
and get back far, far less in Federal handouts than the Red States do.
That is to say that Blue States pay more in taxes than Red States and
get back less. Red States pay less in taxes and get back much, much more
because they are largely indigent.
Sorry to sink your little boat so brutally but someone has to point out
that you're living in some kind of dream palace.
--
EMAC
Steve
wrote:
Of course, it's the conservatives in the blue states that do that....
Dr. Barry Worthington
> On Sep 23, 12:19 pm, "Brian Carey" <car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "4767 Dead" <ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:448id4h2vka7t2ti2...@4ax.com...
>
> > >>>>The boy's a barrel of laughs for us oldtimers!
>
> > >>> If they're really assets, then why aren't the banks holding them
> > >>> solvent any more?
>
>
> > > And are they solvent, Bri?
>
> > LOL! There's quite a few of them, Zepp. Some are, some aren't.
>
> > But I'll take this as an implicit admission that you had no idea what you
> > were talking about when you asked why the banks weren't holding them any
> > more.
>
> > So let's sum what you've been wrong about so far:
>
> > 1. You didn't know that mortgage backed securities were assets.
> > 2. You thought that people who own mortgage backed securities were the ones
> > paying the debt, instead of receiving the payments.
>
> I don't think you know what you're talking about, either. There is no
> "debt" to "pay." These people purchased debt, and bet that the value
> of the home securing the debt would go up. Essentially, hedging means,
> you are betting on the default rate. When the default rate went sky
> high, and the value of the securities dropped precipitously, the
> holders of MBS found themselves in deep shit.
>
> The problem is that the cost of the MBS is far higher than the homes
> that secure the debt. The real solution to this problem is not to give
> these assholes cash. I say fuck 'em. They took a risk and lost.
>
> > 3. You thought that banks weren't holding the mortgages any more.
>
> Banks largely aren't holding the mortgages, fucktard. That's why
> there's a secondary market. In order to mitigate risk, banks write
> mortgages, and then sell some of them (especially VA and FHA) to the
> secondary market, so they have more cash to lend on homes. Face it;
> banks can't always hold onto a $500,000 debt for 30 years.
>
> The problem was, Republicans like Phil Gramm facilitated the creation
> of these huge pools of money, and speculators started selling off
> pieces of mortgages in a market similar to the stock market. The
> problem right now will be figuring who actually holds the fucking
> mortgage, because most mortgages have been broken off into pieces.
So the best thing that a home owner who has had to default can do is
to hold tight, and say to the agency that tries to reposess "give me
proof that you have a right to this debt." Is that it? Is there some
statute of limitations if the paperwork is lost or can't be found?
Dr. Barry Worthington
> > Anything else that you don't know about regarding this subject? If your mom
> > won't help you, I probably can.
>
> Not from what I can see. He's off base, but you don't understand this
> any better than he has.
>
>
>
> > Oh, and we're still waiting for evidence that Michelle Malking plagiarized
> > that New York Slimes article.
>
> Michelle Malkin has never had an original thought. Plagiarism wouldn't
> surprise me.- Hide quoted text -
e1313
Was it because she feared that open records disclosures would make
government emails available to the voters in her state, and that having
accounts on Yahoo would bypass that requirement??
Ms Skunkburger.
--
EMAC
Steve
"pieces of mortgages?"
<shaking my head and smiling>
>So the best thing that a home owner who has had to default can do is
>to hold tight, and say to the agency that tries to reposess "give me
>proof that you have a right to this debt." Is that it? Is there some
>statute of limitations if the paperwork is lost or can't be found?
<shaking my head and smiling more>
>Dr. Barry Worthington
Steve
wrote:
>Is anyone talking about WHY Palin used Yahoo for government business?
First of all, you need to document that she has... and that won;t
happen.
>Was it because she feared that open records disclosures would make
>government emails available to the voters in her state, and that having
>accounts on Yahoo would bypass that requirement??
>
>Ms Skunkburger.
Dr. Barry Worthington
Pourquoi?
Dr. Barry Worthington
> >Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> Every leftist believes that he alone is the chosen one, that
> the world revolves around his needs and wants, that it is the
> obligation of everyone else to cater to his needs, to take
> care of him, to give him whatever he wants, and ignore all
> his transgressions, much as an infant is cradled in the
> arms at the bosom of his ever-protective, ever-nurturing mother.- Hide quoted text -
e1313
conservative you are. Simple.
--
EMAC
Steve
<sh...@abertay.ac.uk> wrote:
because financial knowledge is so far beyond you lefty losers...
Kurt Lochner
>
> Is anyone talking about WHY Palin used Yahoo for government business?
Nope, and don't expect them say anything more about it unless it's
to lessen the 'pucker factor' regarding the bailout of the mortgage
"industry" and/or McLame's next political gaffe..
> Was it because she feared that open records disclosures would make
> government emails available to the voters in her state, and that
> having accounts on Yahoo would bypass that requirement??
It would appear to be the case, never mind that the GOP hordes
have descended upon Alaska to squelch the Palin-TrooperGate
hearings. This reminds me of the vote recount fiasco in Florida
back when Putsche stole the 2000 election..
--History defeats itself..
Brian Carey
"Steve" <steven...@yahooooooo.com> wrote in message
news:8n4kd4h0sh042j0ma...@4ax.com...
>>I wonder if Democrats are happy that their evangelists on Usenet are so
>>absolutely STUPID when it comes to this subject?
>>
>>LOL!
>>
>
>
> The Usenet lefty loons aren't good at dealing with financial things..
I have fequently asked: Why is it that liberals know so little about
economics, business, and finance?
It has never been demonstrated more clearly, or humorously, as it has on
this thread.
> Most of them are hand-to-mouth losers and have never had any real
> assets. Most of them never will. I doubt that any of them ever even
> had a car that was worth more than they owed on it...
Explains why they don't know what an asset is. LOL!
4767 Dead
<car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
><rightwin...@muslim.com> wrote in message
>news:733c7537-5026-471a...@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>On Sep 23, 3:54 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>
>> >> That's from Zeppy Jamieson who thinks that holding a mortgage doesn't
>> >> qualify as an asset. But then, the pathetic, hand-to-mouth, usenet
>> >> lefties have never had any assets, so how can we expect them to
>> >> understand?
>>
>> >Ok, now i know you've never had two dimes to rub together in your
>> >life.
>>
>> You don't know shit dummy, and your bluster below proves it.
>>
>> >A mortgage is not automatically an asset, you fucktard.
>
>Duh! What do you think "holding a mortgage" means, you idiot?
>
>It means YOU ARE THE MORTGAGEE. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO RECEIVES THE PAYMENTS.
And the payments are the asset.
But if you don't recieve the payment, is it still an asset?
Think HARD, Bri.
>
>That is an ASSET, Clouseau.
>
>If you guys don't know what you're talking about, do yourselves a favor and
>JUST SHUT UP.
>
>LOL!
So Lehman and AIG folded because they had too many assets?
>
>
--
Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition,
as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of
innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.
-- John McCain, in the Sept/Oct 2008 issue of Contingencies, the magazine of the
American Academy of Actuaries.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
Zepps_News...@yahoogroups.com
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
Zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
4767 Dead
<car...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
><rightwin...@muslim.com> wrote in message
>news:94df3ec3-f52a-4c0b...@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>On Sep 23, 11:48 am, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooooo.com> wrote:
>
>>> That's from Zeppy Jamieson who thinks that holding a mortgage doesn't
>>> qualify as an asset. But then, the pathetic, hand-to-mouth, usenet
>>> lefties have never had any assets, so how can we expect them to
>>> understand?
>>>
>>If holding a fucking mortgage qualifies as an asset, you pathetic
>>fucktard, then why are they so quick to sell them to Fannie Mae and
>>Freddie Mac.
>
>BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....
>
>Yes, Clouseau, a steady stream of cash flows, or an accounts receivable, is
>an ASSET.
>
>You and Zepp are WAY TOO STUPID to be having this debate.
So tell us why the economy creashed because there were so many of
these mortgages.
>
>And they sell them so they can raise capital to originate additional loans
>(i.e., assets).
>
>>How fucking stupid do you have to be to think that lending someone
>>$200,000, so that they can buy something, constitutes an asset?
>
>Duh! Because it's a receivable, Clouseau. Receivables are ASSETS.
>
>>The
>>interest is an asset; the portion of the principle that has been paid
>>back is an asset. The outstanding balance is a liability.
>
>No you idiot. Money that someone owes you IS NOT A LIABILITY.
>
>And the interest is NOT an asset. It is INCOME. It appears on the balance
>sheet once it becomes "retained earnings" after the company's financial
>period ends.
>
>>You don't
>>need security on an asset, you fucktard; the home is the asset, not
>>the fucking loan.
>
>The home is collateral, dipstick. If the mortgagor defaults on the loan,
>then the bank gives up on one asset (the loan) and exchanges it for another
>asset (the house) via foreclosure.
>
>I wonder if Democrats are happy that their evangelists on Usenet are so
>absolutely STUPID when it comes to this subject?
>
>LOL!
>
Phlip
> You are so full of nonsense. The more educated you become, the less
> conservative you are. Simple.
The less "fascist" you are. Here's an educated conservative describing the
current mess:
"The political left always aims to expand the permeation of economic life by
politics. Today, the efficient means to that end is government control of
capital. So, is not McCain's party now conducting the most leftist
administration in American history?"
-- George F. Will